261–270 of 276 posts
The Paris attacks were coordinated over plain old encrypted SMS. Didn't see that coming. The Australian PM thinks the laws of mathematics can be bent to those of Australia. Now this genius. Fact is, communications are ubiquitous now, and even if every byte was unencrypted, they won't be able to catch every crook.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My viewpoint when talking about security is please sign this form and your bank can send your bank statements on the back of a postcard in full view of everyone. For your convenience we will include your PIN number and card number in full on all correspondence.
What does this mean?
> When pressed on what kind of metadata she wanted, she replied: “I’m having those conversations in private.” Well I would like to know who she's having those conversations with, when she's having them, and how long they last. I think it's important that she share this information with us. So that we can catch criminals.
Also, this is beyond ridiculous. Have fun having those "private conversations" on a backdoor-riddled machine.
IIRC the Bataclan terrorists didn't use any crypto at all. Using crypto makes you stand out, and doesn't really complicate traffic analysis. Corollary: not using crypto makes it easier to look like hay in a huge hay pile, even if you're a needle. Ad-hoc-but-disciplined plaintext comsec for small committed teams is not that difficult to establish and master, and can work very well for them. But for the rest of us, pla…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, this is beyond ridiculous. Have fun having those "private conversations" on a backdoor-riddled machine.
I'll be Librebooting my X200 shortly, the webcam and mic are coming out too.
I feel like the people who understand encryption and privacy advocates (myself included) are not engaging enough (or maybe effectively enough) with the public in communicating the concerns around trying to 'backdoor' encryption or giving up more of our privacy. While I think these political statements are often ridiculous, they actually have widespread public support, if my cohort of friends and family are anything t…
I tried to be as non-technical as possible when I wrote this as an introduction to what cryptography is all about. http://coding2learn.org/blog/2017/06/11/dear-theresa/ The problem is that the subject is inherently complex, and abstractions and analogies can only go so far.
Sadly we need something that is not much more than a paragraph. Maybe something that would fit in a tweet. Something that competes with 'people want to blow you up, surrender your privacy so we can catch them'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll be Librebooting my X200 shortly, the webcam and mic are coming out too.
Noone is interested in listening at your heavy breathing and watching your extactic face while you are getting entertained with adult material on your TP.
There is a growing misconception that it is the role of the government to "keep their citizens safe". Although that it is often the intention of legislation to prevent behaviour which may lead to unsafe situations. For example, making it illegal to drink and drive. You can arrest someone for breaking the law, but never can you arrest someone right up to the point of breaking the law. For example, You cannot arrest so…
>For example, You cannot arrest someone for being drunk and having their car keys in their pocket, or even being asleep in the car while drunk. An aside, but this is not true. "According to Alabama state law, Hand was deemed to be in “constructive possession” of the vehicle, and although he wasn’t driving and the vehicle was parked, the keys being in the car was the determinant that triggered the arrest."" https://ww…
yes you can, at least in Florida. i had to recently take a driving class to avoid points on my license, and one of the points the instructor really impressed on that class was that IF you're in the parking lot in your car, (asleep or awake, doesn't matter) AND a police officer stops you AND gives you a sobriety test AND your BAC is over the limit, you're getting cited for sure.
be responsible and get an uber or a lyft or a taxi or any of the other options available to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>For example, You cannot arrest someone for being drunk and having their car keys in their pocket, or even being asleep in the car while drunk. An aside, but this is not true. "According to Alabama state law, Hand was deemed to be in “constructive possession” of the vehicle, and although he wasn’t driving and the vehicle was parked, the keys being in the car was the determinant that triggered the arrest."" https://ww…
from the article. "Hand was parked in a near-campus parking lot, sitting in the driver’s seat with the headlights on and the vehicle cranked, but was asleep with the car in park." "The vehicle cranked" is the key there.. he is shown to be operating the vehicle while under the influence.. If he was asleep in the car without it being on, I doubt they would have a case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Next they take your car. But cars are useful and, on average safer, for many / the majority of people that use them. Guns are, on average, not so useful / safe. Note that I'm averaging this across the planet, not just across one small (5% of global population) country with a lot of strong opinions on the matter. > Why? Cars kills way more people than guns. I know it's a pithy aphorism, but in the same way that guns…
>But cars are useful and, on average safer, for many / the majority of people that use them. Guns are, on average, not so useful / safe. Note that I'm averaging this across the planet, not just across one small (5% of global population) country with a lot of strong opinions on the matter. Do you have the numbers to back that up?
Seriously?
Do you mean car .vs. gun, or gun harm/death differentials between countries with (broadly) different attitudes towards gun ownership and use?
The latter is pretty easy to find numbers. Wikipedia [1] (sort by last column) for countries by fire-arm death, or [2] estimated number of guns (ownership) per capita. Comparing gun deaths around the world, humanosphere[3] has some nice stats (from 2016-06) dispelling the 'other countries without so many guns just use knives' argument. Actually, that article has some hugely sobering comparisons with some highly risky parts of the planet. CBS posted an article in 2016-02 [4] comparing gun deaths in the USA with other countries - quoting a study published in the AMA earlier in the year.
If you mean the former - that's a trickier thing to evaluate. Less people have access to a gun than a car, for starters, and most people use a car much more often than they use a gun. Cars are designed to transport people and goods - guns are designed to cause damage - so defining 'accidental use' of both is an interesting question. A bit of quick googling comes up with some numbers, suggesting guns are now - in absolute terms - the cause of death for more USA citizens than cars ... but naturally there's some dispute about how those numbers are determined, and some strong interest in not comparing those stats to other countries.
On the other hand, if you think gun ownership should be legal, popular, loosely regulated, and enshrined in law, then you're probably well prepared to disregard any argument to the contrary. Any 'but people die from car accidents' rebuttal is pretty disingenuous.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_c... [3] http://www.humanosphere.org/science/2016/06/visualizing-gun-... [4] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-ot...