I wonder if he'll be fined
League players have been fined for wearing the wrong headphones and similar, so I reckon it's possible.
322 posts • joined 29 Jun 2011
League players have been fined for wearing the wrong headphones and similar, so I reckon it's possible.
But why exactly is his access to technology being place under scrutiny?
Did he meet the person, whom the police couldn't convince a jury that he had raped, online?
Except that's not what actually said.
What was said was: We believe this is the way things are. We will investigate, and should it turn out, that we are right - we will take action. Should you have relevant information regarding our investigation (and if you're Google you'll likely wish to provide information to disprove the initial belief), then you now have the chance to prove that we're wrong.
Let's be fair. Riker would need to provide a command override to the privacy settings. Once his envy became apparent, and his knowledge was found to be too great, Picard would check the system and BAM: "Ensign Riker reporting for duty"
Further of course, the vessels of Star Fleet will be command vessels, and authorized personnel will need the ability to - within very strict privacy and command override protocols - to access information if it is deemed necessary for the safety of the people aboard and the integrity of the mission.
Surely they'll save some battery life by not including internet access... right?
It used to just be session logging of internet, but this time they want to add phone location to the list, which is just terrific!
Oh wait.. I meant terrifying!
The minister has also said that the police have requested these tools to do their jobs, but when pressured about who specifically, she wound up saying something like: "Politicians make the laws, and we of course confer with the police and relevant authorities, to make sure it's practically feasible" - aka; "I've never said that the police made requests".
I'm guessing it's the NSA pressuring to bring it back, so they will have less work to do with monitoring the Danish people... Or well I might guess that, if I were a crazy conspiracy nut, right.. heh..
Except the sites that had this done in May have just now been blocked at an ISP level.
I mentioned it because this article seemed to imply that "if something like that were to happen", despite the fact that it happened literally a day before this article came out.
"According to Danish digital rights group IT-Pol, the next step could be the furniture industry taking on Danish internet service providers in court to secure a blocking injunction. The industry is certainly going all out here – it also sought, and was awarded, an order for Voga to block even pictures of replica furniture."
Uuuh... This already happened: http://jyllands-posten.dk/livsstil/ECE7278991/Slut-med-adgang-til-netsider-med-kopimøbler/ (in Danish). Granted it was for other sites, but same issue entirely.
Note that in this case the british websites had been court ordered in May to do what Voga.com has now been ordered to do.
So by all means continue with the indignation, but fast-forward it a bit please.
Once whatever non-compete clause was in the deal with MS wears off, I'd look to Nokia re-entering the game. I'm hopeful as ever of a Jolla purchase :)
I'd probably not mind paying sites for an ad-free version (ad-free does not mean thank-you laden).
I would mind paying Google to pay sites for an ad-free version.
ElReg you could pave the way. However much you earn from ads per person/month = monthly subscription fee. That buys user ElReg lite. No ads, no trackers, no nothing. (granted it might cost a bit to set up - but think of the potential end result: "Vulture does, what Google can't")
Payment options should of course include crypto coins, paypal, credit cards - to suit the assorted mix of people on here :)
It's nice and comforting to know, that Cameron will protect us from extremist material!
Public discourse, education, and tackling issues head on is always a waste of time. It's reassuring to know that we can simply ban extremist material, and then the people who previously held these views will realise the error of their ways, and embrace good ol' fashioned British values!
God bless David Cameron!
But are you able or even allowed to remove your comments from the FCC public record?
What if it was a politician who had been very adamant about destroying Net Neutrality, but after the fact, he'd rather have that be forgotten...?
The much more interesting development will be what company will be replacing CSC.
I mean surely trust in their abilities is at an all time low, seeing as the hackers had access for 4+ months!
I wonder how the US would react if a foreign national criminal investigation bureau hacked a hosting business in the US, because they either couldn't go through regular international routes - or because they couldn't be bothered to do so.
Just imagine an Icelandic police force hacking GoDaddy (only US host provider I know o.0) to get to an Icelandic citizen they believed had an illegal server/service running through them.
"Hoffelder claimed Digital Editions 4 slurped and leaked the metadata of all the ebooks on his system – not just the ones read using the application. Adobe said this shouldn't possible, but has its developers checking again to make sure this isn't a bug."
I'm sure it was just a rogue engine... programmer!
To be fair, most people probably don't think about it at all.
They either assume emails are secure or they haven't given it any thought.
A shift towards encryption as default - anywhere it's feasible - could be a good thing.
Think of the money saved from the federal budget.
Sure it's too bad for the people kidnapped and their families, but that's what you get for encrypting your phone I guess.
I came to comment on a similar note.
"We all want and need privacy, but this doesn't mean anonymity."
I mean he's not necessarily wrong. I don't have to have anonymity, but I do want privacy.
Unfortunately it has more or less been shown that the only way to obtain privacy is through anonymity.
Well if I were somehow able to actually trust the search engine, then sure €10/year wouldn't be unfair.
Buuut... Current climate = You can't trust it if it's government/EU run, and you can't trust it if it's privately owned.
Sooo.. NGO-NPO search engine?
Then of course there's the problem that you can already get search engines that are more or less free from profiling.
What you want is a search engine that does profiling, but doesn't use that for any other purpose than serving your searching needs. Maybe even does a split-search, where the left side is based on your profile, and the right side is profile-free.
Of course then there's data security to worry about.
"It is fully possible to permit law enforcement to do its job while still adequately protecting personal privacy."
Oh I'm sure it is. Currently though, it seems to require a rather loose definition of adequate protection...
Sooo there should only be exceptions regarding culture?
Should we feign surprise when culture turns out to be big music and film business?
Well.. I'm not Veti, but the opening sentence of the article on my browser is:
"At the weekend, actress Emma Watson gave a well-argued and reasoned speech to the UN calling for better relations between the sexes."
The gender of one person is identified - Emma Watson.
Did you see the word "sexes" and think; "Well that implies something, I guess"?
The inclusion of 4chan trolls and taking that angle is probably in order for this article to actually be suitable for ElReg - aka; Emma Watson talking about feminism isn't tech news. Emma Watson being targetted by internet trolls because of her talking about feminism is.. sorta.
There's no need for anyone here in the comments to explain why internet trolls relate to feminism, because if you read the article then it's nicely explained why it relates. Internet trolls are making a fuss over a feminist speech - tada, link established.
That would seem like one of the riskiest strategies you could use.
I mean... surely there's some serious federal offences involved in identity theft on such a massive scale?
And you think the ISPs have bad PR now?
Also sending that many emails would only prolong the process, risking further publicity for the issue, and possibly more pressure on the FCC to actually protect the people of the United States.
Much better to do it as quickly as possible, and then deal with the fallout once the law has been boug... passed!
While Activision Blizzard have certainly had some annoying shit happen in the Blizzard department (The term "always online" more or less covers it), it's nice to see that like a good poker player they know not to chase money already spent.
Since they say they won't be focused on MMOs, I suspect a 3 vikings mobile game to be imminent (with a nice set of micro-transactions of course), perhaps a new franchise of some sort, and possibly some renewed focus on the Warcraft movies (aka building it in to a franchise for further money making plx!)
See how quickly I diminished the ray of light I pointed out.. Damn this pessimistic view of gaming that I have felt pushed to adopt.
"It shouldn't be too difficult, or expensive, to fit a small USB camera to the front and have a small swith that you operate to have 'real external view' fed to the front screen."
Well this is just a sci-fi story waiting to happen!
How do you know if the switch actually worked, or if it just started it's real purpose - matrix-style enslavement!
Well - he's not sticking around :)
The new MineCraft MMO - MCMMO!
It's MineCraft, but now with a subscription fee! Huzzah!
You are of course right!
I have once or twice felt threatened by humans, so now the only reasonable action is to assume that all humans are threatening psychos who want to harm me.
How about instead we acknowledge that it isn't unheard of, but more information is required before making a judgement.
In this case - where he apparently drew a handgun during a protest - I would expect there to have been a bunch of witnesses. Surely it would not have gone without remark if he hadn't had a gun.
I'm also a loss for motivation for the police officer. "Well... They're already rioting because of a dead guy, one more couldn't hurt"? Or is it "Did I remember to put bullets in my gun today? Only one way to find out I guess".
I'm not saying he couldn't have had a motivation for doing it - and I'm not saying things went exactly as it is being claimed. I'm just struggling to understand why he would shoot - and "only" wound - someone during a protest.
Well unless he was resisting with some version of a weapon - stabbing or shooting for instance - I'd say the selling of smokes is the only one of the two likely to lead to deaths (at least deaths of other people), meaning that being killed for resisting arrest is actually even worse...
But I can't stop thinking of the wonderful work environment that'll be promoted by the implementation of security measures after this.
That'll be sure not to plant more dissatisfaction with the work place.
It's all those lovely cases of "I really just need that one file - why the hell am I not allowed in there without Keith watching over me"
(Sherlock cause it's the closest I could get to a magnifying glass)
Precisely. The point must be to make mass surveillance economically or "strategically" infeasible
The race is on to start up twatch.com!
It would be interesting to see how much money Google has had to fork over in total due to this "rogue engineer"
I'm guessing it isn't enough to be certain that no more "rogue engineers" engage in legally shady practices.
I'm just going to reply so I can find this place easier later, when some wise sage has answered the question. Sorry I couldn't be of any help :)
I don't think I know anyone who has ever viewed a film and - as the place was being shot up, or the wake was progressing slowly and mournfully - gone "Those curtains - my God they are fabulous. If only there was some way for me to identify their brand and purchase some for myself."
And frankly I don't believe that happens - and if it does I don't believe it happens enough to justify this gizmo.
If I am to be distracted from whatever content I am consuming (that's the correct lingo, right?), I do believe I'd prefer it be by cake and coffee or something along those lines.
As much as I love advertisements, I do believe that the money being paid to make those ads should help negate the costs for me for consuming content. So unless using this wonderful new invention means I'll be getting Netflix for free, I can't see this being anything I'd use.
He really isn't...
There could also conceivably be parents who buy some of these things for their kids.
"If you clean your room all week, then we can buy that engine upgrade for your super car"
Or something of that sort.
I mean it's at least possible
True to a point.
That point being when Google - doing this as standard - winds up with the inferior search engine.
"All I can find on Google about person X is that he's a fine upstanding citizen. Yet Bing/Yahoo/Duckduckgo/Startpage etc. etc. give me info about that scandal a few years ago. I knew I hadn't gone senile - I did recall X being involved in a prostitution ring."
Isn't patent law made in such a manner, that if you do not uphold your patent you forfeit it (or am I thinking of TM?)
Such that we just need a single company to very publicly make use of the patents for a short while. Once not action is taken against that company, the patents are forfeit
Well I would certainly expect other results from buying ad-words than Google telling me it's working... I might even hope for an increase in sales o.0
So yeah - Google could tell me all sorts of shit, most likely they wont tell me shit. I'll trust that they target the advertisements, and if I see a proper amount of return from my investment, I'll probably renew my ad contract. If nothing happens, then I'd be a fool to continue advertising using Google.
I think it was a reference to national security letters in the US, where by a secret court gives a secret authorization to secretly demand data from a company that is not allowed to tell anyone that this even took place.
Perhaps it was more likely to raise flags if he tried to store emails from his own account, so he chose other more ripe targets.
Perhaps he thought that when he released evidence that the NSA has immense power, the conversation would be on that fact and on which course to take, and not about whether or not he followed appropriate channels, or if he had a horse as a child, or how his haircut is indicative of insanity, so it must all be crazy ramblings of a sick commie!
So here's a question.
What's the worst case scenario for non-US citizens, if these fastlanes are forc... accep...lovingly embraced by the hard working patriotic American people?
What the hell... If I wanted to be tracked by corporations and governments I'd probably carry around some sort of gps-enabled microphone and camera!
I would think the proper (read: legal) way to deal with something like this was to bind certain knowing employees with some kind of gag-order pertaining to their work?!
Adding such a clause to a contract might up the wage a bit, so I can see why it's easier (and now also cheaper) to simply make shady dealings with other companies.
Did the government already take some action against these companies? Will they? Can no action be taken at all?
These question are simply to quench the fire that is my ignorance (though it will likely continue to burn bright)
Sure there's a negative perspective to put on this...
But at least with more control and easier interface, it's "only" facebook you have to worry about (and probably some - if not all of the - apps/games).
So kudos for doing something in the right direction.
I sincerely doubt that this is actually true.. but if true, that's pretty much Google done for? At least as far as ad revenue goes, which I'm lead to believe is the foundation of the business...
" "special-interest alien smugglers." "
I can not possibly be the only one, who really hopes this should be taken at face value.
One has to wonder how the infrastructure and ability to compete would have looked for the companies that could've spent $XX millions on upgrades and on servicing their customers...
It's almost like that would've been a good investment which would've ensured long term profits...
"His proposal will ask citizens "if paid prioritization should be banned outright" "
Since I'm not a US citizen I don't fell I should directly meddle... but can we assume that Reddit et. al. are mounting campaigns to answer this asking with a resounding "Yep, it should. kkthx"