Re: no winners yet?
I'm sure we have, but there's those falling by the wayside who haven't put in their tuppence.
Sidenote... spell check doesn't like "tuppence". Very strange.
12880 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Nov 2012
No one said it was "right" did we. Just that there is a precedent and no backlash from it. Trump wants the same ban.. temporary until Congress, etc. can sort out how to deal with this situation. Is that really a problem?
Here's my previous on this: http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2719853
I won't get into his other statements, just this one as Trump is still an ass and even blind squirrel gets an acorn once in awhile.
He was known as a rich ass for a lot of years. His current status has come from two words he would utter on reality show (for some value of reality) usually to some snot-nose asswipe: "Your fired". People ate that up and they now think he's a wise businessman. No... he's still a schmuck. Elect him at your peril.
Well.. the media is to blame for much of this... consider what he said and the bit at the end that no one mentions: .... until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on".
They totally ignore that part which actually the way it should work. Congress has to decide.
Disclaimer: I'm not a Trump supporter or a Billary supporter. Just a voter who's following along at this point and trying to sort out the rhetoric. We have a situation here much like chocolate bars in a cesspool... Sorting out the chocolate from the crap is a tough job.
In other words, it sounds like a poorly thought-out, knee-jerk reaction that would almost certainly fail a First Amendment challenge.
Typical Feinstein. When in doubt, pass a law as that will stop everything bad dead in it's tracks. No one will ever do anything against the law, she thinks. The chandelier that is Congress is filled with dim-bulbs but I think hers is burned out.
I guess no one looked out the window and saw an abundance of runway in the other direction? Which at one time was normal practice. First off to see if you were getting the full runway and secondly to make sure the tower didn't screw up and have a plane coming in while you're trying to take off*.
*It's happened more than once...
You should. But it could be that your LEO's decided it's more cost effective for them if the US does it. Or maybe there's a fear he'd go hide out in an embassy like a certain other lad?
There's so much not being said... yeah, he was an employee on "American soil" and committed the crime on said soil, but where did the victims reside? It could have went either way.
Warrants? Legal speak it all you want. It still boils down to either they encryption is secure or it's insecure. If it's insecure, I don't want it.
Backdoored or weak encryption is useless in the real world. It leave everyone open to Identity Theft, Band Fraud, and CC Fraud. And that's at a minimum. Those threats are more prevalent than a terrorist attack. Take out the miscreants who engage in this activity and when there's no more of this happening, we'll re-think encryption.
You're proposals sound like they came out of Feinstein's mouth. "Pass a law and no one will every break it. Use a warrant and only we can get the information." Bullshit. Look into the tech and the maths of encryption.
Either the website is getting hammered or connection to the US is bit erratic. I get none of the directions and just a bit of the puzzle before it dies and it's allegedly 3811X3545 pixels.
I'm showing outbound and almost no inbound traffic on the LAN connection for this. No joy with either IE or Firefox. I wonder if I should be wearing my tinfoil hat?
Imagine that. I think the commentards here already know this. I would hope that maybe they'll get some non-tech oriented media coverage. Currently, the media fawns all over IoT as being the next, best, big thing... and the person on the street believes it.
New acronym.. IoG.
I was (still am) a fan of the Grateful Dead. Back early on, they were local then once they got widely known still played for relatively (for the time) low gate prices. Their marketing was simple: make a recording at a concert and share it, but you can't charge for it. It worked for them as people after hearing the "pirate" wanted to buy the professional version with better quality.
I do tend to be a devil's advocate though since many of the classics in warfare (and everything in the business/corporate world is warfare if you look at that way) say to "know your enemy better than yourself".
Do allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. If it weren't for the labels and music streamers like Spitify, how would an artist's works get to the public? There's a huge backend for any musical piece.
But yes, royalties should be fair and equitable and the creative accounting of the labels should not be allowed. The is some common ground somewhere for the artists and those marketing/using the music for profit.
I see... ok.. the article made the statement: Funding in place, they plumped for sub-Sarahan Africa for their test run as the lack of forestation made it easier to test those algorithms. Also, there were workers available on the ground to double-check the results by manually counting trees.
I made the assumption that hand counting to verify until they get everything sorted was needed. I'll go stand in the corner and remind myself not to assume facts not in evidence.
So they need to send human counters in to the forest. Will they need to make roads? Clear some space for a campground? How will they mark the tree so they know it's been counted? I can hear the Greenies screaming now at this invasion of tree-space.
I'm still wondering if he's pulling a Ross Perot and will bail out at some point. If he is just power hungry, then he's someone we don't want in that office. And we sure as hell don't need another guy like Obama who knows better on everything and won't listen to any counterpoints.
This scenario has been tried before.. Obama's the latest. Nixon even tried it. If, let's assume, Trump wins. If he's smart, he negotiates with Congress instead of screaming, demanding to get his way. Then there will be Supreme Court challenges.
However, if he pulls an FDR (Japanese Interment Camps), he might get away with it. The War Powers Act has a lot of latitude in it.
Actually, both sides are responsible for the dumbing down and the "not being responsible for your actions" beliefs. It goes back to the 70's and "you're smart" and "we'll not use grades because you're special". Then they cut the spending on the basics... maths, science, etc.
This is the fruit of many years of hard work by the powers that be. They dumbed things down, and here's the result...<sarc> happy proles.</sarc>
Currently, the US is looking for leadership. Obama doesn't have it and the people need it. These same people respect Putin because he is a leader and is (to those outside looking in) looking out for his country. Trump is playing to that. Clinton... not so much.
Exactly... just the board, maybe a admin assistant (or whatever the PC types call them these days) or two to answer the phone, and shareholders. Minimum expense... profit!!!! IOW, the perfect corporation from an activist investor.
If they keep the name Yahoo! I think that would be rather disingenuous to say the least.
Ah, no. Black ice is called black ice for a reason. No reflectivity. Having driven mountain passes daily for many years, you just assume it's there from temperature and few other clues, like cars off the road.
And when you hit it, it's too late do much except ride it out. The key is to assume it's there and drive accordingly.
Exactly. That's why I asked. One can't be too careful. I'm glad someone picked up on KB3112343 as I hadn't got through them all yet. What a clusterfsck things have become.
Sidenote, still sorting out my programs and Linux so I can break free of this tyranny.
The problem is "where's the targeting radar"? At sea level or low altitude this angled side ought to work pretty well. If the targeting radar is airborne at a good altitude to minimize the angle, it might get back a better signal.. but then there's the decoys.
I ran this for a "friend" who insists on using it. He called me because VoodooShield found one of the components (gcheck.exe) to be "unsafe". WTF, Adobe???? It's supposedly something from ask.com.
Anyway, the friend got what he wanted... I'm not sure why and didn't ask. I just said, I'm not supporting Flash for anyone after today... friends, relative, etc. as it is crap and will increase your odds of getting malware.
These are at odds with each other. Securing it is a great idea for data protection, etc. But most emergency services agencies want your phone to be unlocked so they have contact info in case you get by a bus, train, plane, whatever. Most people, being honest would look at a phone and call someone to say they found this. A very mixed bag of "what to do"....
Seriously, why is it that every time there is an article on mobile phones, some ludite pops up to boast about using outdated technology? Similarly articles on Facebook, where half the comments are just people saying they don't use it.
It has really nothing to do with being a luddite, I think. In my case, I've got enough stress and work just keeping up with changes by my employer. I don't need to have the latest and greatest toy (and the learning curve). As for social media, we in tech know enough horror stories to make us run away.
As for the original poster in this topic, he's proud that he's never lost his mobile and he should be. Come to think of it, I've never lost one either. Nor have I left a laptop on the train/bus that may or may not have had sensitive information on it.
We had ProtonMail getting hammered in a large multi-day attack and now Janet. I'm guessing these need some heavy resources (botnet?) to pull off and keep them going. Is the ProtonMail DDoS still going on? I've not heard anything.
Just seems a bit of coincidence.... heavy attack for multiple days.
Dan,
You're too rational to be a lawyer, PR type, or corporate exec. I like that. Uber has bending and twisting words and ignoring laws since they started. If only a few other places would take on Uber AND the execs like France has, something might get sorted. I think, that if other countries did this, this might be good for Uber. Uber really need some good press after all the bad that they have had (and brought onto themselves, I might add) and going along with some local regulations or working to get them changed would be a good thing for them.
OTOH, I really don't see them changing. They keep taking on city hall and losing. Sooner or later, it will all catch up with them.