Depends on who shot the suspect. The purpose was to crush these whistle-blowers, so if one of them had done the shooting he'd have gotten the death penalty.
IMSI catchers are getting so common it's getting to where you're more likely to connect to one of those than to a regular cell tower.
Maybe we're thinking about this backwards.
Maybe the proper approach is to simply order law enforcement (i.e. government) to operate the entire cell network. Yeah, no privacy, but that ship has apparently sailed already. Certainly Congress isn't going to help--three guesses what any IMSI catcher law is going to do for privacy: nothing, nothing and nothing.
But think of the benefits: Coverage would improve. No more roaming. No more "can you hear me now" shill commercials. No more data caps. Probably many more.
While we are sensitive to the Department’s need for discipline throughout the chain of command, the policy here and the disciplinary actions taken pursuant to it would, if upheld, lead to an utter lack of transparency in law enforcement operations that the First Amendment cannot countenance.
But-but-but that just can't be what Chief Despot Dixon intended!
I really like the party line buy-in that, "EVERY SAMSUNG NOTE 7 WILL EXPLODE IN FIFTEEN SECONDS...TICK...TICK...TICK...!!!"
Yes, Samsung had a problem. But it was "dozens of phones" out of 2.5 million. "Dozens" is a bit nebulous but, if it is still the correct term, then probably not over a gross (144). On that basis the chances of a Note 7 failing are 1-in-17360, about the same as that of your dying next year in an automobile accident.
Oooo...and there's 133,000 of those Note bombs still out there, "...ANOTHER EIGHT MIGHT EXPLODE!!!"
Forget about this report. Even the one at the archives is not coming out. They buried it in the new poured-concrete foundation--and didn't even wrap it first.
Mr. Health Secretary Hunt, sir: We are a few random nerds and we're willing to assess your mental health. I'm afraid the outcome is likely a bit dodgy...but--hey--it's all in your better interests. Okay?
Fake news is a justification for more control. And if they get that, and fake news goes away, that will be proof that more control is better and will justify yet more control.
See, it's like a ratchet: it only works one direction.
Here's hoping that the TTAB finds in favor of Adidas on the other arguments.
So what are we saying here? That hopefully the government will come to its senses and grant a multi-billion dollar concern primacy over some uppity little church? Because Adidas is automatically more important?
I thought that was the whole problem with IP law: that the incumbent gorillas always get priority over the aspiring mice. It's sort of nice to see an incumbent mouse crushing an aspiring gorilla...gives me the feeling the law isn't all one-sided.
Also sniping the free-marketers, who focus on profit as the only meaningful measure of success--and deplore and would eliminate anything that interferes with that profit.
Such as governance, the absence of which provides such fertile ground for assholes to peddle fraud, extortion, and poisoned children.
No, fake news doesn't change anyone's' mind. Perversely, it exists to keep anyone's mind from being changed.
Roughly, on any issue, we can divide the public according to a 10-20-40-20-10 rule; the old bell curve in action. The people creating the fake news are in the outside 10% segments. From that group, on one side:
10% are creating the fake news.
The adjacent 20% are prevented from shifting their beliefs forward by the horror of the opposite side of the curve generated by the fake news.
The middle 40% are kept indecisive by conflicting views, a little sickened by it all.
The opposite 20% are horrified by it, unsure how to proceed, but sure the opposition is a lost cause.
The last, opposite 10% are consumed by creating fake news to counter just the fake news. As opposed to more effective activities that might change minds.
The result, basically, is that the central 80% are frozen in cement, unable to find any justification to change their minds. This is like a war, where destruction of the enemy is not possible; leaving the only possible defense to be a stalemate.
And that is important when the beliefs of that outside 10% are categorically ugly.
On the post: Court Says Police Chief's Social Media Policy Violated The First Amendment
Re:
Depends on who shot the suspect. The purpose was to crush these whistle-blowers, so if one of them had done the shooting he'd have gotten the death penalty.
On the post: City Passes Ordinance Mandating CCTV Surveillance By Businesses, Including Doctors And Lawyers Offices
Re: Re: Re: This is a good thing folks...
On the post: City Passes Ordinance Mandating CCTV Surveillance By Businesses, Including Doctors And Lawyers Offices
Re: really...
On the post: European Court Of Justice Rules Against UK's Mass Surveillance Program
Brexit
On the post: House Oversight Committee Calls For Stingray Device Legislation
Maybe backwards
Maybe we're thinking about this backwards.
Maybe the proper approach is to simply order law enforcement (i.e. government) to operate the entire cell network. Yeah, no privacy, but that ship has apparently sailed already. Certainly Congress isn't going to help--three guesses what any IMSI catcher law is going to do for privacy: nothing, nothing and nothing.
But think of the benefits: Coverage would improve. No more roaming. No more "can you hear me now" shill commercials. No more data caps. Probably many more.
Turn the networks into a true public service.
Surely worth at least a think.
On the post: City Passes Ordinance Mandating CCTV Surveillance By Businesses, Including Doctors And Lawyers Offices
Re: "No problem, but first..."
Next year: Mandatory connection of the security video to local law enforcement.
On the post: Twitter Cuts Off Firehose Access To DHS Fusion Centers
Intelligence agency lament
[whisper] Except for the secret feed, Elizabeth! The light is coming back, Elizabeth!
On the post: Court Says Police Chief's Social Media Policy Violated The First Amendment
I'm sure he meant well
But-but-but that just can't be what Chief Despot Dixon intended!
On the post: Samsung Issues Update To Brick Remaining, Spontaneously Combusting Galaxy Note 7 Phones, Verizon Refuses To Pass It On
Panic Attack
I really like the party line buy-in that, "EVERY SAMSUNG NOTE 7 WILL EXPLODE IN FIFTEEN SECONDS...TICK...TICK...TICK...!!!"
Yes, Samsung had a problem. But it was "dozens of phones" out of 2.5 million. "Dozens" is a bit nebulous but, if it is still the correct term, then probably not over a gross (144). On that basis the chances of a Note 7 failing are 1-in-17360, about the same as that of your dying next year in an automobile accident.
Oooo...and there's 133,000 of those Note bombs still out there, "...ANOTHER EIGHT MIGHT EXPLODE!!!"
Sigh. Way overblown.
On the post: Obama Has Saved One Copy Of The Torture Report From Destruction, But What's Going To Happen To The Rest Of Them?
Wave bye-bye
On the post: UK's Health Secretary Has The Solution To Cyberbullying & Sexting: Nerds Should Nerd Harder
You first
On the post: Wall Street Is Dreaming Of Megamergers Under Trump -- Including A Verizon-Comcast Super Union
Re: Choices are hard
On the post: China Uses US Concern Over Fake News To Push For More Control Of The Internet
Rachet
See, it's like a ratchet: it only works one direction.
On the post: Adidas Can't Trademark 'Adizero' Because A Small Chicago Church Sold Two 'Add A Zero' Hats To Someone In Wisconsin
Re: 'Splain to me, Lord
On the post: Adidas Can't Trademark 'Adizero' Because A Small Chicago Church Sold Two 'Add A Zero' Hats To Someone In Wisconsin
Primacy
Here's hoping that the TTAB finds in favor of Adidas on the other arguments.
So what are we saying here? That hopefully the government will come to its senses and grant a multi-billion dollar concern primacy over some uppity little church? Because Adidas is automatically more important?
I thought that was the whole problem with IP law: that the incumbent gorillas always get priority over the aspiring mice. It's sort of nice to see an incumbent mouse crushing an aspiring gorilla...gives me the feeling the law isn't all one-sided.
On the post: Theranos's Insane Campaign To Punish Whistleblower, Who Happened To Be Famous Boardmember's Grandson
Re: Re:
...I am bit surprised that this matter has escaped the attention of the media...
I see your mistake: you thought the media still served the public.
On the post: Twitter Says Its API Can't Be Used For Surveillance, But What Does It Think The FBI's Going To Do With It?
The full statement
On the post: Theranos's Insane Campaign To Punish Whistleblower, Who Happened To Be Famous Boardmember's Grandson
Re: Re: Re: Shining example
Also sniping the free-marketers, who focus on profit as the only meaningful measure of success--and deplore and would eliminate anything that interferes with that profit.
Such as governance, the absence of which provides such fertile ground for assholes to peddle fraud, extortion, and poisoned children.
On the post: Theranos's Insane Campaign To Punish Whistleblower, Who Happened To Be Famous Boardmember's Grandson
Shining example
On the post: Yes, There's Lots Of Fake News On Facebook, But Is It Really Changing Anyone's Mind?
Fake news as stalemate
No, fake news doesn't change anyone's' mind. Perversely, it exists to keep anyone's mind from being changed.
Roughly, on any issue, we can divide the public according to a 10-20-40-20-10 rule; the old bell curve in action. The people creating the fake news are in the outside 10% segments. From that group, on one side:
The result, basically, is that the central 80% are frozen in cement, unable to find any justification to change their minds. This is like a war, where destruction of the enemy is not possible; leaving the only possible defense to be a stalemate.
And that is important when the beliefs of that outside 10% are categorically ugly.
Next >>