131–140 of 417 posts
I don't know much about American law. I was under impression that things are reserved to states unless important reason for them to be handled on federal level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're thinking of mass shooting 2019/247, not mass shooting 2019/248. (Yes, we're up to more than one a day on average now) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th...
This list gives me shivers...is the USA a scary, uncivilized country?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would characterize the home invaders as the "perpetrators" in that particular story and exclude them from the injury count, consistent with the language of that definition. From the article: Gun Violence Archive, a nonprofit research group that tracks shootings and their characteristics in the United States, defines a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people, excluding the perpetrators, are shot in…
Yes, they use the official definition of the term "mass shooting", as it was adopted after 2013 by the US congress, which defines it as a shooting with 3 or more victims. Moreover, they mention in the very first paragraph that the definition is controversial and problematic, and they mention all alternative official definitions (e.g. before 2013) explicitly in the following paragraphs. You probably have another defin…
Is this your citation for the 2013 US Congress definition? (because I don't think it says what you seem to think it says).
https://www.congress.gov/112/plaws/publ265/PLAW-112publ265.p...
If not, please provide your citation so that I can read it and respond intelligently.
Okay, good. I'm glad that we've now tested out the security of our devices and found that they are secure enough to vex government entities.
As with all strategic information, they could still possess the ability to backdoor / crack this phone but deem that ability a strategic asset. Only using it in private or when the stakes are much higher than an already committed crime.
Is the American government position “Guns don’t kill people, encryption kills people”, or am I just combining the personal opinions of a bunch of unrelated people who work for the government?
We (HN commenters) all know that the demonization of encryption is bullshit. What we need to do is to figure out how to communicate that effectively to the public.
Maybe instead of calling it encryption, we should call it “privacy.“
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're thinking of mass shooting 2019/247, not mass shooting 2019/248. (Yes, we're up to more than one a day on average now) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th...
This list gives me shivers...is the USA a scary, uncivilized country?
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/03/5-facts-abo...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn’t just detective work, it is personnel with the skills to identify and pursue likely evidence. Digital forensics is way outside typical leo training and believe it or not you can make a lot more money in the private sector with IT training. Local, state and federal case loads get backlogged behind, leaving the highest priority cases to get staffed.
What stops LEO from contracting with a digital forensic company or consultancy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really does seem to be that is the position. There are a lot of backwards nutjobs in the government right now, blaming other backwards nutjobs, while the rest of us sane people are trying to duct tape society together. Guns don't kill people, encryption doesn't kill people, backwards nutjobs kill people. Politics in America, currently, can entirely be summed up as the Spiderman pointing at Spiderman meme.
More like guns either kill people or look pretty on a wall; encryption not only can't kill people, it also prevents people from stealing. Even a nutjob armed with the latest encryption, still needs a gun to kill people.