Fines? Forget fines. Streamline it. Asset forfeiture is the way to go man!
Concurrently with asset forfeiture proceedings, you can also 'disappear' the accuser. They don't need representation at any asset forfeiture proceedings, because, hey, they've been detained for allegations of accusing the government.
Maybe better than government servers which are scheduled for an upgrade from tin can and string technology to tin can and fishing line technology.
Maybe private email servers could be viewed as more secure than government servers which may have secret unelected watchers secretly watching everything secretly in secret from a secret remote location. While these snoops could easily monitor the private servers, they have to know you are using them first.
Just because you don't say anything intelligent or important enough to be concerned about someone spying on you doesn't mean that other people don't have legitimate concerns about being spied upon.
Yet somehow you managed to become secretary of defense? How did you do that? Does it pay well? Do you actually have to do anything? Is any knowledge required? It sounds like the easiest job in the world!
Your job is to route packets to their destination. Period.
Your job is NOT to snoop on my traffic. Prioritize my traffic. Purposely mis-route my traffic to different servers. Play games with how DNS resolution works. And other evil things.
I understand that doing evil things are in your nature. And therefore, can be impossible to resist. But it is not what you are supposed to be doing with my packets.
Google does NOT do deep packet inspection of my traffic. The information that Google does have about me is information I allow them to have in exchange for a superior experience in using the internet.
Especially since AT&T does not, never has and unlikely never will offer a superior internet experience, for that reason AT&T should definitely NOT be snooping on my traffic.
Not to worry. I'm sure they will be punished as much as Sony was punished for Sony's widespread rootkit distribution on CDs; which required large numbers of people to have their OSes reinstalled at their own expense back in 2005.
On the post: The FBI's Paranoia And Incompetence Threatens Free Speech
Re: It's All Google's Fault!
If Google would have come forward to help the FBI, at Google's own expense, and without being asked by the FBI, then this would not have happened.
Something must be done. Terrorists. Etc.
:-)
On the post: Verizon Latest To Balk At Weather Channel Rate Hikes For 'Weather Coverage' That's 70% Fluff And Nonsense
Re: I'm a Comcast subscriber
TWC can charge a much higher rate to carry TWC. Comcast will gladly pay the higher rate to carry TWC and pass the cost on to you.
TWC will be happy.
NBC will be happy.
Comcast will be happy.
All stakeholders accounted for. Everyone happy? Right?
On the post: Canadian Town Bans Spitting, Swearing And Gathering In Groups Of Three Or More
Re: It's for the greater good...
But hey, it is for the greater good. I didn't disturb anyone.
But those people in the fire sure did.
On the post: Verizon Latest To Balk At Weather Channel Rate Hikes For 'Weather Coverage' That's 70% Fluff And Nonsense
Safety Hazard
Someone could have a heart attack looking at those people on those sexy beaches.
On the post: Apartment Complex Claims Copyright Of Tenants' Reviews And Photos, Charges $10k Fee For Criticism
Re: From Domestic Spying to Asset Seizure
Concurrently with asset forfeiture proceedings, you can also 'disappear' the accuser. They don't need representation at any asset forfeiture proceedings, because, hey, they've been detained for allegations of accusing the government.
On the post: Apartment Complex Claims Copyright Of Tenants' Reviews And Photos, Charges $10k Fee For Criticism
Re: Re: Re: Simple answer
Of course, you have to put them into the form of a patent application. But you can keep it 'submarined' for years and years where nobody can see it.
On the post: Another Newspaper Paywall Bites The Dust
Effective on April Fools day?
How fitting.
On the post: Encryption Backdoors Will Always Turn Around And Bite You In The Ass
Politicians please remember . . .
They will bite the American Public individuals and companies in the ass. So that makes it okay, right?
On the post: Encryption Backdoors Will Always Turn Around And Bite You In The Ass
Oxymoron time
The "Golden Keys" is a euphemism for Back Door, to make it sound nicer.
A Back Door is a security vulnerability that makes a system insecure.
Therefore the person is saying they want a system to be Secure and Insecure. That is a government worthy oxymoron if I have ever heard one.
See here for example:
New Rules in China Upset Western Tech Companies
Oh, look! The Chinese are doing it too! But they don't call it "golden keys", they say they want systems to be "Secure and Controllable".
Controllable means Back Door.
Back Door means vulnerability making system insecure.
Therefore, the Chinese want systems to be "Secure and Insecure". Another oxymoron brought to you by a government.
On the post: Breaking: Clinton Gave Staffers Clintonemail.com Addresses Too
Maybe private email servers work better?
Maybe private email servers could be viewed as more secure than government servers which may have secret unelected watchers secretly watching everything secretly in secret from a secret remote location. While these snoops could easily monitor the private servers, they have to know you are using them first.
On the post: Australian Secretary Of Defense Not Concerned About Phone Hack; Doesn't Think People Want To Spy On His Phone
Dear Senator Scott Ludlam
Yet somehow you managed to become secretary of defense? How did you do that? Does it pay well? Do you actually have to do anything? Is any knowledge required? It sounds like the easiest job in the world!
On the post: AT&T's $30 'Don't Be Snooped On' Fee Is Even Worse Than Everybody Thought
Dear AT&T
Your job is NOT to snoop on my traffic. Prioritize my traffic. Purposely mis-route my traffic to different servers. Play games with how DNS resolution works. And other evil things.
I understand that doing evil things are in your nature. And therefore, can be impossible to resist. But it is not what you are supposed to be doing with my packets.
Google does NOT do deep packet inspection of my traffic. The information that Google does have about me is information I allow them to have in exchange for a superior experience in using the internet.
Especially since AT&T does not, never has and unlikely never will offer a superior internet experience, for that reason AT&T should definitely NOT be snooping on my traffic.
On the post: The FCC's Historic Day: Voting Yes For Net Neutrality, Voting No On Protectionist State Telecom Law
Re: Dear Imaginary Innovation Angles
On the post: The FCC's Historic Day: Voting Yes For Net Neutrality, Voting No On Protectionist State Telecom Law
Dear Imaginary Innovation Angles
Thanks
On the post: Nvidia Actually Listens To Its Customers, Will Again Let Them Use The Expensive Hardware They Own As They See Fit
If there is a bug that customers want . . .
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dratz/1045336659/
On the post: NSA Director: If I Say 'Legal Framework' Enough, Will It Convince You Security People To Shut Up About Our Plan To Backdoor Encryption?
Terminology Note
Let's call them what they are: secure insecurities.
A government style oxymoron if I ever heard one.
Rationale:
Golden Keys == Back Doors
Back Doors == Insecure
Secure Golden Keys == Secure Insecurities
On the post: Thought Komodia/Superfish Bug Was Really, Really Bad? It's Much, Much Worse!
Re:
On the post: Sorry: AT&T & Verizon Can't Upgrade Or Repair Your Aging DSL Line Because Parts Are Too Hard To Find
I'll bet . . .
In highly profitable DSL markets, I bet parts are easy to find.
On the post: Copyright Enforcement Company Uses Sketchy Algorithms And Questionable Math In Hopes Of Becoming Copyright Trolls' Go-To Resource
Java or JavaScript
(of course, I have them both blocked by default.)
On the post: Copyright Enforcement Company Uses Sketchy Algorithms And Questionable Math In Hopes Of Becoming Copyright Trolls' Go-To Resource
Re:
Next >>