There is a stealth pun in the article title, in that the lawyers are threatening the site, and that the threat itself is "something awful"
We all know how much our government likes to collect data on the population, so this shouldn't be too hard right?
There's a more pragmatic (not in a good way) side to it: any amendments would either send the bill back to the House and/or force a conference on this legislation.
Just wear rubber lips!
...did I just really reference Batman & Robin? I think I'll go hide now.
Apparently Bob Menendez added this provision as a parting shot against the Administration for indicting him on corruption charges - which may or may not be retaliation for Menendez's support for more sanctions during the Iran nuclear negotiations. Better the elites fight with one another than we the people, I suppose...
The author is Ben Wittes? More like Ben Wittless mirite?!
The EFF and ACLU submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the plaintiff (Radiance). It's not as newsworthy as the ruling itself but it's further proof - as much as some groups refuse to acknowledge - that the ACLU will defend christians, conservatives, etc when their rights are infringed.
A prize-based system would also completely short out patent trolls.
Orwell was just Eric Blair's pen name. Maybe you mean 1984 /pedantic
"...It would not end bulk collection of call data," McConnell said, referring to the provision of the Patriot Act that the NSA says justifies its bulk data sweeps.The only time pols are thoroughly honest with us is when we're going to be screwed over.
Better hope we don't go down the route of DX:HR with backdoored neural chips.
While we're talking drones, a recent AP poll has found that a majority of Americans support the program. But as with any poll, the phrasing of the question affects the outcome:
Kreps examined poll data and found that if respondents are confronted with evidence of errors and civilian casualties in some drone strikes, support for the strikes drops below a majority
Anyone else notice that the "B5 exemption" reads similarly to "BS exemption?"
Mike, I think you need to have some sensitivity towards readers with psychological trauma over cell tower spoofers. You should put a "TRIGGERFISH WARNING" in your title!
Love his comments about how despite all of the NSA's secure systems they were foiled by a mere human.
If a half-baked reform bill is made law, it's going to convince people wrongly that the problem is over, when at best it's just been painted over with a think veneer of reform. Check out the analysis by Marcy Wheeler - who is pretty convinced this is a gambit by Mitch McConnell.
"We all love the benefit of the internet and all the rest of it, but we need [technology companies'] support in making sure that they're doing everything possible to stop their technology being exploited by terrorists. I'm saying that needs to be front and centre of their thinking and for some it is and some it isn't."Know what would help? NOT inserting vulnerabilities and going public with any exploits that are uncovered in < 48 hrs. Bruce Schneier said it best:
We have a choice between an Internet that is vulnerable to all attackers, or an Internet that is safe from all attackers. And a safe and secure Internet is in everyone's best interests, including the US's
I strongly suspect this story is an attempt to CYA for any damage resulting from the OPM data breach. I realize this story is about British intelligence agents - and the data breach occurred within the US gov - but the US & UK work hand-in-hand on many issues + the people who eat this story up aren't going to think too critically about these points...