The First Amendment doesn't mean that the press isn't free to shoot itself in the foot. Gawker won on invasion of privacy under a state law, and it seems that the NYT is vulnerable on similar grounds.
I'm not sure who I'm cheering for here. I like transparency, but at some point people deserve some privacy, even at the level of the Presidency. "It's just sex and everyone lies about that" was Clinton's excuse that got him off impeachment, but he still lost his license and was disbarred because he made that lie in a court filing and to me that was the appropriate punishment. It may be that the NYT is doing the public a favor about pointing out Trump's use of tax loopholes (although I will point out Clinton has used the same loophole), but in doing so it may well face serious consequences and I'm ok with that.
That's not likely to be all that possible with IPv6 and IPv6 is likely to be even more required with IoT. Getting an IPv6 enabled router to filter your own devices properly right now is technically challenging even with things like OpenWRT, much less the crap software that's typically installed on a home router. Full statefull IPv6 connections with firewalls are tough on things like VoIP and require some finesse.
Until these things become more accessible (i.e. automated), it's an issue for the average Joe.
Newsflash: that's been going on since Jefferson if not before. Cronies get repaid with cushy diplomatic posts to places where they won't be a threat, and it's been going on since the start of the Republic.
Of course, it's not usually quite a brazen as Obama/Hillary, and there's almost never hard evidence of it as there is now. But it's one of our grander traditions.
You're preaching to the choir, buddy. But we have one candidate who actively did that when given any chance and one who alleges that he doesn't. Not that I don't think Trump will get hooked on the power drug, but at least he doesn't have a proven track record of blundering off into needless conflicts *cough* Libya *cough*.
Funny how not too long ago Obama and his minions were calling Russia a minor nuisance and regional power, destined to the dustheap of history.
Now that they're goring the Democratic Party, they're the #1 threat in the world.
Funny how all this works, eh?
Sure, the GOP is enjoying the Democrats squirming and being forced to eat humble pie in public. But if there weren't pie makings in the leaks, the Democrats wouldn't be in this sort of a dilemma, would they? It's a 100-1 that there aren't "47%" worthy comments made by the GNC, but they're luddites haven't gone as heavily into easily hackable systems like the DNC so we're less likely to see them.
It is only in recent history that we started applying the title of "journalist" to someone who attempted to report events honestly and without bias. Matt Yglesias is clearly a "journalist" in the "yellow journalism" tradition: he's a naked partisan who at best makes inadequate and awkward attempts at balance and has been since the beginning of his career.
And if you think I'm condemning him for his nakedly partisan writings, you're wrong. I'm only condemning those who attempt to beguile the unsuspecting by claiming that he's a "journalist" in the modern definition of an unbiased reporter of facts. I'm actually much more comfortable when a journalist is quite open about his partisan leanings and philosophy so that I know how much work I have to go to before I should believe their arguments or facts. In Matt's case, I've seen far too many arguments like this for me to give most anything he says much weight. And for the record, Hannity falls in the same catagory. They simply aren't credible as unbiased and accountable.
So your argument is that the Executive branch needs to be more secretive and less open to Congress and the people of the US? Is that what you're seriously saying? I have a hard time believing that anyone other than a hyper-partisan can make that argument in these days of over-classification of even routine information. The FOIA is one of the very, very few methods by which people can challenge the process of making laws via bureaucratic rule making (a power Congress has been handing the Executive branch for many years now) and I'd rather it not be weakened.
Clinton's problem is that she took the Secretary of State job as a placeholder while she got ready to run for the Presidency and didn't want to leave a trail of her political activities behind her. She took the path of least resistance and nearly highest risk and incompetence and now she's paying the price.
I love it when you hear ideologues like NPR call those who passionately disagree with them "trolls." Sites with a very distinct, very pronounced viewpoint should not be surprised when there are folks who will denounce their work. The problem is that so few of those sites and authors are willing to debate folks who don't come from their mindset. (And by debate, I mean actual debate, not a descent into ad hominem attacks.)
... with vendors and Luddite consumers often ill-prepared to quickly update these products when vulnerabilities are exposed.
I am a proud Luddite where these things are concerned. I won't upgrade to an IoT thermostat, refrigerator, etc. There's too little utility to such a device to justify either the price or the compromise in security, or even the new vulnerabilities.
I don't think most people understand just how vulnerable you are to a misconfigured IoT thermostat, for example. That hacker who took control of your thermostat could actually destroy the AC unit by turning it on an off without letting the compressor cool down sufficiently, for example, and that would cost you much more the 1 bitcoin to replace. There's a reason there are cycle limits built into thermostats.
It's almost as if Getty's PR people have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.
Actually, PR people are paid not to have a clue what they're talking about. If they knew what they were talking about they couldn't properly parrot what their corporate masters wish to broadcast.
I have a fair number of patents. How many do I think are "real" and justified rather than just filed to make the company happy? Not many.
When the PTO was forced to finance itself with fees, they became quite liberal in granting patents and quite remiss in doing anything with prior art. The situation with silly patents and trademarks is understandable when you realize the examiners are overloaded and under pressure to grant rather than reject, with all the extra work that causes them (appeals, repeated submissions, etc).
I remember when I was at a very large company and the legal department came to me for help because a company was coming after us for a circuit I'd designed. I pointed out that the patent was completely invalid due to prior art, and the lawyers asked me to due a literature survey. I tracked back similar circuits all the way to vacuum tube implementations from the 50s and pointed out that just because something is made in CMOS instead bipolar or tubes doesn't make it patentable.
The only downside to the whole incident was that I couldn't get rid of the lawyers for years afterwards. They kept coming to me every time some two-bit company came after ours. Management wouldn't let me get out of consulting because IP licensing brought in over $1B/yr and the lawyers pointed out that their use of my time made the company a whole heck of a lot more money than the profits from the products my division actually made.
Very true, but you're missing the point of ISDS clauses. They are there to serve to lessen the risk of the business environment changing under the corporation. As such, it helps to up the mobility of capital between countries. It's a "feature" for the moneyed elites to be able to shift capital across boarders with minimal risk.
Now, it's a valid question of whether such mobility is a plus or minus for the countries involved. The rise up is heady, but the fall is terrible. In the case of Brazil right now, for example, it's definitely a minus as cash is flooding out of that country and tanking the economy even more now that commodities have crashed. But the mobility of capital was a god-send to them in the commodities-fueled boom of 8 years ago that allowed them to create enormous new social programs for the poor that cannot now be unfunded without serious, serious social disruption.
Re: I think we'd need to not only fire the transgressors...
Judge Hanen did effectively "disbar" the out-of-state attorneys involved in that he revoked their pro hac vice status, meaning that they can't practice in Texas at least. That's probably a more effective sanction than the ethics training since it effectively makes them useless for at least some jurisdictions.
Commercial platforms aren't terribly trustworthy as it is, but this would ensure that a trustworthy one is impossible to create.
It would be quite an interesting development. You'd have people who care about privacy and security looking for companies outside the normal reach of the various big governments, or going to the various platforms like CyangenMod.
I'm not sure how much it would hinder Apple and other US technology companies. When it became clear that ALL governments would be issuing the same orders for custom surveillance versions of their own subjects the impact would be far less. It would take someone like the EU declaring a "right to privacy" to give that region an economic advantage.
On the post: Trump Campaign Threatens To Sue NY Times For Sharing His 1995 Tax Returns
Re:
I'm not sure who I'm cheering for here. I like transparency, but at some point people deserve some privacy, even at the level of the Presidency. "It's just sex and everyone lies about that" was Clinton's excuse that got him off impeachment, but he still lost his license and was disbarred because he made that lie in a court filing and to me that was the appropriate punishment. It may be that the NYT is doing the public a favor about pointing out Trump's use of tax loopholes (although I will point out Clinton has used the same loophole), but in doing so it may well face serious consequences and I'm ok with that.
On the post: The Internet Of Poorly Secured Things Is Fueling Unprecedented, Massive New DDoS Attacks
Re: Re: Re: Re: Gentlemen, start your firewalls!
Until these things become more accessible (i.e. automated), it's an issue for the average Joe.
On the post: Pressure Mounts to Punish Russia For Hacking Without Evidence And Before Investigations Are Concluded
Re:
Of course, it's not usually quite a brazen as Obama/Hillary, and there's almost never hard evidence of it as there is now. But it's one of our grander traditions.
On the post: Pressure Mounts to Punish Russia For Hacking Without Evidence And Before Investigations Are Concluded
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Correction...
On the post: Pressure Mounts to Punish Russia For Hacking Without Evidence And Before Investigations Are Concluded
Re: Re: Re: Correction...
Now that they're goring the Democratic Party, they're the #1 threat in the world.
Funny how all this works, eh?
Sure, the GOP is enjoying the Democrats squirming and being forced to eat humble pie in public. But if there weren't pie makings in the leaks, the Democrats wouldn't be in this sort of a dilemma, would they? It's a 100-1 that there aren't "47%" worthy comments made by the GNC, but they're luddites haven't gone as heavily into easily hackable systems like the DNC so we're less likely to see them.
Oh yes, and particularly enjoyed this one where the DCCC admitted that Obama policies actually did help the creation of ISIS. Nothing like helping along folks who believe in cutting off your head with policies designed to solve at-home political problems rather than real security problems.
On the post: Vox: If The Clinton Email Scandal Has Taught Us Nothing Else, It's That Email Should Be Exempt From FOIA Requests
The definition of journalist?
And if you think I'm condemning him for his nakedly partisan writings, you're wrong. I'm only condemning those who attempt to beguile the unsuspecting by claiming that he's a "journalist" in the modern definition of an unbiased reporter of facts. I'm actually much more comfortable when a journalist is quite open about his partisan leanings and philosophy so that I know how much work I have to go to before I should believe their arguments or facts. In Matt's case, I've seen far too many arguments like this for me to give most anything he says much weight. And for the record, Hannity falls in the same catagory. They simply aren't credible as unbiased and accountable.
On the post: Vox: If The Clinton Email Scandal Has Taught Us Nothing Else, It's That Email Should Be Exempt From FOIA Requests
Re:
Clinton's problem is that she took the Secretary of State job as a placeholder while she got ready to run for the Presidency and didn't want to leave a trail of her political activities behind her. She took the path of least resistance and nearly highest risk and incompetence and now she's paying the price.
On the post: NPR The Latest Website To Prevent You From Commenting Because It Simply Adores 'Relationships' And 'Conversation'
Re: You must be new around here
On the post: Your 'Smart' Thermostat Is Now Vulnerable To Ransomware
Proud Luddite
I am a proud Luddite where these things are concerned. I won't upgrade to an IoT thermostat, refrigerator, etc. There's too little utility to such a device to justify either the price or the compromise in security, or even the new vulnerabilities.
I don't think most people understand just how vulnerable you are to a misconfigured IoT thermostat, for example. That hacker who took control of your thermostat could actually destroy the AC unit by turning it on an off without letting the compressor cool down sufficiently, for example, and that would cost you much more the 1 bitcoin to replace. There's a reason there are cycle limits built into thermostats.
On the post: Getty Makes Nonsensical Statement On Photographer Carol Highsmith's Lawsuit For Falsely Claiming Copyright
Re: Artists need to get paid
Actually, PR people are paid not to have a clue what they're talking about. If they knew what they were talking about they couldn't properly parrot what their corporate masters wish to broadcast.
On the post: Citigroup Sues AT&T For Saying 'Thanks' To Customers
Re: USPTO
When the PTO was forced to finance itself with fees, they became quite liberal in granting patents and quite remiss in doing anything with prior art. The situation with silly patents and trademarks is understandable when you realize the examiners are overloaded and under pressure to grant rather than reject, with all the extra work that causes them (appeals, repeated submissions, etc).
I remember when I was at a very large company and the legal department came to me for help because a company was coming after us for a circuit I'd designed. I pointed out that the patent was completely invalid due to prior art, and the lawyers asked me to due a literature survey. I tracked back similar circuits all the way to vacuum tube implementations from the 50s and pointed out that just because something is made in CMOS instead bipolar or tubes doesn't make it patentable.
The only downside to the whole incident was that I couldn't get rid of the lawyers for years afterwards. They kept coming to me every time some two-bit company came after ours. Management wouldn't let me get out of consulting because IP licensing brought in over $1B/yr and the lawyers pointed out that their use of my time made the company a whole heck of a lot more money than the profits from the products my division actually made.
On the post: India Seeks To Renegotiate 47 Investment Treaties Because Of Their Corporate Sovereignty Clauses
Re: Perhaps it's just me being old fashioned ...
Now, it's a valid question of whether such mobility is a plus or minus for the countries involved. The rise up is heady, but the fall is terrible. In the case of Brazil right now, for example, it's definitely a minus as cash is flooding out of that country and tanking the economy even more now that commodities have crashed. But the mobility of capital was a god-send to them in the commodities-fueled boom of 8 years ago that allowed them to create enormous new social programs for the poor that cannot now be unfunded without serious, serious social disruption.
On the post: Federal Judge Catches DOJ Lying, Sanctions Lawyers With Mandatory Ethics Classes
Re: I think we'd need to not only fire the transgressors...
On the post: How Apple Could Lose By Winning: The DOJ's Next Move Could Be Worse
Re: Re:
It would be quite an interesting development. You'd have people who care about privacy and security looking for companies outside the normal reach of the various big governments, or going to the various platforms like CyangenMod.
I'm not sure how much it would hinder Apple and other US technology companies. When it became clear that ALL governments would be issuing the same orders for custom surveillance versions of their own subjects the impact would be far less. It would take someone like the EU declaring a "right to privacy" to give that region an economic advantage.
On the post: How Apple Could Lose By Winning: The DOJ's Next Move Could Be Worse
Re: Re: I know I'm stretching here
Next >>