Not all torrenting involves piracy, you know. There are lots of totally legitimate torrents out there.
And there is "legitimate" reasons to pirate too.
If you purchase a DVD from a vendor that is damaged or doesn't play properly, you have a very limited number of legal options. You could return the DVD to the vendor and hope that they will allow you to exchange it for a working copy, or return it to the publisher, if they have a paid replacement policy (I've had some success with that, but it is extremely rare,) or you could go without even though you already paid. You might be able to sue the publisher for failure to fulfill their end of the bargain, but that gets expensive and the outcome isn't assured.
I get real tired of buying stuff and having it not work...which seems to happen an awful lot lately. And unlike other commercial products, which allow you to return them if they don't work for full refund, software and media tend to not be allowed to be returned even when there is a problem.
I don't torrent for piracy, but I can certainly see why people would want to in order to obtain what they paid for and what the publisher has failed to provide.
I have found though that seeing the latest episode of anything isn't a big deal anymore.
The only time I've had issue with it is when others are discussing what happened in the latest episode. Spoilers are still a big issue. However, that hasn't been much of a problem for me lately because I spoiled the hell out of them talking about the latest episode of Game of Thrones because I had already read the books (not that the show is remaining true to the books.) People stopped talking spoilers around me since.
Fortunately, the librarians in this case are steadfastly refusing to back down. That isn't always what happens. And, look, there's nothing wrong with being conservative, having a specific set of values, and all the rest. What you can't do, however, is insist that public institutions follow your personal views just because. That isn't how secular government works. [...] We have to be more grown up than that, something librarians have been pushing for a long, long time.
A very long time...
The Library of Alexandria was known to contain every work they could get their hands on...sometimes stealing the work off of ships parked in the harbor, transcribed onto papyrus scrolls, and then the copies were usually returned to the owner, instead of the originals, once the copy was made.
The Library of Alexandria was destroyed, likely by conservative religious zealots (Coptic Pope Theophilus or the Muslim army of Amr ibn al `Aas), who disliked or despised the knowledge contained within the library or its availability to commoners.
I wish conservatives (though, full disclosure, I consider myself one,) would worry more about themselves than what other people are doing.... There is also an awful lot in the Bible about not judging others and treating others as you would wish them to treat you (which usually are ignored by the conservative Christian population in favor of the fire and brimstone, everyone else is going to hell attitude.)
I personally see the presence of these types of terms as a huge red flag that the company has a history of pissing off its customers.
I do too, and would avoid these companies like the plague once I was aware of this, but I can understand what would bring someone to this level of dickishness.
He did say that he wished that Yelp would review the reviewers and not just allow anyone to post anything...to which I explained that this already exists, but it is a little more reactive than proactive.
I could see that someone, who doesn't even have a history of pissing off customers, could react in this way. Sheer ignorance and cutting their own throat, but like I said, he wasn't upset about the reviews that were negative about stuff he could fix.
So is it safe to assume that these companies provide poor services and they know it
In this case...you are probably right. However, I have a friend who runs a restaurant, and he has gotten angry at people posting reviews before (not enough to do something this stupid though.) I've seen some of the reviews, and they are really, really bad. One person wrote a ton of bad stuff about their experience, but never said anything good. I'd personally read something like that as sour grapes...the person was upset, their day wasn't going too well, they woke up on the wrong side of the bed, etc.. If nothing is going right for them, they aren't going to see anything good about anything.
Sour grapes is one thing, but reviewing a restaurant you've never been to (mistakenly,) or trolling, I've seen those to. He has a ton of great reviews, but 54 reviews so bad Yelp has pulled them. I laughed at a few of them because the person complained about something the restaurant has never served, or about service the restaurant (which is a "fast food" restaurant) has never provided ("the waiter was snobby and difficult to work with.")
But there were also a lot of good reviews that gave low/lower points on yelp because of valid criticisms, and even stuff I've seen going into his restaurant. I've had mixed up orders, and stuff missing from my meal...but he didn't seem too upset by those reviews either since he knew they were stuff he had to fix.
Here's a free tip to the companies: if you provided good services at a fair price, you wouldn't get reviews that were so bad that you had to sue people.
And another couple: You are going to get bad reviews; don't take them personally unless there is something you can do to fix the problem they are criticizing you about. People are more likely to complain than praise, and you just can't please some people. Also realize that bad reviews help consumers too...if you have a spotless record in reviews, we are going to think something is a little fishy. Having a 99.5% positive rating is more valuable than a 100%. And whatever you do, don't be a dick.
Re: Re: Lesson 1: Don't post who you are on the internet
And use a proxy when posting so they can't get anything useful if they find a judge who actually believes that IP addresses can identify a single person.
Hopefully a proxy that doesn't keep records...which is hard to find today. Otherwise the judge just asks the proxy for your information and you're toast (though, I suspect that if you find a competent lawyer, and push the issue, the law will eventually side with you that this is an unconstitutional abuse of the 1st amendment.)
I'd rather companies go back to the old "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" model. If you don't like my opinion of your service, disown me as a consumer (I most likely already have disowned you anyway, but at least you'll feel good about it.) Playing these legal games with people's lives and financial well-being is only going to backfire in the long run, and in some cases, the short run.
Somewhere at Keurig, there is a lead engineer who returned to his desk after lunch and found his chair, phone, computer, desk drawers, and coffee mug all covered in tape.
I was kinda hoping that he and his fellow workers would return to find sales tags on their phones, chairs, desks, computer, and coffee mugs and friendly security guards to usher them out of the building. Along with the three letter executives, which were removed by the stockholders who aren't very amused about the anti-consumer, greedy douchbaggery that they tried.
It is due to how people react to what you do, what you have, what you believe.
Look no further than teachers being fired from work due to what they choose to place (or what others choose to place) on their Facebook pages. Stuff that is outside of work, that has absolutely no impact what-so-ever on work, and in many cases is really nobody elses' business.
When we, as a society, have to worry about how someone, anyone, may mistake, confuse, or react to what we consciously (or what others consciously) place in the public or semi-private forum, we've all lost. It isn't about taking responsibility for your actions, it is about taking responsibility for that what the most dense, most intellectually challenged, and/or most willing to jump to illogical conclusions based on limited evidence among us may possibly infer by it.
AA (Adult Accompaniment)-14 ratings are given to movies released in Canada. It is equivalent to PG-13 ratings in the US.
I agree with Mark though, how the movie got PG-13/AA-14 ratings is beyond me, other than it was an "indie" movie and thus didn't have the big bucks behind it to "fix" the problems.
This film is not yet rated (which I second as a great and well worth movie to see how the system doesn't work) goes into great detail about how indie movies get screwed...
Exactly! I'd gladly pay that if it's the price for the cable companies losing the ability to screw me over.
They're still screwing you over...just not in such a shady way (or an even more shady way by tacking on a fee, calling it a government tax, and then pocketing it themselves as the phone companies have done for ages with their universal service, E911 and other faux government fees that turn out to just be hidden profit lines.)
I'd much rather see the local loop become infrastructure that anyone can compete on, allowing businesses or government to lay the fiber infrastructure if they want, cutting out the cable/telecommunications company as the monopoly abuser.
Why bother? They don't need to present the drugs or guns to anyone, so they can simply say they found some during their inspection and put you in jail.
They aren't law enforcement...even if they claim to be. In order to get you for something like this, they are going to have to involve law enforcement and law enforcement is going to want drugs or bombs in order to prosecute you.
That way, they don't actually have to keep guns and drugs on-hand.
That is not the point. The point is to turn you into an unwitting mule. TSA on one end of the line puts a sizeable amount of drugs into your luggage, and then the TSA at the other end removes the drugs. If it gets discovered, you are the one holding the bag...not them.
Like "Tijuana car remodels" (where they borrow your car in Tijuana, pull it apart and add drugs to various places, and then return it before you know it is missing,) you get nabbed by the police when the drugs are found, and if not, they steal your car once you get north of the border and take the drugs...you are the perfect mule because you have no clue that something is amiss.
The company the TSA contracts to is called Covenant?? Really? Wow. Aside from the many layers of irony in that name, it sounds like a religious outfit. Very creepy.
Covenant Aviation Security. They have an email address and phone number for their lost and found, but no mail address and nobody seems to want to provide one. Also, there was a CAS NOI in the bag, but it wasn't stamped...despite their claim, and TSA's requirement, to hand stamp CAS NOIs.
Also, this is a good time to point out yet again that the TSA contracting this stuff out is a terrible idea.
The *ONLY* way to fix this is to outlaw TSA, or any contracted agency, from inspecting any article without the person who owns that article present, along with cameras and preferably several screeners present. TSA claimed, at the time that I filed the report, that they inspect so many bags this would be impossible. Yet every other country I've been to does it.
Meanwhile, some other hapless traveler is missing a camera (and everything in it).
Luckily, they pulled the chip out of the camera before packing it in their bags. The chip was missing from the camera.
According to the TSA agent I lodged a complaint report with, the airline probably covered the loss of the camera with insurance, but the TSA agent wouldn't give me an address to send the camera to in order to return it (or put it in their lost and found,) and the airline said they didn't want anything in their lost and found that was found in my luggage...only if I found it on the plane or in the airport. Covenant, the company that TSA contracts with in SFO, said they had no interest in me returning the camera to them either and that I should just keep it (probably the most unethical response I had ever heard from a security company.)
Since it's the TSA's tape, I'm sure they could re-open and re-seal it as many times as they want.
Nope...it is the foreign government's tape (or other tamper resistant device.) TSA doesn't apply tape. They rip it off and don't re-apply it after they rip it off. I know when they do it because it is missing.
If I remember correctly, airport 'security' is reviewed checkin of people and baggage that is then 'secured'/inspected/tamper-free.
Certainly true in foreign countries that care about Security (including the places I've been to: Japan, Germany, France and Bahrain.) Not true in the US. In these countries, your bag is examined (if it needs to, or randomly) in your presence, and then sealed using tamper-resistant tape or other restraints, and sent on its way to the plane. In the US, TSA can examine the bag without you or working cameras present, and you can only use a lock which they can open and tamper-seals from other countries are broken/removed.
If we followed the same system everyone else uses, TSA or airline employees wouldn't have the capability to steal from luggage without it being easily discovered, which I believe is why TSA doesn't want to implement this.
Well, as the story says, "... you know it's pretty easy to put stuff in as well."
Having had a camera (without a sim card) added to my luggage in San Fransisco International Airport, I can confirm that it is easy to have crap added to the bag. When I reported it, and just wanted an address to send back the camera, the TSA blamed it on the foreign inspectors (I was coming from Japan) and then on the contractors, and then finally on me, instead of accepting the blame and providing an address to send the camera. The Japanese version of TSA opened my bag and inspected it with me present, and there was no camera there. They then sealed the bag and it went on board the plane sealed. When it got to San Fransisco, it was still sealed with a tamper-proof seal. I went through customs with the bag still sealed. When it was dropped off at TSA, the seal was broken and the contents of the bag examined, in a secluded room while I was not present. When I got home, the seal was broken, a "we inspected your bag and added stuff to it without your permission" form was included as well as the camera.
TSA's only solution was to ask the contractors who run their system in San Fransisco to review the camera for evidence, but according to the contractor, none of the cameras were working when my bag was inspected, so no evidence. I asked them how they could hope to stop drugs or bombs from being added to the bag, and they said they would never do that. And yet, they added a camera to my bag.
I believe one of the TSA inspectors took that camera from another bag, got caught by a supervisor, and quickly added it to my bag to hide the theft of the camera, but that is only speculation since TSA doesn't examine bags in the presence of the owner, and doesn't have working cameras in the inspection areas.
NVidia Shield has a locked bootloader...be careful, there be sea-serpents there.
Luckily, it can be easily unlocked, but the NVidia Shield is just as vulnerable to this type of activity, since NVidia can release an update that locks it/disables the ability to unlock the bootloader.
I wish they would make it illegal for companies to sell products with back-doors/"security systems" to allow the company to break the system or disable functionality remotely after selling the product to you. Locked bootloaders offer no user protection/capabilities beyond enforcing the companies control over your products. Like DRM, locked/encrypted bootloaders are defective by design.
The Kindle will never receive an update, given what I read here it was a wise decision to terminate it's internet abilities. I don't hack stuff but then there is no guarantee what they may decide to limit in the future.
As an owner of a ASUS Transformer tf101 (8* Serial #,) I will never purchase a locked bootloader/firmware system ever again, regardless to whether I can disable the phone-home capabilities. My ASUS Transformer is dead, and has been for some time, but my unlocked Samsung and B&N Tablet are both working, long after the companies behind them gave up on the product and no longer support them.
It isn't what the company that builds them does with the product while they support them...it is what they do once the product is no longer supported and they want to motivate you to purchase a new one. ASUS's memory flash chips some-how failed pretty much the same time they decided to pull the plug on support, and while it may be entirely a coincidence, I have a hard time believing that is true given my experience with other non-locked devices continuing to work long after the company no longer supported them.
Or wait 5min to an hour and it will be on a torrent site.
I kinda figured that by now, those who were really into the show were watching the East Coast feed (whether legally through Satellite or via torrent.) My sister watches the east coast feed via Satellite. Me, I couldn't care less (I'd rather play L4D2.)
On the post: Children Are Leading The Cord Cutting Revolution
Re: Re: Re: Re:
And there is "legitimate" reasons to pirate too.
If you purchase a DVD from a vendor that is damaged or doesn't play properly, you have a very limited number of legal options. You could return the DVD to the vendor and hope that they will allow you to exchange it for a working copy, or return it to the publisher, if they have a paid replacement policy (I've had some success with that, but it is extremely rare,) or you could go without even though you already paid. You might be able to sue the publisher for failure to fulfill their end of the bargain, but that gets expensive and the outcome isn't assured.
I get real tired of buying stuff and having it not work...which seems to happen an awful lot lately. And unlike other commercial products, which allow you to return them if they don't work for full refund, software and media tend to not be allowed to be returned even when there is a problem.
I don't torrent for piracy, but I can certainly see why people would want to in order to obtain what they paid for and what the publisher has failed to provide.
On the post: Children Are Leading The Cord Cutting Revolution
Re: Re:
The only time I've had issue with it is when others are discussing what happened in the latest episode. Spoilers are still a big issue. However, that hasn't been much of a problem for me lately because I spoiled the hell out of them talking about the latest episode of Game of Thrones because I had already read the books (not that the show is remaining true to the books.) People stopped talking spoilers around me since.
On the post: Librarians Are Continuing To Defend Open Access To The Web As A Public Service
The Library of Alexandria
A very long time...
The Library of Alexandria was known to contain every work they could get their hands on...sometimes stealing the work off of ships parked in the harbor, transcribed onto papyrus scrolls, and then the copies were usually returned to the owner, instead of the originals, once the copy was made.
The Library of Alexandria was destroyed, likely by conservative religious zealots (Coptic Pope Theophilus or the Muslim army of Amr ibn al `Aas), who disliked or despised the knowledge contained within the library or its availability to commoners.
I wish conservatives (though, full disclosure, I consider myself one,) would worry more about themselves than what other people are doing.... There is also an awful lot in the Bible about not judging others and treating others as you would wish them to treat you (which usually are ignored by the conservative Christian population in favor of the fire and brimstone, everyone else is going to hell attitude.)
On the post: Here Are The Companies That Want To Charge You $2,500-$100,000 For Negative Reviews
Re: Re: Re: Poor services = poor reviews
I do too, and would avoid these companies like the plague once I was aware of this, but I can understand what would bring someone to this level of dickishness.
He did say that he wished that Yelp would review the reviewers and not just allow anyone to post anything...to which I explained that this already exists, but it is a little more reactive than proactive.
I could see that someone, who doesn't even have a history of pissing off customers, could react in this way. Sheer ignorance and cutting their own throat, but like I said, he wasn't upset about the reviews that were negative about stuff he could fix.
On the post: Here Are The Companies That Want To Charge You $2,500-$100,000 For Negative Reviews
Re: Poor services = poor reviews
In this case...you are probably right. However, I have a friend who runs a restaurant, and he has gotten angry at people posting reviews before (not enough to do something this stupid though.) I've seen some of the reviews, and they are really, really bad. One person wrote a ton of bad stuff about their experience, but never said anything good. I'd personally read something like that as sour grapes...the person was upset, their day wasn't going too well, they woke up on the wrong side of the bed, etc.. If nothing is going right for them, they aren't going to see anything good about anything.
Sour grapes is one thing, but reviewing a restaurant you've never been to (mistakenly,) or trolling, I've seen those to. He has a ton of great reviews, but 54 reviews so bad Yelp has pulled them. I laughed at a few of them because the person complained about something the restaurant has never served, or about service the restaurant (which is a "fast food" restaurant) has never provided ("the waiter was snobby and difficult to work with.")
But there were also a lot of good reviews that gave low/lower points on yelp because of valid criticisms, and even stuff I've seen going into his restaurant. I've had mixed up orders, and stuff missing from my meal...but he didn't seem too upset by those reviews either since he knew they were stuff he had to fix.
Here's a free tip to the companies: if you provided good services at a fair price, you wouldn't get reviews that were so bad that you had to sue people.
And another couple: You are going to get bad reviews; don't take them personally unless there is something you can do to fix the problem they are criticizing you about. People are more likely to complain than praise, and you just can't please some people. Also realize that bad reviews help consumers too...if you have a spotless record in reviews, we are going to think something is a little fishy. Having a 99.5% positive rating is more valuable than a 100%. And whatever you do, don't be a dick.
On the post: Here Are The Companies That Want To Charge You $2,500-$100,000 For Negative Reviews
Re: Re: Lesson 1: Don't post who you are on the internet
Hopefully a proxy that doesn't keep records...which is hard to find today. Otherwise the judge just asks the proxy for your information and you're toast (though, I suspect that if you find a competent lawyer, and push the issue, the law will eventually side with you that this is an unconstitutional abuse of the 1st amendment.)
I'd rather companies go back to the old "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" model. If you don't like my opinion of your service, disown me as a consumer (I most likely already have disowned you anyway, but at least you'll feel good about it.) Playing these legal games with people's lives and financial well-being is only going to backfire in the long run, and in some cases, the short run.
On the post: Keurig's Controversial Java 'DRM' Defeated By A Single Piece Of Scotch Tape
Re: Re:
Must be a Thursday...never could get the hang of Thursdays.
On the post: Keurig's Controversial Java 'DRM' Defeated By A Single Piece Of Scotch Tape
Re: Re: Some people really like a challenge
I don't.
Somewhere at Keurig, there is a lead engineer who returned to his desk after lunch and found his chair, phone, computer, desk drawers, and coffee mug all covered in tape.
I was kinda hoping that he and his fellow workers would return to find sales tags on their phones, chairs, desks, computer, and coffee mugs and friendly security guards to usher them out of the building. Along with the three letter executives, which were removed by the stockholders who aren't very amused about the anti-consumer, greedy douchbaggery that they tried.
On the post: Judge Posner Says NSA Should Be Able To Get Everything & That Privacy Is Overrated
Re: The real problem with lack of privacy
Look no further than teachers being fired from work due to what they choose to place (or what others choose to place) on their Facebook pages. Stuff that is outside of work, that has absolutely no impact what-so-ever on work, and in many cases is really nobody elses' business.
When we, as a society, have to worry about how someone, anyone, may mistake, confuse, or react to what we consciously (or what others consciously) place in the public or semi-private forum, we've all lost. It isn't about taking responsibility for your actions, it is about taking responsibility for that what the most dense, most intellectually challenged, and/or most willing to jump to illogical conclusions based on limited evidence among us may possibly infer by it.
On the post: IFC Center Rejects MPAA's 'R' Rating On Snowden Documentary, Says It Should Be 'Essential Viewing'
Re: Re: UHF
AA (Adult Accompaniment)-14 ratings are given to movies released in Canada. It is equivalent to PG-13 ratings in the US.
I agree with Mark though, how the movie got PG-13/AA-14 ratings is beyond me, other than it was an "indie" movie and thus didn't have the big bucks behind it to "fix" the problems.
This film is not yet rated (which I second as a great and well worth movie to see how the system doesn't work) goes into great detail about how indie movies get screwed...
On the post: The Broadband Industry Pretends To Be Worried About Your Soaring Bill In Attempt To Undermine Net Neutrality
Re: Re: Re:
They're still screwing you over...just not in such a shady way (or an even more shady way by tacking on a fee, calling it a government tax, and then pocketing it themselves as the phone companies have done for ages with their universal service, E911 and other faux government fees that turn out to just be hidden profit lines.)
I'd much rather see the local loop become infrastructure that anyone can compete on, allowing businesses or government to lay the fiber infrastructure if they want, cutting out the cable/telecommunications company as the monopoly abuser.
On the post: Another Batch Of Baggage Handlers Accused Of Stealing From Luggage; Because Airport 'Security' Isn't
Re: Re: How easy would it be to set people up?
They aren't law enforcement...even if they claim to be. In order to get you for something like this, they are going to have to involve law enforcement and law enforcement is going to want drugs or bombs in order to prosecute you.
That way, they don't actually have to keep guns and drugs on-hand.
That is not the point. The point is to turn you into an unwitting mule. TSA on one end of the line puts a sizeable amount of drugs into your luggage, and then the TSA at the other end removes the drugs. If it gets discovered, you are the one holding the bag...not them.
Like "Tijuana car remodels" (where they borrow your car in Tijuana, pull it apart and add drugs to various places, and then return it before you know it is missing,) you get nabbed by the police when the drugs are found, and if not, they steal your car once you get north of the border and take the drugs...you are the perfect mule because you have no clue that something is amiss.
On the post: Another Batch Of Baggage Handlers Accused Of Stealing From Luggage; Because Airport 'Security' Isn't
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Covenant Aviation Security. They have an email address and phone number for their lost and found, but no mail address and nobody seems to want to provide one. Also, there was a CAS NOI in the bag, but it wasn't stamped...despite their claim, and TSA's requirement, to hand stamp CAS NOIs.
Also, this is a good time to point out yet again that the TSA contracting this stuff out is a terrible idea.
The *ONLY* way to fix this is to outlaw TSA, or any contracted agency, from inspecting any article without the person who owns that article present, along with cameras and preferably several screeners present. TSA claimed, at the time that I filed the report, that they inspect so many bags this would be impossible. Yet every other country I've been to does it.
On the post: Another Batch Of Baggage Handlers Accused Of Stealing From Luggage; Because Airport 'Security' Isn't
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Luckily, they pulled the chip out of the camera before packing it in their bags. The chip was missing from the camera.
According to the TSA agent I lodged a complaint report with, the airline probably covered the loss of the camera with insurance, but the TSA agent wouldn't give me an address to send the camera to in order to return it (or put it in their lost and found,) and the airline said they didn't want anything in their lost and found that was found in my luggage...only if I found it on the plane or in the airport. Covenant, the company that TSA contracts with in SFO, said they had no interest in me returning the camera to them either and that I should just keep it (probably the most unethical response I had ever heard from a security company.)
On the post: Another Batch Of Baggage Handlers Accused Of Stealing From Luggage; Because Airport 'Security' Isn't
Re: Re: Re: Evidence of Failure
Nope...it is the foreign government's tape (or other tamper resistant device.) TSA doesn't apply tape. They rip it off and don't re-apply it after they rip it off. I know when they do it because it is missing.
On the post: Another Batch Of Baggage Handlers Accused Of Stealing From Luggage; Because Airport 'Security' Isn't
Re: Evidence of Failure
Certainly true in foreign countries that care about Security (including the places I've been to: Japan, Germany, France and Bahrain.) Not true in the US. In these countries, your bag is examined (if it needs to, or randomly) in your presence, and then sealed using tamper-resistant tape or other restraints, and sent on its way to the plane. In the US, TSA can examine the bag without you or working cameras present, and you can only use a lock which they can open and tamper-seals from other countries are broken/removed.
If we followed the same system everyone else uses, TSA or airline employees wouldn't have the capability to steal from luggage without it being easily discovered, which I believe is why TSA doesn't want to implement this.
On the post: Another Batch Of Baggage Handlers Accused Of Stealing From Luggage; Because Airport 'Security' Isn't
Re: Re:
Having had a camera (without a sim card) added to my luggage in San Fransisco International Airport, I can confirm that it is easy to have crap added to the bag. When I reported it, and just wanted an address to send back the camera, the TSA blamed it on the foreign inspectors (I was coming from Japan) and then on the contractors, and then finally on me, instead of accepting the blame and providing an address to send the camera. The Japanese version of TSA opened my bag and inspected it with me present, and there was no camera there. They then sealed the bag and it went on board the plane sealed. When it got to San Fransisco, it was still sealed with a tamper-proof seal. I went through customs with the bag still sealed. When it was dropped off at TSA, the seal was broken and the contents of the bag examined, in a secluded room while I was not present. When I got home, the seal was broken, a "we inspected your bag and added stuff to it without your permission" form was included as well as the camera.
TSA's only solution was to ask the contractors who run their system in San Fransisco to review the camera for evidence, but according to the contractor, none of the cameras were working when my bag was inspected, so no evidence. I asked them how they could hope to stop drugs or bombs from being added to the bag, and they said they would never do that. And yet, they added a camera to my bag.
I believe one of the TSA inspectors took that camera from another bag, got caught by a supervisor, and quickly added it to my bag to hide the theft of the camera, but that is only speculation since TSA doesn't examine bags in the presence of the owner, and doesn't have working cameras in the inspection areas.
On the post: Amazon Fire TV Firmware Update Bricks Rooted Devices, Prevents Rollback To Previous Firmware Versions
Re: Re: Re: Well...
NVidia Shield has a locked bootloader...be careful, there be sea-serpents there.
Luckily, it can be easily unlocked, but the NVidia Shield is just as vulnerable to this type of activity, since NVidia can release an update that locks it/disables the ability to unlock the bootloader.
I wish they would make it illegal for companies to sell products with back-doors/"security systems" to allow the company to break the system or disable functionality remotely after selling the product to you. Locked bootloaders offer no user protection/capabilities beyond enforcing the companies control over your products. Like DRM, locked/encrypted bootloaders are defective by design.
On the post: Amazon Fire TV Firmware Update Bricks Rooted Devices, Prevents Rollback To Previous Firmware Versions
Re: Re:
As an owner of a ASUS Transformer tf101 (8* Serial #,) I will never purchase a locked bootloader/firmware system ever again, regardless to whether I can disable the phone-home capabilities. My ASUS Transformer is dead, and has been for some time, but my unlocked Samsung and B&N Tablet are both working, long after the companies behind them gave up on the product and no longer support them.
It isn't what the company that builds them does with the product while they support them...it is what they do once the product is no longer supported and they want to motivate you to purchase a new one. ASUS's memory flash chips some-how failed pretty much the same time they decided to pull the plug on support, and while it may be entirely a coincidence, I have a hard time believing that is true given my experience with other non-locked devices continuing to work long after the company no longer supported them.
On the post: AMC Forgets Time Zones Exist, Spoils Walking Dead Midseason Finale
Re:
I kinda figured that by now, those who were really into the show were watching the East Coast feed (whether legally through Satellite or via torrent.) My sister watches the east coast feed via Satellite. Me, I couldn't care less (I'd rather play L4D2.)
Timezones are for noobs.
Next >>