- The solution to traffic deaths is to get rid of cars - The solution to viruses and malware is to get rid of computers - The solution to fires and burns is not to use fire - The solution to the disease is to get rid of the person
Awesome world you'd live in, eh?
The Constitution gives the Congress the power to create bodies like the FCC at their own discretion and delegate powers to those bodies. Go read so you won't make a fool of yourself.
I've learned to listen/read to what Pai says and interpret the exact polar opposite. So when he says he likes the poor I actually hear "I hate the poor with nazi levels of hatred". If you do it his remarks make total sense and are coherent with his actions.
Jesus fucking christ, when are we gonna stop acting like moralist morons and accept that prostitution is a goddamn natural thing (as much as pot) and proceed accordingly by making them fully legal and giving protection for the users and the workers?
At the very least there's a visible pressure piling against this idiotic "morals" thing.
If the only thing you think is about collecting it all, laws and rights be damned, you shouldn't be surprised when others decide you can't be trusted. I'm hoping the next president and Congress actually do something to stop this shit in the US. I had the opportunity of spending time with Americans and they are generally good people. They don't deserve the hatred and suspicion the world places upon the US due to their shitty governments.
Even if you say "vote" it's hard to vote right when you have that electoral college (whatever you call it) and when politicians mislead and obfuscate information.
I like it. Differently from TD I wholeheartedly support efforts from DRM crackers. I actually should thank them for allowing me to run cracked stuff I owned but couldn't run properly or had to keep the CD on the drive. Hardly pirate-y stuff.
Nowadays I couldn't care less. If it has DRM then I don't want it.
And a battery sinkhole. Cell to cell seems feasible but even then your phone would still have to search for towers to call other numbers or even be in the network. Otherwise you are talking about radio comms with possibly encrypted signal.
Also, there's plenty of examples of people being compelled to unlock their stuff, justice be damned. By courts on top of that. Of course you can choose to remain locked indefinitely if you don't want to comply.
They need warrants to search homes that will contain photo albums, receipts, personal documents protected by a lock and the likes but they don't need it when it's a cellphone that will contain photo albums, receipts, personal documents protected by a lock. Awesome reasoning.
That's the main problem. Unless they are looking for one specific point of metadata in a specific time then anything should need a warrant. If law enforcement wants to plant a goddamn ankle gps on a person they need authorization, if they want to 'stalk' someone to check exactly who is said person talking to they need authorization but when it goes to cellphones or online everything is suddenly crazy. Seriously, what's the goddamn difference?
I think it's a misconception. I'm fairly sure you use e-mail. Does it mean you gave up your privacy to your mail provider? Or do you use GPG and the likes (which I must remind you have been shown to have critical vulnerabilities pretty recently)?
You are not giving up your privacy and personal data. You are allowing the service to see part of your data, your friends to see another part of that data (that may or may not be the same percentage) and the public at large to see another portion of your data (that can be 0%). It's not always about popularity but rather about social interactions. Not everything has to be entirely private and this is the point. As you pointed out, once you say something about your life to someone it's not entirely private anymore but it doesn't mean you gave up your privacy. You didn't announce in a megaphone or something (even though sometimes it may have the same effect if the person has a loose tongue or if there's a breach in the service).
It's about those trade-offs. Even when I used Facebook I'd segment what a portion of my contacts could see. Reality is more complicated than "you are giving up your privacy".
If you are explicit of what's being done then things get simpler. Take the interoperability for instance. If both platforms make it clear what they will be accessing and when it is being accessed then it should not be too much of a problem.
Maybe add multi-factor authentication steps. I'm thinking something in the lines you'd have to provide specific tokens to each provider that are sent to a secure channel such their own 2FA codes that would be confirmed by the other service or some authentication key via e-mail (not very secure I know but it is one way).
Anyway, as the article says "the only certainty is that Facebook needs to start identifying and testing approaches now" but I'd argue that it's not only Facebook, it's everybody.
As a side note, when I see all this discussion I always remember how my psyche improved after I stopped using social networks, how it felt like a burden was lifted from my shoulders. And how all of this is basically a non-issue to me.
They really should stop calling these shit unlimited. If they had to add a pair of quotation marks for every caveat their unlimited branding includes it would be something like:
SIGN UP FOR OUR """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""unlimited"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" plan.
You can't only corrupt the Executive and the Legislative (the telcos already have), you need a complete and crushing victory by corrupting the courts as well it seems.
In any case Americans need desperately to vote and send a though message to the shit that has made its way into power.
It's even worse when you emphasize the photos were never shared and that there might be a confusion on the age of consent part. Technically courts can shot the FBI attempt to destroy his life just to score a conviction because even if you violate the basic right to live can be discarded as a crime if there is evidence of legitimate defense (ie: wither you kill or you are killed). I'm hoping the courts get this one right.
And this ignores the fact that sex workers are now forced to work at much worse and risky conditions. There are statistics showing a rise in the number of violence against women.
Basically the ones that pushed for this mess have succeeded in assisting murders and pimps. Awesome, eh?
On the post: A FOSTA Of One's Own: UK Parliament Members Looking To Punish Websites, Push Traffickers Underground
Re: Re:
On the post: Ajit Pai's Cure For The 'Digital Divide' Looks Suspiciously Like A Giant Middle Finger
Re: Re: Re: Pai
- The solution to viruses and malware is to get rid of computers
- The solution to fires and burns is not to use fire
- The solution to the disease is to get rid of the person
Awesome world you'd live in, eh?
The Constitution gives the Congress the power to create bodies like the FCC at their own discretion and delegate powers to those bodies. Go read so you won't make a fool of yourself.
Thankfully you are not in charge of anything.
On the post: Ajit Pai's Cure For The 'Digital Divide' Looks Suspiciously Like A Giant Middle Finger
On the post: A FOSTA Of One's Own: UK Parliament Members Looking To Punish Websites, Push Traffickers Underground
At the very least there's a visible pressure piling against this idiotic "morals" thing.
On the post: European Parliament Turns Up The Pressure On US-EU Privacy Shield Data Transfer Deal A Little More
Even if you say "vote" it's hard to vote right when you have that electoral college (whatever you call it) and when politicians mislead and obfuscate information.
On the post: Latest Denuvo Version Cracked Again By One Solo Hacker On A Personal Mission
Nowadays I couldn't care less. If it has DRM then I don't want it.
On the post: Post-Carpenter Ruling Says Call Records Aren't Content Or Cell Site Location Info; Thus, No 4th Amendment Protection
Re:
On the post: State Appeals Court Says Exigency Beats A Warrant Requirement If A Phone Has A Passcode
Re: Re:
On the post: State Appeals Court Says Exigency Beats A Warrant Requirement If A Phone Has A Passcode
On the post: Post-Carpenter Ruling Says Call Records Aren't Content Or Cell Site Location Info; Thus, No 4th Amendment Protection
Re:
On the post: How We Can 'Free' Our Facebook Friends
Re:
You are not giving up your privacy and personal data. You are allowing the service to see part of your data, your friends to see another part of that data (that may or may not be the same percentage) and the public at large to see another portion of your data (that can be 0%). It's not always about popularity but rather about social interactions. Not everything has to be entirely private and this is the point. As you pointed out, once you say something about your life to someone it's not entirely private anymore but it doesn't mean you gave up your privacy. You didn't announce in a megaphone or something (even though sometimes it may have the same effect if the person has a loose tongue or if there's a breach in the service).
It's about those trade-offs. Even when I used Facebook I'd segment what a portion of my contacts could see. Reality is more complicated than "you are giving up your privacy".
On the post: How We Can 'Free' Our Facebook Friends
Maybe add multi-factor authentication steps. I'm thinking something in the lines you'd have to provide specific tokens to each provider that are sent to a secure channel such their own 2FA codes that would be confirmed by the other service or some authentication key via e-mail (not very secure I know but it is one way).
Anyway, as the article says "the only certainty is that Facebook needs to start identifying and testing approaches now" but I'd argue that it's not only Facebook, it's everybody.
As a side note, when I see all this discussion I always remember how my psyche improved after I stopped using social networks, how it felt like a burden was lifted from my shoulders. And how all of this is basically a non-issue to me.
On the post: Shocker: DOJ's Computer Crimes And Intellectual Property Section Supports Security Researchers DMCA Exemptions
Don't be mistaken, it's just a small hiccup of sanity, they'll be back to trumpeting (this was intended) bad stuff pretty fast.
On the post: Charter Spectrum's New 'Unlimited' Wireless Service Bans HD Video Entirely
SIGN UP FOR OUR """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""unlimited"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" plan.
On the post: SCOTUS Nominee Kavanaugh Bought Verizon's Silly Argument That Breaking Net Neutrality Is A 1st Amendment Right
Re: Re:
On the post: A Numerical Exploration Of How The EU's Article 13 Will Lead To Massive Censorship
On the post: SCOTUS Nominee Kavanaugh Bought Verizon's Silly Argument That Breaking Net Neutrality Is A 1st Amendment Right
In any case Americans need desperately to vote and send a though message to the shit that has made its way into power.
On the post: FBI Decides To Ruin A Man's Life Over Nude Photos Of His Legal Girlfriend He Took Seven Years Ago
On the post: More Police Admitting That FOSTA/SESTA Has Made It Much More Difficult To Catch Pimps And Traffickers
Basically the ones that pushed for this mess have succeeded in assisting murders and pimps. Awesome, eh?
On the post: AT&T Is Very Excited To Try And Ruin HBO
*grabs popcorn*
Let us watch the demise of HBO.
Next >>