Having never used whatever this is (I guess it's called Tor), or knowing exactly how it creates anonymity for anyone, it would seem to me that by reading the document that one could not have deciphered exactly what they might be visiting by visiting the url listed as the site..
While I'm sure there were plenty that intended to visit that url it seems as equally logical that there were others who had no intention to view that content and ended up there simply because they clicked a link that they could not have previously known what it might contain... of which most probably closed it immediately.
I wonder how many knocks came at the doors of those people and got swept up in something that otherwise would have gone unnoticed... but the gov doesn't accept "accident" or "unintentional" as a reason anymore.. Guilty until proven innocent.
I let visitors use my bathroom when they are in my home. I disclosed the insides of my bathroom to visitors.. I better go check for cameras since now I have no expectation of privacy there.
The scariest part is not even this order but when reading the various outlets on this news you find there are literally masses of people that are completely acceptable to what the FBI wants... some going so far as to bash others for being against it and claiming they support terrorism. Sorry, I'm not willing to give up my rights to our own government because they promise it helps protect us when in fact they are slowly dousing the rag with ether with hopes to surprise us and slip it over our face and drag us off to conformity.
...they will tell you that denial is the first symptom.
Welcome to denial.
Now I'm gonna vent.
In my town the 25Mbit (2Mbit up) provider actually sends about 1.5 Mbit during peak hours. They only recently removed a monthly cap of 30GB but they tout it as a "No Bandwidth Limit". They don't even know the terminology of the business they are in... yet their parent company is always touting how they need to be your IT support professionals for businesses. Why not entirely incorrect, bandwidth is not usually rated on a monthly term...which is what they really meand since it clearly denotes a 25Mbps speed... morons.
The cost of their 25Mbit? It's $44.95... $5 cheaper than the other provider in town.. The other provider in town charges $49.99 for 155Mbit service (10Mbit up)... I pull, during peak hours, about 200Mbit (20Mbit up) with ease. No cap limits. Well above the speed I am promised obviously.
Why does one service totally suck and is overly expensive in comparison? Because they mostly do not overlap. I've had both services twice in different locations and in one house they actually overlapped. Only then was the junk-internet provider "able to offer" a discount on service when I called to make inquiries. That meant choosing between 25Mbit @ $30 per month of 80Mbit (at the time) for $44.. I clearly made the right choice to pay $44.
Of course the junk service offers higher speeds... Yes, you can get 50Mbit.. but only as a business class service with a $300 activation feed, variable installation fee (because why? who knows) and $150 per month.
The key was "disabling traffic shaping rules". What this means is that if T-mobile is throttling then video content will sputter and buffer when the connection is too slow. This temporary change will have minimal effect on streaming site but will have maximum effect on tmobile subscribers can't watch a damned thing on the service without constant buffering..
...when vagueness in a law is used for actions not explicitly permitted then one day lawmakers will begin writing vagueness into the laws on purpose.. oh wait. nm. this is already the case.
So what would have happened if the mix up was tied to illegal activity online.. Say the "other guy" made a threat online... what happens when the cops show up at 6am, break down doors and shoot the dog?
And another question.. why the heck is comcast TYPING mac addresses into any system?!?!?!? I'm guessing the failure rate on accuracy is pretty high here.
Why does no one see how to end this encryption debacle?
Here's a VERY simple solution...
Let the government pass the damned law.. In 30 days time after the first "backdoor" and "hacker proof" algorithm is completely destroyed by pretty much everyone who wants to try then we can put this issue to bed that NO BACKDOOR IS SAFE. Period.
I'm having a hard time finding people in their 50s who are fluent in technology. What makes me believe that these artifacts in politics know what the heck they are talking about?
This fossil couldn't figure out how to send emoticons and somehow she wants to pretend that she knows anything about encryption???
I would love for someone to stand up to anyone who speaks this asinine rhetoric and ask them what they know about encryption..
I nominate: "What is a semi-prime?" as the first question.
...you are an ordinary citizen. This is what's wrong with you... you think you are special. Comcast sucks, agreed, but you aren't any different other than you have a voice loud enough to get attention and make a call to action.
On the post: Warrant For FBI's Hacking Technique Makes No Mention Of Hacking Or Malware
...too wide.
While I'm sure there were plenty that intended to visit that url it seems as equally logical that there were others who had no intention to view that content and ended up there simply because they clicked a link that they could not have previously known what it might contain... of which most probably closed it immediately.
I wonder how many knocks came at the doors of those people and got swept up in something that otherwise would have gone unnoticed... but the gov doesn't accept "accident" or "unintentional" as a reason anymore.. Guilty until proven innocent.
On the post: What Should We Do About Linking To Sites That Block People Using Ad Blockers?
What?!?!
On the post: Courts, DOJ: Using Tor Doesn't Give You A Greater Expectation Of Privacy
Aw crap.
On the post: We Read Apple's 65 Page Filing Calling Bullshit On The Justice Department, So You Don't Have To
Re:
On the post: Apple Responds To Order To Help Decrypt Phone, As More Details Come To Light
The scariest part is...
On the post: Congressmen Upton, Walden Latest To Insist Nobody Needs Faster Broadband
In most help programs...
Welcome to denial.
Now I'm gonna vent.
In my town the 25Mbit (2Mbit up) provider actually sends about 1.5 Mbit during peak hours. They only recently removed a monthly cap of 30GB but they tout it as a "No Bandwidth Limit". They don't even know the terminology of the business they are in... yet their parent company is always touting how they need to be your IT support professionals for businesses. Why not entirely incorrect, bandwidth is not usually rated on a monthly term...which is what they really meand since it clearly denotes a 25Mbps speed... morons.
The cost of their 25Mbit? It's $44.95... $5 cheaper than the other provider in town.. The other provider in town charges $49.99 for 155Mbit service (10Mbit up)... I pull, during peak hours, about 200Mbit (20Mbit up) with ease. No cap limits. Well above the speed I am promised obviously.
Why does one service totally suck and is overly expensive in comparison? Because they mostly do not overlap. I've had both services twice in different locations and in one house they actually overlapped. Only then was the junk-internet provider "able to offer" a discount on service when I called to make inquiries. That meant choosing between 25Mbit @ $30 per month of 80Mbit (at the time) for $44.. I clearly made the right choice to pay $44.
Of course the junk service offers higher speeds... Yes, you can get 50Mbit.. but only as a business class service with a $300 activation feed, variable installation fee (because why? who knows) and $150 per month.
On the post: Publicity Rights For A Photobombing Horse? Owner Demands Cut Of Photo Prize
Maybe the could have won...
On the post: New Report Debunks FBI's 'Going Dark' FUD
Yup. you lost me at the title of the document in the PDF...
"First, it is slightly cheaper; and secondly it has the words Don't Panic inscribed in large friendly letters
on its cover."
On the post: Theater Sues State Police For Using State Liquor Laws To Walk All Over The First Amendment
yeah, ok.
On the post: God v. Copyright: Mike Huckabee Invokes Religion In Copyright Suit
Here's your fodder, Survivor...
On the post: Game Cracking Group Predicts The End Of Cracking Because Of Better DRM
The key?
On the post: Streaming Video Company Drops Out Of BingeOn To Protest John Legere's Attack On EFF; It Will Still Get Throttled, Though
Throttled, yes but obvious.
On the post: ACLU, EFF Join Fight To Suppress Evidence Illegally Obtained With A Cell Tower Spoofer
the real problem here is...
On the post: FBI Turns 18-Year-Old With An IQ Of 51 Into A Terrorist; Dumps Case Into Laps Of Local Prosecutors
Ah, the plan flushes out...
On the post: Daughters Sue 'Big Bang Theory' Over Infringing Use Of Mother's 82-Year-Old Poem 'Warm Kitty'
SMH
On the post: Comcast Cap Blunder Highlights How Nobody Is Ensuring Broadband Meters Are Accurate
Bigger problems...
And another question.. why the heck is comcast TYPING mac addresses into any system?!?!?!? I'm guessing the failure rate on accuracy is pretty high here.
On the post: Clueless Press Being Played To Suggest Encryption Played A Role In San Bernardino Attacks
Re: speculative prevention
On the post: Clueless Press Being Played To Suggest Encryption Played A Role In San Bernardino Attacks
We can EASILY solve this encryption debate...
Here's a VERY simple solution...
Let the government pass the damned law.. In 30 days time after the first "backdoor" and "hacker proof" algorithm is completely destroyed by pretty much everyone who wants to try then we can put this issue to bed that NO BACKDOOR IS SAFE. Period.
On the post: Hillary Clinton Joins The 'Make Silicon Valley Break Encryption' Bandwagon
WTH
This fossil couldn't figure out how to send emoticons and somehow she wants to pretend that she knows anything about encryption???
I would love for someone to stand up to anyone who speaks this asinine rhetoric and ask them what they know about encryption..
I nominate: "What is a semi-prime?" as the first question.
On the post: Thou Shall Not Browse: Comcast Refuses Service Call To Chicago Church Out Of Fear
Dear preacher-man...
Next >>