Thank you, thank you, thank you, TechDirt and Mike Masnick for sharing this with us! And thank you for so kindly posting the full text of the document.
I knew about the NRC having no reporting procedure to track breaches pertaining to accidental release of sensitive information, because I noticed an entry in the Federal Register (or somewhere similar) saying that they needed to draft and instate one, in October or November last year. I wasn't aware of the pervasive carelessness in so many other U.S. government departments though.
The SEC is my primary interest. Lax security increases exchange infrastructure vulnerability. There is another concern, namely, the always-tempting opportunity to exploit and profit from unauthorized access to material non-public information.
Hello CBimerrow formerly of IT support! I didn't know any other way to reply to you, about what I read on the TechDirt insider chat thingy. That's where y'all talk to each other and we get read access. You mentioned something that I noticed and winced at (just like you did, when you said, "it burns!") but no one talks about. Same as the reaction on TechDirt Insider chat; no one replied to you, re this hxxp://gizmodo.com/sochi-official-our-shower-surveillance-footage-says-ho-1517435247?utm_campaign=so cialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow I agree, it is unsightly! The UTM's are for Google, or other web analytics "campaign metrics". I strip them away whenever I post or send a URL. They look cheezy. Even if I'm using a URL shortener, I want that crud gone. I was curious why the person you were IM chatting with didn't post this instead, hxxp://gizmodo.com/sochi-official-our-shower-surveillance-footage-says-ho-1517435247 Is it considered immoral or rude to excise the crud, because the URL creator can't surveil (track?) as well? That URL was so lengthy that it forced the sidebar chat widget to scroll out to 4 times width!
For etiquette's sake, I'll return to the current topic. Why don't these comments have any respect for IT? IT departments are NOT always clueless bureaucrats who don't know how to set a password other than to "password". Someone else described how their IT department isolated Macs because of PC viruses (I didn't say that quite right, it's down below). Just maybe, the IT guys know something that the users don't know, about security. The user's job, in this case, is to be a developer. IT doesn't sit around all day doing nothing. Their job, among other things, is to be real-time up to date about viruses. Macs are not immune, regardless of OS used. Even computers running Linux can be vulnerable.
As for getting in the way of business and customers, I learned the hard way that IT needs to be consulted. I worked on a project using PHI (protected health information). At the beginning, before we bid on the contract, one of our IT guys warned us that there would be problems with using VolP as part oF the dEliverable, that HIPAA didn't allow it, in that context. Client said it would be okay, but didn't check with their own IT guy, nor anyone else. So we did months of work and sure enough, our IT guy was right. We should have spent some time to see if he were correct, before proceeding further. We were still paid, nothing terrible happened. Client had to spend more though, for us to do (lots of tedious) changes.
IT security can be a huge pain to deal with, like a law enforcement bureaucracy in your midst, e.g. a visit from Tyler in Data Security was much worse than having the Assistant District Attorney stop by to "ask you a few questions"! It is management's job to reign in overzealous IT, or replace any who are incompetent.
Yes. This is a very convincing argument against DRM in HTML5. Urg... plug-in's.
I have never used a file sharing site, never illegally downloaded software, music, video or anything else. I'd be happy to give my computer to the MpAA, RIAA, NSA etc. to peruse. I'm very boring! Yet I still don't like the idea of DRM in HTML5. It will cause profound interoperability problems.
Are you certain about that? I don't see why he wouldn't get any salary. He should. He does work!
Jimmy Wales has a variety of shortcomings. I could find many examples of his vanity, accepting large cash honorariums for speaking engagements, sailing on Richard Branson's yacht etc. Nevertheless, Wikimedia Foundation should pay Jimmy Wales. Maybe they should pay him more than they do now. Maybe if he were paid better... well, I've said enough. Everyone who works as an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation should be paid a living wage.
Lots oF people use Wikipedia content, including the U.S. government. Google does too. They link to it for definitions in their help pages, as is their right, under the CC license.
This is all going on at the same time. First there is the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). That's what they renamed it! It was originally Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement or TAFTA. It is so complicated and lengthy that it is difficult to understand any of it. I tried to read the document that Wikileaks kindly provided. I am certain that the opacity is by intent though. The CFC folks wrote this about the implications of TAFTA - TTIP in plain language.
Then I read a super creepy commentary by Vint Cerf via TechCrunch. He met with the head of SANS and two FCC commissioners and lots of other people at an off-the-record "privacy thought leaders" dinner in Washington D.C. a few nights ago. Immediately afterward, he made the creepy announcement about right to privacy being a transitory anomaly, unknown in human civilization until the 1960's, and an inevitable, necessary casualty of the "digital age".
And now... THIS! From what I can tell, Colum Lynch seems like a sensible person. This latest not-privacy scheme at the UN is something to be concerned about.
Unless circumstances have changed, Glenn Greenwald had all 30,000 to 50,000 of Snowden's documents. Glenn Greenwald is in Brazil, and not likely to be delivering the remaining documents to the NSA in Washington D.C. nor the NSA's Utah data center.
Whether the documents are destroyed or not isn't up to anyone but Greenwald. The Guardian is his employer, but I'm sure another newspaper would be happy to work with him, if The Guardian weren't.
Yes, school districts are agencies of the state. Here, the state is California, which is large and influential. One school district has implemented Geo Tracking. Another, larger district (Burbank) is already considering doing the same..
These are minors. First, they are protected under the Fourth Amendment. Where does the school district draw the line of in loco parentis, despite the child having one, or two, parents or legal guardians?
Even if this were limited to school, I wouldn't like it. It would be better for schools not to allow SMS, Twitter and Facebook during school hours, instead of this 24 hour per day/ 7 days per week surveillance. That is so wrong!
The school is using contractors. If there were a choice, the school district IT department would be required to observe privacy law and be less likely to exploit student information than an outside, private contractor. I'm just saying "what if", as this tracking, 24/7, of all minors is not ethical, whomever does it; with the exception of parents, as a personal family decision that should not be dictated by the school district, nor the state.
Rush Holt had finished his own education and started teaching when I started school at Swarthmore College. He was either an instructor or associate professor of physics.
He was well-liked at Swarthmore, He isn't an extremist about anything, despite Swarthmore College's extensive reputation as a bastion of communist-socialists and militant feminist-lesbians. Yes, they have free speech, as is their right. But their are many viewpoints held by students and academic staff at Swarthmore. I didn't realize that until years later. .
I agree with you, Prashanth. I have followed Rush Holt's career, though not that observantly. He is one of the only members of the current Congress that I respect and trust, unequivocally. I hope I can say that in five years, or ten, and that he remains in public office.
Ninja, don't talk to him like that! What is your problem? You said:
"why are you so bitter ootb? did someone molest you when you were a kid?"
Say whatever else you want. Call him a an a-hole, or an idiot, or Communist, or unpatriotic, or stupid. DON'T SAY THAT THOUGH. It is cruel, excessive, unnecessary. It made me cry. And no, I'm not him, I'm Ellie Kesselman. I wasn't "molested when I was a kid", and I wasn't fortunate enough to be able to have children.
Ad hominem attacks are facile, but, call me a bad and illogical person, I sometimes find them amusing. Trolls can be amusing too. They usually behave, or leave you unscathed, if you recognize and appreciate the genuine aspects of humor, or sorrow/ bitterness in what they say.
This isn't about being "politically correct", or LBGTQ friendly, or feminist or not being racist, or any of that. It transcends all of it. How dare you toss out remarks about being molested as a child as ridicule in a comment thread. Don't tell me to "lighten up" either. With so many other creative, cruel, clever insults available, you say THAT? You've reached the nadir of worthless.
This is becoming impossible for me to ignore, that
"gun control, anti-abortion restrictions, immigration, gay marriage / civil union rights, medical marijuana, birth control, or any of the other hot topics [are] meant to distract the public from what's REALLY going on".
Seems that way to me too. Sadly, it also seems that regulations, which should help, are being used to serve other, quite separate agendas.
Firedoglake sourced it from The Hill, which says that the more stringent disclosure and reporting requirements will still apply to the president, vice president, members of Congress, candidates for Congress, and some nominees. This is the ridiculous part (via Obama signs STOCK stepback):
[The law] would have required roughly 28,000 senior government officials to post their financial information online, and had come under harsh criticism from federal government employee unions.
There are 28,000 senior government officials EXCLUDING all the members of Congress?! Or considered senior enough such that disclosure of financial information on a publicly available online database was:
...found to be problematic and even dangerous for high-ranking government workers... it could needlessly threaten the safety of government employees abroad, as well as make it difficult to attract and retain talent in the public sector.
Obama shouldn't have signed it into law if it were going to endanger government employees posted overseas! But he did, to get a big flashy spotlight of attention back when he wanted to be popular. Then he gets most of it repealed quickly, over a weekend, with complicity of both parties. We aren't idiots! That makes me feel MORE distrustful of government, rather than less.
I've been aware of Teri Buhl's drama for years. I never was privy to her "elite" protected Twitter feed. Annoying that she was a journalist who reported on news that wasn't accessible to the public (me)! She's vacillated between protected-on, protected-off for her Twitter feed for awhile. Teri Buhl news stories are always high-drama!
TechDirt showed remarkable restraint and courtesy. Buhl comes off as very arrogant and presumptuous. This is especially so, as she has a pending court case against her for harassment of a minor.
Weird spelling, "jurno". That's not a "SoCal Trojan" nor a New Canaan expression. This made me laugh:
It is surprising that she's never seen journalists ignore requests to keep her tweets private, though perhaps it's because there's never been any reason to quote her prior to this.
Given my low-level curiosity about her seeming (self-)importance for years, I enjoyed this post, and the one prior, immensely. Thank you.
The Verge is a fine one to talk! They shamelessly scraped many paragraphs of content yesterday about an important tech legal type news story, from Reuters UK. I could barely find the link, it was tiny with only one word of anchor text, for attribution. They really shouldn't be complaining so loudly about HuffPo!
If you wire transfer the proceeds that you receive for your novel, regardless of the subject matter, to terrorists, you will likely have problems. As a British citizen, if you reside in the U.K., I don't think the U.S. government will be arresting you though. It would be U.K. law enforcement, as they do not encourage the funding of terrorist organizations.
It isn't the publisher that's they're saying is the problem. The government seized the money received as an advance payment for the graphic novel. The government seized it because they believe that the authors of the novel have transferred that money to a terrorist organization.
Although... maybe I understand your point now... there aren't enough details in the TechDirt post to tell. If the publisher is directly transferring the advance payment for the graphic novel to the terrorists, rather than to the authors, that would be a problem. In that case, both the authors (who would have had to request their advance payment be made to someone else), and the publishers who had completed the money transfer would be at fault.
You're right: The funds seizure needs to be based on specific evidence, which shouldn't be a problem to obtain, if it exists.
Of course, you're correct. It is not new, nor does it only happen to books, or obscure works. Movies too, such as "The Manchurian Candidate" were banned. In that situation, the movie was pulled from theatres after release, with a requirement that re-release be allowed after the passage of 25 years. It is a good movie, starring Frank Sinatra and Angela Murder-She-Wrote. I saw it a few years ago. (How did the government decide that 25 years was the right length of time to wait, I wonder?)
Zbigniew, thank you for the URL to that SSRN article! It looks good, based on the abstract. Especially nice: It distinguishes between software patents and patents in other fields where patent law remains functional (as it was for most patents in the past e.g. chemical engineering).
In return, you and others might like browsing through the Patent Reform Group items that I just found on scholarly article bookmarking site, CiteULike.