they endanger everyone who uses the internet.Come again?
Since this decision is effectively retrospective to the date of implementation of this directive, does that mean that anyone convicted of crimes based on evidence obtained by exercising this directive (or the local laws made to comply with the directive) now have valid grounds of appeal?
Upvoted for truth and for potty mouth!
Adobe Acrobat (Adobe's PDF creator) has an actual specific redaction MODE. There is a tool that says something like "redaction tool" that performs, you know, actual redactions of the selected area rather than just 'black-boxing' it.
There also a function, I think it's called 'sanitizing' or something similiar, within Acrobat that destroys all the metadata fields in the PDF to remove the author information and all other information specifically for public releases of documents.
I think you overestimate how smart people need to be to work in jobs coming out of Silicon Valley technologies.
I've worked in IT for 20 years.
I've done various jobs, developer, UNIX sysadmin, middleware support etc.
I think I've done them all competently.
And I'd probably scrape into the top 40%, let alone top 16%...
"the United States is not spying on ordinary people who don?t threaten our national security"
Sorta.
The AG is a member of parliament (i.e. voted into the legislature's upper or lower house in a general election) appointed by the Governor General upon advice of the Prime Minister.
So the AG's position is not directly voted on, but the AG must be appointed out of the pool of people voted into the legislature in a general (or by-) election.
Those are the only two outcomes technically possible, which is a huge problem for the Executive Branch.
the internet is a... well, *GASP* international net.
the old standard bluetooth devices that worked on PS3 no longer work on PS4... including Sony branded devices!
Actually no, it's more like having a setuid root script that steam can modify at will on my system, so can therefore be used to run ANYTHING. If steam update got hacked (say by the NSA), millions of computers could get infected by spyware/trojans etc.
...I take it you don't use apple products either...
I'm not sure exactly what you are replying to.
This article has nothing to do with constitutional rights and so on.
It is to do with an Oregon state law, House Bill 2371, that makes it illegal for information gained from swiping an identity card (such as a drivers license) to be stored and/or passed on. And the fact that the police are encouraging, enabling, those business to break said law:
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2009R1/Measures/Text/HB2371/Enrolled
(2) Except as provided in subsection (6) of this section, a private entity may not swipe
an individual′s driver license or identification card, except for the following purposes:
(a) To verify the authenticity of a driver license or identification card or to verify the
identity of the individual if the individual pays for a good or service with a method other than
cash, returns an item or requests a refund.
(b) To verify the individual′s age when providing an age-restricted good or service to any
person about whom there is any reasonable doubt of the person′s having reached 21 years
of age.
(c) To prevent fraud or other criminal activity if an individual returns an item or requests
a refund and the private entity uses a fraud prevention service company or system.
(d) To transmit information to a check services company for the purpose of approving
negotiable instruments, electronic funds transfers or similar methods of payment.
(3) A private entity that swipes an individual′s driver license or identification card under
subsection (2)(a) or (b) of this section may not store, sell or share personal information
collected from swiping the driver license or identification card.
(8) In addition to any other remedy provided by law, an individual may bring an action
to recover actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater, and to obtain equitable relief, if
equitable relief is available, against an entity that swipes, stores, shares, sells or otherwise
uses the individual′s personal information in violation of this section. A court shall award a
prevailing plaintiff reasonable costs and attorney fees. If a court finds that a violation of this
section was willful or knowing, the court may increase the amount of the award to no more
than three times the amount otherwise available.
It's always argued that what you do in public carries no expectation of privacy,
I actually parsed it at first as
"mad, insane, paranoid cocks"
Judges should alwasy ask the following questions:
1) Where has the information come from?
2) What is the background of the informant? (i.e. r they a drug dealer who is seeking a reduced sentence for providing information)
3) What independant steps has the PD taken to verify this information?
4) What were the results of those steps?
5) Has the PD or any other body/individual undertaken additional investigation into the target of the warrant?
6) What were the reults of that investigation?
What civil liberties are being violated?
Does Russian law/constitution recognise/enshrine civil liberties?
If not then they can't be violated in Russia as they don't exist.
/pedant
Pray I don't alter it any further.
What this guy suffered was embarrassment and inconvenience.
Re: Re: Re: Disagree
However, while I think they should be revoking certs for free, it is a different situation because they didn't make the problem.