Its called Google.
3264 posts • joined 11 Apr 2006
Its called Google.
They admin lost the case by default because he failed to show up to trial.
Its a default judgement which means the school can make his life hell going forward.
The guy shot himself in the foot. (IMHO) He should have helped them in good faith and then continued with his discrimination lawsuit.
That would have worked in his favor. Instead the tactic he chose to use was in fact blackmail.
Or rather could be seen negatively by the courts and described as blackmail.
I pulled a gig in London.
Your so called unarmed police are now very well armed.
I saw one walking around with a nice HK MP5.
But to your point.
1) Hunting. Yes we do that. In some states Hunting / Fishing pull in a billion dollars of tourism.
2) Prevent crop damage. Do you know how much damage deer can do in a field of watermelon or other plants?
3) Protect the herd.
a) Poisonous Snakes.
c) Feral Dogs
d) Cow birds
And we haven't even talked about the 2 legged type of individuals who know that you're 35 minutes away from the nearest police station.
That's why you own a gun.
Or you like to shoot.
Or you live in Chicago.
I guess you've never fired a gun.
Or lived in rural America.
On the farm, you will find a .22lr rifle, a 16 or 12 gauge shotgun and a hunting rifle.
(.22lr, .300WM, 7mmRemMag, 16gauge, 12 gauge for me. )
And yes, I've had to use a 12 gauge only once to stop an individual from doing something stupid.
Just the sound of it cycling at 5:00 am in the pitch black morning will scare a person in to following orders.
If you remember GRID Laptops, the one on the shuttle had to have a fan installed.
I am not sure if you were directing this to me...
As in the same meaning that is in the 2nd Amendment?
Yes, I was of military age and population. Now I'm above that age.
10mm? Yeah you probably dry fire because you can't afford the ammo. ;-)
And you also don't like the recoil. (Yes, I have a .40 and I've rented 10mm at the range so I do know what it feels like. And yes, I am not recoil sensitive.)
But to your point. You do have to spend time with the gun in both dry fire and doing skills and drills.
Unfortunately there are some drills that you can't do at the range.
Sorry, I am an old fart and I don't grok your 'cultural reference'.
Ballistic knives have been outlawed in many of the states.
You have no clue.
1) Google CMP (Civilian Marksmanship Program) while founded in 1903 there's a reason why it exists.
2) Guns are a tool. Go spend time living / working in the rural US.
3) Owning guns did help when it came to training conscripts during the draft during WW II.
Hint. Research how they taught air crews to shoot.
You must not buy the right kind of pistol that you find it unreliable. ;-)
Yes Revolvers are less likely to fail. However... 5-6 rounds vs 15. And reload times are faster,
As to Revolvers, I have big mitts and like a full sized frame. Conceal carry a pistol vs revolver.
And your revolver is DA or DAO. My pistol is DA first shot, SA the rest unless I decock it.
W.R.T Hunting... the revolvers are better for hunting unless you look at the pistols that shoot rifle rounds.
Yes you are slow. ;-P
The trick is to focus on the front sight and the target. Usually this is at targets that are within 7 yards or less where you practice this drill. If you train yourself to have good posture and repeated posture, you can do this drill and you'll be 'on target' and shooting much faster. You may not be hitting 10X, but you'll be hitting center mass and depending on how good you are you can get this within the 8-9 ring every time.
Note: There are some people teaching advanced techniques that can shrink your groupings...
Dude, your ignorance of guns is amazing.
Clearly you've never hunted.
Depending on what you hunt... where you hunt... caliber, distance and shot placement... you may not kill the animal right off. You may have to put a second shot. And lets see. Do you spend $1.50 using a high powered rifle round or do you pull out your 9mm and spend ~.25-.30 cents or less (FMJ 115gr) YMMV, cheaper if you reload. (Or you could use a .22lr too)
There's more, and yes, hunters carry pistols.
Oh and some actually hunt with pistols too. ;-)
As to firing quickly and accurately.. yes you can do both. However that takes a lot of practice with a pistol.
Even with a rifle. One time I had to get out of a deer stand and stalk a coyote who was in the field with the cattle. I had a split second shot at 125yrds in a low light condition. So speaking from experience... yes, split second shots done accurately. (BTW, some shooting ranges have controlled targets that will expose themselves and hide (turn 90 degrees sideways) for periods of time.
I won't even get in to how silly you sound about NJ.
Again please... go get some education about guns and gun safety.
Its called a ballistic knife. And they are pretty much outlawed.
Since you brought it up. Laquan ?sp? McDonald in Chicago was a teen who was shot 16 times by a CPD officer who is now up on charges. Why? Because he was high on drugs, resisted arrest and was approximately 20 feet holding a knife and refused to drop it.
You may have heard about this case. Lots of protest marches and the Chief of Police lost his job over the 'cover up'.
The officer will get tried and most likely will be found innocent. Then watch the riot/protests that ensue. Of course the family was already paid off by the city...
Wow. I can tell you don't own or know anything about guns.
Let's go point by point...
"1. Increased complexity and decreased reliability... leading to decreased safety for the user.
Yes, they said this about automatics when revolvers were in common use. It was a bad argument then and it is a bad argument now."
No, they didn't. In terms of guns, the revolver is the most reliable and least likely to fail. In terms of pistols, they are for the most part very reliable and safe if well maintained. The key thing about a firearm is that you want it to go bang when you pull the trigger. The 1911 and Luger pistol have been around for over 100 years. I'd say that the design is well proven.
"2. Delay in operation - as noted, this can increase risks to user, and reduce utility.
Ever hear of target identification? It takes time. People kill friends and relatives because they do not take that time. Might stop a few guys killing their daughters when they sneak home via the window,"
I don't know if you realize how dumb you sound. Anyone who's gone thru any gun safety or defensive handgun class will tell you that you don't shoot unless your life is clearly in danger. Where the delay in operation can kill you is if you are in a CCW situation and you have to clear leather. You don't have 1.5 seconds when you reach to get your gun. Even if the armed assailant has a 'safe gun' his is in his hand and he's ready to shoot. Bang, you're dead.
"3. Increased cost.
Will not be significant if produced in volume."
That's your guess. And the Epi-pen prices shouldn't have risen 500% in the past 2 years either.
"4. Will not work while wearing gloves.
Why is that a bad thing? How many people try to use short arms wearing gloves. Most cases where you would be wearing gloves you would be using long arms."
Again, you don't shoot. You have no clue about why anyone would wear gloves when shooting. Free clue. I wear gloves when I go to the gun range and work through my skills and drills. If you have to ask why, you've never seriously shot a pistol. And that's just at the range. If you're in a tactical situation you always have gloves on. Some LEOs wear kevlar gloves.
"5. Potential failure of locking / authentication system (may fire anyway), leading to a false sense of security and, likely, accidents.
This would be designed to fail safe i.e.. Not fire unless 'it' was sure it was being instructed to do so by an authorised user. There will be no false sense of security or accidents. It might not fire when you want (possible flaw, yes) but it will not fire when you do not want it to. Engineering can guarantee that as much as it can for any firearm."
Wow. more complete nonsense. Do you know what a hang fire is? There are a lot of bad things that can happen when a firearm malfunctions. Before you go talking you need to run a lot of rounds and different types of ammo. BTW, the kid's demo pistol is a .22. What happens when you start fire real guns. You know .40, 10mm , +Ps ... When the electronics fail ... what happens? The point is you don't know you're guessing.
I can go down the list and I can say that you clearly don't have a clue about guns, gun safety and defensive handgun techniques.
Please do us a favor and take an actual gun safety class and get some hands on experience.
In the current Universe.
They aren't as bad as the CNN but they are left of center and are closer to the left than others.
For those who don't get it...
There are several types of safes.
And its here that biometrics makes sense.
There is a safe manufacturer that makes a small desktop / desk side safe that uses either a biometric, RFID or combination to let you get to your gun quickly. In this type of safe, you would keep the gun with a loaded mag, but not one in the chamber.
If you have kids around the house, you don't keep loaded guns out where they can get them.
Yup you are correct. Only problem is that you have people who don't know anything about guns who can't get it thru their thick heads that a fingerprint reader isn't going to make anything better.
Clearly you don't own firearms or know anything about them.
The author went on about some kid at MIT who was reinventing the fingerprint scanner on the gun.
You blather about the RFID tag in a ring or bracelet or something else used to unlock the gun.
Neither system will work in real life.
In terms of gun safety... there are gun safes that either use a combination lock, rfid card or rfid ring. Secures the gun in the home and its ready for use when needed.
So, let me get this straight...
People are protesting about a system which has the potential to be used to find those who are living illegally in the US and deport them?
Does anyone else see how insane this is? You have people who are knowingly violating the law and you want to protest the Feds for doing their jobs?
As others have pointed out... Google also has the potential do the same thing. In fact they could probably do a better job of finding people since they pretty much track and own every web site out there.
Any word about pizza ?
Pizza and coffee don't really go together.
Diet coke is a different matter.
Total Thumbs up.
Now lets see someone come up with a better GUI and front end for an open source mail/calendar/etc app to replace Exchange and other less secure systems.
If only Hillary had a competent tech who set up dovecot and postfix instead of an unsecured exchange server! :-P
(No, I still wouldn't vote for her. She's still as crooked as they come. )
Yes, anything can be hacked. However, its possible to increase the barriers to a point where hacking becomes futile and obtaining the information thru other means is easier.
And there are other things that Google could do, but doesn't yet do...
I've been watching this company since it made noise a couple of years and they haven't really come out with a product.
So I am a bit skeptical with all of this hype and no product.
Please don't misunderstand, I'd love to see them succeed. 4+ TB on an M.2 form factor card would be incredible. (They talk about a 1 TB per cm^2 density) But please don't tease us with something that isn't close to being a product.
Not just Friday, but Friday the 13th!
And this is the crux of the case.
The tech sees an image and reports it.
Now suppose the image is of a girl who is 18? Then its a legal image.
The claim by the police is that they recognized the girl as a victim from other cases.
Then they know its child porn.
Browser cache or not, if the image is of child porn, then they would have enough to request a warrant.
The unanswered question... why was the tech looking at the drive? The defense will depose him before trial and try to figure out what he was doing. And that's the weakness of this case.
As it is... the man's life is pretty much ruined. Guilty or not... he'll have to move and go somewhere where he won't be recognized.
The you would be a forensic IT specialist.
Is it possible to plant evidence so well that you can't tell that its planted? Sure, but that takes a real professional... Not a geek squad guy.
Before the tech reported the guy there is no 'chain of custody'.
The police do not have custody of evidence before it is brought to their attention.
The tech brings the evidence to the police. At that point custody begins.
The tech is then questioned and makes an official police statement.
The tech will at a minimum be deposed about the image and how it came in to his possession. The burden of the defense is to create doubt as to the origins of the evidence.
You misunderstand the burden.
The prosecution has the burden to show and prove guilt. The defense has the burden to bring reasonable doubt to the evidence so that the prosecution doesn't meet his burden.
Yes, I realize that many motions get submitted and they don't always get ruled on immediately or argued. However, in this type of case, you make a motion to dismiss and you argue it out, you don't keep going. In a criminal defense case you want to drag things out.
I don't think you've spent much time in court.
The lawyer could make a motion to dismiss raising both arguments at once.
In doing so, the judge can deny the motion and the guy is toast.
If he makes two separate arguments he can argue each on its merit alone so he gets two chances to get the case dismissed.
In the first argument he claims 4th amendment because the geek was acting as an agent of the FBI.
Second one is that the picture isn't technically porn so then they got the warrant on bad faith. So it wasn't a warrantless search but a faulty warrant.
Yes and no.
The evidence could be re-admitted if they find something that would have led them to a search of his machine. However, you would have to go and find that evidence on its own and not something can could be tied back to the search.
Using your example, a log file of his downloading an image from a site.
You would have to show that you got that information without any reference to his computer.
For example... how did you know to go to that web site to get the logs? How did you get his IP address?
I mean its possible, however, its like finding a needle in the haystack.
Unallocated could have meant that he deleted the file.
Or he could have claimed that it wasn't his image if it was the only one.
However it wasn't.
You do bring up a question... what was the reason for the tech to look at the hard drive? That would go back to the reason why he was called.
Chain of custody isn't an issue.
The tech reports the incident.
He would have had to file a complaint.
If the image was planted... you would know and the tech would be found guilty of one or more of the following:
1) Lying to the FBI
2) Filing a false police report
(It depends if he signs a document like an affidavit.)
Post that... then you have a chain of custody issue.
Custody isn't on the reported image, but of what the FBI finds while they execute a search warrant.
Caveat... IANAL and I don't know European laws...
While the defense lawyer can make the argument that this was a warrant-less search, it will fail and also that this was a violation of his 4th amendment rights also would fail. (It did).
First, the doctor called the tech company to send a tech out to fix his computer. Meaning that he, the doctor, initiated the request and gave approval for the tech to access his system. In doing his job, the tech came across an image which he thought to be child pornography. He then reported this to the authorities.
The defense lawyer is arguing that because the FBI pays a reward for the tip, the tech is acting as an agent of the FBI therefore he's doing a search on the behalf of the FBI and without a warrant. This fails the sniff test. Imagine you invite a police officer in to your house and there's a kilo of coke sitting on the coffee table. The officer doesn't need a warrant to arrest you because the cocaine is in plain sight.
Now you have a hypothetical. Suppose the good doctor actually encrypted the kiddie porn images and the tech asked him for the password to decrypt the files. Since this would not be part of his job, it could call in to question that the tech was doing an unreasonable search. Then the lawyers argument may hold water. Back to our police entering your home... if the kilo of coke was in a cupboard and not in plain sight... then he would need a warrant to search your home. His opening a cupboard on his own would be a warrantless search.
But back to reality. The judge didn't buy the 4th amendment argument and the case moved on.
Now the latest argument is that the photo turned in may not be considered child pornography. Therefore there was no evidence for the search. And this is where the arguments get interesting.
The tech sees the image, thinking it to be kiddie porn, alerts the authorities. They see the image, they believe it to be kiddie porn and get the warrant on good faith. Even if the image wasn't kiddie porn on a technicality... they got and served the warrant in good faith. The fact that one of the officers recognized that it was a still from a kiddie porn movie and could identify the victim... would be enough.
So this too shall fail.
But to your point... this wasn't a fishing expedition by any stretch of the term.
The employee was doing his job and saw a potential criminal act and alerted the authorities.
This guy did the right thing.
Where geek squad guys get in to trouble is when they go out, work on a computer and see a stash of porn pics and vids of the owner, and then make a copy and post them online. That is illegal and that's why you fire them.
A word to the wise... encrypt the folders where you stash your porn or other private stuff.
Funny you made that comment.
I suggest you actually learn something of the law before you make a snide comment about violating terrorist's rights.
There was no forth amendment rights violation.
" This is on top of Riddet's earlier complaints that the doc's constitutional rights against warrantless searches were trampled on by the Feds by relying on a Geek Squad informant."
Earlier means that the motion failed.
Here's the thing.
The defense attorney is arguing that the image used to obtain the search warrant did not qualify as pornography therefore the search warrant wasn't valid. If the judge agrees, then the evidence from the search is inadmissible. (Fruits from the poisonous tree. ) Its a legitimate argument to make, however if the Feds can convince the judge that the still is of a known victim and they recognized that it was, then they got the warrant in good faith and the defense's motion fails.
How the image came to the Feds is not relevant.
And yes, the police can rifle thru your garbage if its outside of your domicile and they don't need a warrant.
Your whole point about the 'good Samaritan' is that they find something, alert the authorities, they may either have to sign an affidavit stating how and where they found the item, or testify as to the facts of the find, OR BOTH. The lawyer lost his argument that the use of the techie as a 'snitch' was a violation of his constitutional rights. That too was a clever argument, but it didn't hold water.
The point is that the defense motion is interesting and could get a pedophile off. (No pun intended)
Ok, for those who don't know US law, the point of the picture not 'technically' being child pornography is that if it isn't then the Feds didn't have probable cause to search his home and computer for child pornography.
If the sicko wins, then the search warrant is null and void and and evidence found would be inadmissible. This means the guy walks.
Yes, he is a pedophile. Yes the FBI knows it. But if he wins the motion, then the jury will never hear about the evidence, or the Feds drop the case against him.
If he loses... then the evidence stays in and he goes to jail and becomes his cell block's be-itch.
Actually there is more to it.
It goes beyond regular systems, however, to your point, there are more than one way to solve a problem and this would mean buying more IBM kit.
Yes, here's a solution now lets find a problem... That's the IBM way of doing business.
To your point...
Yes, you should scratch your head.
Not all block chain implementations will allow you to embed something within the chain. So if you use that implementation, you can share keys. However you will have to truncate the audit so you will lose access history over time.
Then there's the issue of scale. Its a distributed ledger so it will make transferring data between organizations easier. So information from your insurance company to the hospital / doctor and vice-versa can be easier.
Of course now IBM will have to push EPIC to partner in this.
I definitely agree with your skepticism.
Well you can launch drone fighters to provide air cover.
But to some extent, even drones would suffer the same issues that your manned aircraft would face.
On the launch, you should be able to adjust the initial rate of acceleration to reduce stress.
It could be that they didn't implement that yet. Even still, all of the catapult launches and arresting wire catches puts a lot of strain on the air frame. Its not just the landing gear, which does take the brunt of it.
As to not being able to separate it... I think its more than draining the system, but in the power management too. Maybe a PE with a background in power will be able to give a better answer.
In the consumer market... yeah, the SSD is more resilient to abuse. Drop an SSD from 2 meters, vs drop a spinning rust drive and see how they hold up. So the premium is worth it.
In the enterprise, its all about two things. 1) Cost per GB. 2) Speed.
With SATA drives... both have the same speed, with the interface being the bottleneck.
With NVMe, you have a faster bus and better performance so that the flash/ssd wins out.
Its NVMe that is killing the spinning rust in that portion of the market.
At the enterprise side of things... its more of a question of power/heat and price per GB that are going to drive the extinction. As NVMe drives come down and more server models offer that as an option... you will see them taking over. Once that happens... you will see Spinning rust 'die' within 4 years. Note that even that won't kill it off completely. Tape still exists. ;-)
The internet is never free.
Adverts are one thing.
Targeted adverts are another.
Did you ever hear of a thing called USENET?
And yes, it did have a porn news group. (pics and some low res movies.)
As to spam... you can thank Cantor-Siegel for the first spam of a newsgroup.
Of course this was all before the whole websites thing.
Think about it.
Do you know if your opponent is human or a machine?
If the machines win out... you just set up your own AI poker bot to play online several games at a time...
If it wins out... you're rich until you're caught.
I don't know if Dragonsoft is still around, but you had to train it to your voice for dictation.
They could have done the same thing had they thought about it or even cared.
People don't know how careless tech companies can be while they chase the almighty dollar.
I'd imagine it's rather a no-win situation for D-Link. They've probably got one set of three letter agencies telling them to put the security holes in and now another one suing them for doing so.
Uhm, do you realize that this is a Chinese company ... actually Taiwanese.
Not sure how much pull a US based 3 letter agency has with a foreign government...
And we're descendants of the Pak. But we don't have our own Protector so we're dead meat.
Its slow, expensive and its a last resort.
On the farm, I almost considered setting up a mini tower with a microwave connection to the telco in town ~20 miles away. Much more expensive but worth it.
From what I read... the law says you have to allow them the right.
But it doesn't say who pays for the cost of installation. And that's a big thing.
I mean if you talk to the cable company and installers, they want to run the cable along the wall or ceiling exposed. Some people say no ... in the wall or in conduit. That's $$$$$.
So landlord could say... sure... go ahead, here's the rules, and you pay for it. They will be compliant, but you will decide against it because its not worth footing the bill.
That's the thing. If you were told it would cost you $3500 for the install alone, would you do it?
What about 6K, 12K... would you still do it?
BTW if the landlord includes internet and cable in the rent... you still pay for it whether you use it or not.
Clearly you haven't been faced with this issue.
Having a choice isn't a bad idea. Like I said, we did just that. We bypassed building in Internet connectivity to our building's monthly assessment and going for a big discount. One reason was that it limited our individual choices even withing the cable provider. The second was who would run on the premise equipment like routers and wi-fi access points. I could but if I moved or was unavailable... oops!
We were able to do it, although the second cable / ISP got burned.
We have a resident who's in real estate and kept coming to the condo board meetings griping about not doing a deal that built in our cable to our monthly assessment. As if new home owners really cared.
I do agree with choice, but unless you can get a large enough group to move or want it... its not worth the cost and effort. 20+ years ago, I had a switched 56KB link in my apartment and then ISDN. I could do that because I had copper to the unit. Today... cable modem is the cheapest and best buy. If I could do FIOS... for the price... maybe.