Re: Do the quotes have limits?
My guess is Audible.com doesn't have their stuff in Youtube's auto-blacklisting system and haven't been flagging things at the same rate they've been added
676 posts • joined 13 May 2013
Wait, when did they ever claim that? There's *always* been a chance of being identified online, even if you take precautions like tor or VPNs. There's never been a time when there was no way for a machine to be identified, just ways to make it difficult enough that people give up looking
To be fair they should have disabled the option at installation if they didn't have it working in the beta (although if it's a bug then that's fair enough). It's one thing collecting data in the beta, but if you give customer/tester the option to opt out of that collection then you really should be going along with that
You know, spending a lot of money to put together a fairly innocuous app which is good enough to end up popular purely so that you can use it to track people's location isn't exactly the most straight forward (or cheap) way of following someone. I wonder where the former head of MI6 got the idea
As I understand it that's standard practice to prevent the officers being investigated from interfering with any investigation (police having a better idea how to go about doing that than the average joe). It's pretty reasonable since not everyone who is investigated will have actually committed an offense, even if it does look bad when it's something as blatantly obvious as this. What matters is what comes out of the investigation, and it looks a pretty clear cut case (especially since I suspect the victim will be looking at legal action against the police for what happened, could get a pretty nice pay out for this)
They already have a decent mechanism for this, they can get a court order to require access to materials they believe are stored on the device. It's the same rule as with safes and accountancy books, if they know it exists and have good reason to suspect it's in that location, they can get a court order with the threat of prison time if the court order isn't followed
The only thing this restricts is police cloning devices for later review during a stop and search. Currently the legal opinion of the police is that, if the device is on your person when stopped and they have reasonable suspicion of a crime (which is needed for the stop in the first place anyway), they can search it without a warrant. This makes that near-impossible to do, and means a lack of warrantless searching of any email accounts linked to that phone
Technically, even if the Tories *did* create a bill of rights, it would only stay in place until a later government (potentially including another tory one) decided they didn't like it. No parliament is bound by the decisions of it's predecessors, which is why having a body *outside* of the UK courts to deal with human rights is a good idea. Our system just isn't designed to deal with that kind of thing
Heartbleed was in the OpenSSL libraries, which were cross platform, not linux/osx specific.
Shellshock was a bug in bash, which is mostly *nix (although I think cygwin lets you install it in Windows), although there are alternatives to bash which are also available on *nix machines and don't have the same vulnerability.
Also, as pointed out, when the bug was found it was publicised quickly and had patches out within days. Compare this to Microsoft, who in the past was known to hold back patches so they could be incorporated into a scheduled update because they were concerned that too many updates would worry customers
My office actually has started using google docs for a lot of their stuff purely because it also integrates with google drive, making it much easier to share the documents with clients. Being able to work in the browser bypasses any issues with whether they have compatible software to read or edit files in
Afaik they can only require you give them the password if they have specific evidence they know is on the device they want access to, much like they can require the key to a safe that contains a company's accountancy records. The only case I know of where the court was able to actually require access to a phone the guy had already showed the contents to someone at a border crossing, and it was what he'd shown them that they wanted access to.
Arguably you might be able to get around it by providing the specific thing they wanted access to on your device, but considering they can only get that kind of court order if the thing they're after is evidence of criminality I don't think you'd want to be doing that
It's also entirely possible that they *can* break this encryption, but they don't want anyone to realise they've managed it because then the standard will increase again and they're going to start struggling. Being able to bypass encryption for a criminal prosecution (ie they have to submit the decrypted phone data as evidence, so people know it happened and will suspect the encryption was broken) is kind of a one shot deal
Ok yeah, see your point there. If it'd been a reply I wouldn't have bothered, I just didn't see the other comment. If it's any consolation I've upvoted both since you were replying to something specific and the first comment was reasonable
If the setting of the game includes Panama when he was being ousted then he doesn't really have grounds for claiming it's unauthorised, it'd be like someone making a documentary about American politics over the last 10 years and being told they couldn't have an actor playing the role of George Bush
As for the ad hominem claim, one of the prosecutions accusations is false depiction. This means that what he did (and is now in prison for) is directly relevant to the legal claims being made. Ad hominem is when you attack the person *instead* of the claim, not when the person's past actions are a substantive point of the claims
The system itself actually seemed pretty good, but the linking of all google services with it and requirement to use your real name (and trying to impose use of that on other services too) was a real pain and put me off using it. I ended up doing whatever I could to close my G+ account just because I had no idea what I was posting elsewhere would be re-posted there automatically
If what she's described is true then it suggests this was probably happening at the director level of the foundation, rather than at the group level. It's likely that corporate sponsors would react much more strongly to a director of the foundation voicing concerns about them, and that reaction would likely be fed back
If they were just to add an option that let you open desktop mode apps in fullscreen mode (the F11 one) and then switch straight back to Metro when you close them it'd be a huge improvement on the user friendliness of Metro. As it is, even on the tablet I have the interface is awkward as hell to work with
I think he's gotten confused, although apparently you have as well. Copyright for *commercial purposes* is a criminal act, but copyright for private use is not. Copyright infringement on a non-commercial scale is a civil tort, not a crime (civil and criminal law are two separate branches of the law).
Illegal refers to something that breaks the law, regardless of what kind of law. A crime is a breach of criminal law, which is the jurisdiction of the police and CPS (or a private prosecution, although these are pretty rare). A civil tort is a breach of civil law which requires the injured party/parties bring it to court themselves
Also, the long running ad campaign by FACT where they say "Breaking copyright is a crime" are flat out lying. They want copyright to be perceived as being equivalent to theft, which is a criminal offence, so that people are more willing to accept severe punishments for it. It's basically a propaganda campaign, since FACT are entirely funded and run by various large name publishers and film studios
In your example you're stealing a bit of physical property, without which there's an increased risk of accidents. What the article is talking about, if you were doing the clear green light route at least, wouldn't have any theft and wouldn't increase the risk because it works with the traffic light's systems. You wouldn't have green from every direction, it would be green for you and red for others
"NSA and any other world-class intelligence agency can hack into databases even if they not in the US"
Didn't the US say that they would consider such actions by a nation state to be an act of war at some point last year? Or was that only building of viruses to target systems they were referring to?
Kindles and other ebook readers are becoming more common, to the point that they're not really noticed on public transport as something unusual anymore. Coupled with a slow realisation of the anonymous nature of ebooks which would take the general public a bit longer to catch on to and I don't think it's surprising that books people could find "objectionable" would start to become more popular. What I'm curious about is what the next one will be, and also how the popularity breaks down by region. Could be quite interesting
To be fair, the investigation was fairly brief at the time and wouldn't have been considered sufficient to reach the conclusion of suicide these days. That said, I read a theory that his death was accidental, and that he'd accidentally got cyanide from his home laboratory on to the apple (apparently he was quite careless in his lab and had been electrocuted several times, plus his friends suggested he was in good spirits at the time and he had been off the court mandated medication for around a year)
Not entirely sure how I feel about this. If the Beastie Boys had just sued to begin with then I'd be more on the side of GoldieBlox, but considering GoldieBlox apparently lied about the Beastie Boys suing them as a way to drum up more attention for their product I'm not entirely sympathetic now that the Beastie Boys have decided to take up that suggestion.
Of course, this is completely irrelevant to whether there's a valid parody exception here, which there might well be. I just can't help but feel GoldieBlox is being a bit scummy in the way they're handling this
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019