If Facebook is the only thing that catches a suicidal person, perhaps the problem is that they are suicidal precisely because they use Facebook!
You know how every time you read any article about Facebook and it seems creepy and makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up? That's 200 million years of evolution telling you to RUN, DON'T WALK but RUN away NOW. Except on the Internet.
If US companies are forced to build insecure systems and backdoored encryption, it will put the US at a competitive disadvantage compared to the other 96% of the world's population.
The other 96% of the world population will know better than to use products from US companies -- because of baked-in backdoors. If you're looking for a security product, or a secure product, DON'T BUY FROM THE US!
Quasi-related: Intel's Management Engine is going to come back to bite them so hard they will hate the day they ever built it. These things just take time. But I suppose I should consider that Windows is used all over the world and Microsoft can totally pwn your Windows computer at its whim.
Net Neutrality is about, and only about, your ability to connect to the internet and how fairly your packets get treated.
Your packets should get routed the same regardless of where they are going to or coming from. (eg, no discrimination on whether I use Netflix or Hulu because one might have a "special deal" with my local ISP (which every other Netflix customer helps subsidize))
Also your packets should get routed the same regardless of the contents of your packets. The contents of your packets is none of your ISP's business. But encryption takes care of that.
According to the FBI, public safety would be irreparably damaged if Stingray details were exposed.
That statement reinforces something that I've said here and elsewhere multiple times in the past.
Why is Stingray such a big secret? Two theories:
When the cell phone protocols and system was designed, it was in a world were security was lower priority than today. Some vulnerability has been discovered and exploited. That vulnerability is the basis of how Stingray works, e.g. "the secret".
Stingray is able to spoof a cell tower because it uses stolen crypto keys and/or authentication credentials from multiple cellular network operators. These stolen credentials are "the secret".
In either case, if "the secret" were known, then any old teenage hacker with some electronics and microcontroller knowledge could build their own stingray. Suddenly poor people could spy on rich people! (gasp!) And THAT! folks, constitutes irreparable harm to the public.
It shouldn't be illegal to charge more for more bandwidth. Although you should consider simply selling an "unlimited" package instead.
What should be illegal is if you in any way discriminate on anyone's network traffic based on where it goes to, comes from, or what the packets contain. As an ISP you shouldn't even be looking at what the packets contain -- let alone manipulating the contents. But encryption solves this.
It should also be illegal for an ISP to build "slow lanes". (They call it "fast lanes" but it's really "slow lanes".) It works exactly like lanes on a freeway. If a lane is reserved for certain users, what really happens is that all traffic is squeezed into fewer other lanes -- thus creating slow(er) lanes. Now an ISP could manage its traffic to ensure that all users get an equal amount of throughput. And if there's not enough to go around then the ISP should be building more capacity, otherwise it is like a Theater which sells 10,000 tickets but only has 3,000 seats -- which any attorney general would be highly interested in prosecuting. AOL back in the day got into trouble for not having enough capacity. They just kept selling, but didn't build capacity.
There shouldn't be special "fast lanes" for, say, Netflix because the ISP created some crooked deal with them. Yes, it's crooked, because Netflix is going to pass this cost onto ALL users, including users of other ISPs. So you have, say Verizon-Netflix customers subsidizing Comcast-Netflix customers.
Considering the breadth and depth of the government's corruption, this initiative has the chance to deliver instant death sentences to journalists, bloggers, and social media shitposters all over the nation. This isn't hyperbole. Violators will be arrested. And any arrest can result in dead suspects, especially when the Brazil Federal Police's itchy trigger fingers are propelled by a sense of "duty" that has promised to ignore a lack of legal authority to engage in purging of publications the government doesn't like.
Dear Mr. Trump,
This is a model you should pay attention to.
Remember what you said to police: don't be too nice to them when you're shoving them into a police car. It's good to rough them up a bit, because they are obviously guilty. Feel free to inflict extra-judicial punishment.
Also remember, then pen is a much mightier weapon, and therefore a much bigger threat to the state, than actual weapons.
Parallel Construction is a conspiracy between law enforcement and the prosecution to deny actual evidence to the defense and to perjure themselves before the court by lying about what the actual evidence is.
The evidence used in prosecution may have only been obtainable by using illegal methods including illegal evidence to lead them to the evidence being presented.
Please get therapy from a psychiatrist who won't sue you for leaving a one star review.
Be sure to discuss with the psychiatrist the issues about your childhood and influence of lawyers and judges which might have deeply scared you for life.
Can't some of the experts submit depositions stating that the other experts actually exist? Then those experts can swear that the first group also exists.
On the post: Unintended Consequences Of EU's New Internet Privacy Rules: Facebook Won't Use AI To Catch Suicidal Users
Re: "Save the children"
If Facebook is the only thing that catches a suicidal person, perhaps the problem is that they are suicidal precisely because they use Facebook!
You know how every time you read any article about Facebook and it seems creepy and makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up? That's 200 million years of evolution telling you to RUN, DON'T WALK but RUN away NOW. Except on the Internet.
On the post: Leaked Trump Plan To 'Nationalize' Nation's 5G Networks A Bizarre, Unrealistic Pipe Dream
Not a pipe dream
If Mexico will pay for the wall, then China can pay for our national 5G network. And they can provide the equipment for it as well.
On the post: Another Day, Another Flimsy Report Claiming TV Cord Cutting Won't Save You Money
Re:
I can AVOID paying for offensive content that cable / satellite providers cram down my throat.
Specifically: sports
On the post: FBI Director Chris Wray Says Secure Encryption Backdoors Are Possible; Sen. Ron Wyden Asks Him To Produce Receipts
Re: Re: Another consequence of backdoored encryption
A. No dear child, using Windows 10 is not a sin, it is a penance.
On the post: FBI Director Chris Wray Says Secure Encryption Backdoors Are Possible; Sen. Ron Wyden Asks Him To Produce Receipts
Another consequence of backdoored encryption
The other 96% of the world population will know better than to use products from US companies -- because of baked-in backdoors. If you're looking for a security product, or a secure product, DON'T BUY FROM THE US!
Quasi-related: Intel's Management Engine is going to come back to bite them so hard they will hate the day they ever built it. These things just take time. But I suppose I should consider that Windows is used all over the world and Microsoft can totally pwn your Windows computer at its whim.
On the post: FCC Hopes Its Phony Dedication To Rural Broadband Will Make You Forget It Killed Net Neutrality
Re: Trouble caring
Your packets should get routed the same regardless of where they are going to or coming from. (eg, no discrimination on whether I use Netflix or Hulu because one might have a "special deal" with my local ISP (which every other Netflix customer helps subsidize))
Also your packets should get routed the same regardless of the contents of your packets. The contents of your packets is none of your ISP's business. But encryption takes care of that.
On the post: FBI Director Chris Wray Says Secure Encryption Backdoors Are Possible; Sen. Ron Wyden Asks Him To Produce Receipts
There are TWO choices
1. Securely encrypted devices. Hackers can't get into them. But neither can the government.
2. Insecure devices. The government can get into them. But so can hackers.
On the post: Harris Stingray Nondisclosure Agreement Forbids Cops From Telling Legislators About Surveillance Tech
I've said it before
That statement reinforces something that I've said here and elsewhere multiple times in the past.
Why is Stingray such a big secret? Two theories:
When the cell phone protocols and system was designed, it was in a world were security was lower priority than today. Some vulnerability has been discovered and exploited. That vulnerability is the basis of how Stingray works, e.g. "the secret".
In either case, if "the secret" were known, then any old teenage hacker with some electronics and microcontroller knowledge could build their own stingray. Suddenly poor people could spy on rich people! (gasp!) And THAT! folks, constitutes irreparable harm to the public.
On the post: Montana Says It Won't Do Business With Net Neutrality Violating ISPs
Re:
What should be illegal is if you in any way discriminate on anyone's network traffic based on where it goes to, comes from, or what the packets contain. As an ISP you shouldn't even be looking at what the packets contain -- let alone manipulating the contents. But encryption solves this.
It should also be illegal for an ISP to build "slow lanes". (They call it "fast lanes" but it's really "slow lanes".) It works exactly like lanes on a freeway. If a lane is reserved for certain users, what really happens is that all traffic is squeezed into fewer other lanes -- thus creating slow(er) lanes. Now an ISP could manage its traffic to ensure that all users get an equal amount of throughput. And if there's not enough to go around then the ISP should be building more capacity, otherwise it is like a Theater which sells 10,000 tickets but only has 3,000 seats -- which any attorney general would be highly interested in prosecuting. AOL back in the day got into trouble for not having enough capacity. They just kept selling, but didn't build capacity.
There shouldn't be special "fast lanes" for, say, Netflix because the ISP created some crooked deal with them. Yes, it's crooked, because Netflix is going to pass this cost onto ALL users, including users of other ISPs. So you have, say Verizon-Netflix customers subsidizing Comcast-Netflix customers.
On the post: Montana Says It Won't Do Business With Net Neutrality Violating ISPs
Re: H.R. 4682 will stop states from doing this
If you want to screw consumers, then simply choose not to do business with the State Of Montana.
If you aren't going to screw consumers, then you won't have any problems with Montana's preferences in which ISPs it chooses to do business with.
But you are NOT prevented from screwing consumers. You just can't do business with the state if you choose to do so.
Now I think it would be better if the state or even better federal government HAD net neutrality rules to prohibit screwing consumers in this way.
On the post: Brazilian Government Mobilizes Federal Police To Handle 'Fake News' Problem
Mr. Trump please pay attention!
Dear Mr. Trump,
This is a model you should pay attention to.
Remember what you said to police: don't be too nice to them when you're shoving them into a police car. It's good to rough them up a bit, because they are obviously guilty. Feel free to inflict extra-judicial punishment.
Also remember, then pen is a much mightier weapon, and therefore a much bigger threat to the state, than actual weapons.
On the post: Report Shows US Law Enforcement Routinely Engages In Parallel Construction
Re: Wrong terminology
Parallel Construction is a conspiracy between law enforcement and the prosecution to deny actual evidence to the defense and to perjure themselves before the court by lying about what the actual evidence is.
The evidence used in prosecution may have only been obtainable by using illegal methods including illegal evidence to lead them to the evidence being presented.
On the post: Bigoted Landlord Files Criminal Complaint Against Critic Who Called Him Bigoted
That explains politeness
On the post: Psychiatrist Drops His Lawsuit Against Critic Who Left Wordless One-Star Review
Dear Mark Beale
Please get therapy from a psychiatrist who won't sue you for leaving a one star review.
Be sure to discuss with the psychiatrist the issues about your childhood and influence of lawyers and judges which might have deeply scared you for life.
On the post: Copyright Troll Gets Smacked Around By Court, As Judge Wonders If Some Of Its Experts Even Exist
Expertly Existing
On the post: Psychiatrist Sues A Bunch Of Redditors For Criticizing His Therapy Services
Re: People, who sue people... are the dumbest people in the world.
But from a therapist who won't sue him for criticizing online.
On the post: Picking Up Where We Left Off: A 2018 Policy To-Do List For Washington
Re: Hmm...
On the post: Picking Up Where We Left Off: A 2018 Policy To-Do List For Washington
Not a good list
Erecting troll booths is the 21st century way of making money. Working for it is sooooo last millennium.
On the post: The Gorilla Channel Satire Demonstrates The Ridiculousness Of Banning Fake News
Re: Re: Fake News and The Onion
Yes. That one was extremely funny.
$2,495 for the 32 GB version.
$9,995 for the 64 GB version.
(I could be mis-remering the storage sizes.)
On the post: The Gorilla Channel Satire Demonstrates The Ridiculousness Of Banning Fake News
Fake News and The Onion
Just as, I'm sure, back in the day, people who tuned in to NBC late on Saturday evening might have been fooled by Weekend Update.
Or fake news on other comedy programs.
That doesn't mean it should be or even can be banned.
Next >>