contained only innocuous texts with defendant’s family and cat pictures
One DLL used to handle extracted video content hasn't been updated since 2012, ignoring more than 100 patches that have been made available since then.
Another article identifies that as ffmpeg, so it's really likely there's an LGPL/GPL violation there. Makes me wonder about how much other open-source code might be in there.
I wonder if Nunes can stomach the response, wouldn't be surprised if he tries to horn in on it.
Isn't Hansmeier still in bankruptcy (or has that been discharged)? If I'm not mistaken, court orders move to the head of the line for payment from the estate.
It would be sensible for google to provide a notification every hour that they're "changing the algorithms". Of course, what's announced today and what's implemented in four weeks may vary.
No, democrats hold 20th century traditional soviet values You have an extra comma in there.
I really wish people wouldn't use "disappear" as an active verb. That's like calling a question an "ask".
Which, of course, would run straight into Legend Brewing (although the latter being in Richmond Virginia, USA, they probably won't care).
Its' that "under the color of authority" thing.
This is entirely consistent with how the City of Vallejo operates.
But what does his cow have to say about the matter?
Liebowitz's first response reads a bit like it was written by an AI thing, or by students in answering an AI thing.
For some reason, this harks back to the apocryphal compiler message:
"Too many errors on one line (make fewer)"
Perhaps instead of griping about how many bugs people find, they'd make fewer instead. Could work. Or maybe even hire some professional QA engineers to look for them first.
Probably not so starving that they couldn't afford a case of Brewdog.
It's no stretch to call someone being hustled into an unmarked van by unidentified people an abduction. Since that's illegal (and unlawful), I'd fully expect the "Law and Order" types to want to the bottom of what happened, and as quickly as possible.
Since I also don't see that happening, they must not really care about Law or Order.
You can bet that a lot of defense attorneys are going to be reading that report in the next few days. Expect a flurry of motions shortly thereafter.
The warranty angle only works while it runs- a 10 year old machine isn't going to be covered anyway. A better approach might be to shield the manufacturer only if the "repair" can be independently shown to have caused the tort. Or... the manufacturers could just support their products at a reasonable cost and under reasonable conditions.
Citations, please.
"I am going to appoint a special master to examine the drives. Bailiff, go to the sheriff's office, seize every computer drive you can find, and bring them back here. We'll get to the bottom of this soon enough."
Re:
Unfortunately, IIRC a SCOTUS decision a couple of years ago ("broken tail light") said they don't (currently) need to know the laws they say they're enforcing. That also needs to change.