Can I sue for "journalistic malpractice"?

I think "cash only" could work for LLC #2, but not for LLC number 1. It's the one that has to earn the money to pay LLC #2's rent and internet and electricity. Under my proposal, you've got to have LLC #1 do something to get money from the outside--like renting someplace. Perhaps it can set up a hot dog stand instead of a rental place so it can plausibly be cash only. You'll have to run the hot dog stand (including hiring someone to man it) via anonymous letters and email. And pay the person manning it by having him keep a cut of the money and mailing the rest to an the Nevada PO Box. But then, that money has to be forwarded someplace.

I now thinking the VPN is the best idea too. The problem there appears to be finding one that is and remains non-logging. From what I can gather on the internet, you need to keep your eye on your VPN--sometimes they get sued and start logging, in which case you need to go find a different VPN.

Every ISP I've dealt with has required a physical address. And it has to be real. Whenever I give a fake address for my internet service, I end up getting no service at my real address. Also, every ISP I've dealt with has required real payment. Whenever I give the ISP fake payment information, the ISP doesn't get paid and then cuts off my service.

Here is what you can do:

1) Set up a Nevada LLC and use nominee management and registered agent services and get the "physical address in NV" service, which gets you a mailbox with a physical address in NV.
2) Set up an online bank account for the LLC in which you deposit $100,000 in various increments under $10,000 over time.
3) Have the Nevada LLC purchase a house someplace that it can rent for a profit.
4) Using only typed letters and/or an anonymous free email address, get the house rented.
5) Have the LLC set up another LLC, which second LLC will also open a bank account. Rent profits from the first LLC will be depsosited into the account of the second LLC.
6) The second LLC will, using only typed letters and anonymous emails, will rent an apartment adjacent to yours (did I mention you have to live in an apartment complex with an empty apartment next door?). Leave the door unlocked and throw away the keys. Furnish the apartment so it looks legit if searched--you don't want the police to search the apartment and find it furnished solely with a wireless router. Maybe even let a squater liver there for a few days.
7) Have the second LLC order internet for the apartment.
8) Set up a strong wireless router in the apartment with open access. Use that for all your illigitimate stuff. Dont ever use personally identifying information when hooked in to that signal.
9) Also make sure you have your own internet service that you use for the legitimate stuff.
10) When ISP kicks you off for doing illigitimate stuff, have your first LLC set up another largely hidden LLC and bank account, transfer the lease to the new LLC (via letters and emails). Set up new internet service.

The main problem I see with this is the bank accounts. You'll probably need a tax ID number, so you'll need a real SS# for the IRS. And the bank will need a signatory on the account. I don't think of a good way to set this up truly anonymously.

Since this page couldn't have existed yet when the story was submitted, I salute lxrocks as having superior /. talents.

5 years ago, using a 5 year old computer could be rough. All but the most powerful machines seemed to be largely unusable by that age. But 5 years ago, 64 bit multiple core processors became common. 8 gigs of ram or more was suddenly commonplace. Hard drives under hundreds of GBs were uncommon. And then cheap SSDs came on the scene, reviving old hardware everywhere.

So, yeah, anymore a 5 year old computer is commonplace. I purchased my home desktop in 2010 (Dell XPS 8300, if I recall correctly, with a core i7 and 8 gigs of RAM), I added a 100 GB SSD in 2013 for use as the boot/OS drive, a second monitor around the same time, and a 4 TB drive for media storage in 2015. Although I am a relatively techie person, I see no need whatsoever to purchase a new computer within the next few years. Normally I want to be up with the times, but I am having a hard time seeing what I am missing out on. USB C, I guess? I can't think of anything else.

Technical question--since the iPhone only uses NFC for Apple Pay (at present, anyway), is NFC on the iPhone even broadcasting at all when Apple Pay isn't activated? If so, what would it be broadcasting?

If NFC on the iPhone isn't broadcasting at all when the user hasn't told it to broadcast (by double-clicking the home button to activate Apple Pay), then a person's concerns about NFC on the iPhone are unfounded.

Also, it appears that Apple Pay deliveres only specific data to merchants. I imagine that is all that would be broadcast from NFC--I can't broadcast, for example, my SS# on an iPhone NFC. So, if you just didn't enter any data into passbook, it would have no data to broadcast about you.

No.

You haven't been reading the news. The FBI says that it wants certain security measures removed from one particular phone. It wants Apple to write a modified version of iOS to be used only by the FBI in a secured environment to flash the iOS of this one phone, so the FBI can brute force the password (and use software to assist) without risking the encryption key being destroyed (there is a possibility that a feature on the phone is turned on that would disable unlocking of the phone altogether after 10 wrong guesses (though there are methods around this as well, but still it would be slow)).

That is what the DOJ said anyway. But then other district attorneys said that they are in the same situation with something like 112 other iPhones. They said this to support the DOJ's need for the modified software, but obviously it damaged the government's argument that this is a one time thing.

This is very different from Apple's earlier assistance to the government because this is the first time the DOJ has demanded that Apple actually create a modified, inherently less secure version of iOS. Apple would have to actually pay engineers to write code to create a version of iOS that must, must, must not ever be released to the public. It would have to be used only in a contained environment on Apple's campus not connected to the outside world--which Apple would have to build just for this purpose. Otherwise it would have to rely on the government to not accidentally release the modified iOS to bad actors.

The government is trying to use something called the "All Writs Act" to say that it can basically force anyone to do anything.

AND the government is basically saying that it is requiring that all systems (including the ones used by it) are not secure. This, in particular, is odd. I remember when the news was that Pres. Obama could not use his phone of choice shortly after he was elected because it was not sufficiently secure. I've hear similar comments on Maricopa County, which declared that it would no longer use iPhones due to Apple's refusal to downgrade the security on Farook's device. The inevitable conclusion is that Maricopa County wants hackable phones.

On a side note, a technical question has been nagging at me. Farook didn't own the phone the government wants to hack--it was owned by his employer. Presumably, then, the organization had the normal enterprise controls over some aspects of the phone (for example, most organizations require a password, some require encryption of the hard drive, etc. Though perhaps now the government entities are realizing they don't actually want any of this). Could his employer have used its enterprise phone management tools to make its employees could not lock the employer out? So the phone would lock, but the owner of the phone always has the key. That's been the biggest sticking point for me on this whole Farook thing--why did the owner of the phone allow the phone to be made inaccessible to the owner of the phone?

I also attended BYU and loved it and agree that is has serious free speech issues (which surprises no one), but it is apparent you either didn't read the article closely or misunderstood the purpose of the list. The purpose of the list is to point out recent egregious acts, so BYU has surely been on the list in prior years (and Liberty, and other strict religious colleges) but the makers of the list are looking for fresh meat every year. It isn't an actual top 10 list, but rather a venue to point out recent events that are concerning to the authors. Most schools on the list only have one event detailed for the basis of landing them on the list at all. Also, this type of conduct is expected from someplace like BYU, which makes it less newsworthy, but Northwestern, etc?--That is pretty noteworthy.

From TFA: "Based on the posted list, an unfortunate detail becomes rather clear; either the passwords were poorly secured and easily reversed, or they were stored in clear text inside the database."

I think the point of the 3 ft squares is for very compact places, like slums in India, where there might be several "houses" in an 11 m square. So, to be comparable, it appears that you'd need that 5th digit. But it isn't really 5 digits. It's 5 digits after the decimal place. In each direction. Plus you need something to indicate direction (for brevity, I'd think +/- would be better than N/S/E/W). So, my address is XX.XXXXX,-XX.XXXXX, according to Google Maps. That makes 14 characters to memorize assuming I don't waste any brain power on the decimals and negative sign. This is approximately double the number of digits most people's brains supposedly prefer.

From what I gather from the comments, the benefits of the current GPS system are:

1) It already has a foothold.
2) It's easy to tell by comparing gps units where two places are compared to each other.
3) It can be more or less precise by adding or removing digits.
4) The digits easily translate to other languages (or, rather, they need no translation)

The benefits of the 3x3 system are:
1) It's really easy to remember the "address" for a very specific place.

The drawbacks I'm hearing for GPS are:
1) It's hard to remember the "address."

I think I'm now convinced that the GPS system is better. For example, in the 3x3 system, you can't say its in the vicinity of rabbit.tree.hook without having to look up what on earth (literally) that means. You need a whole new address for every language. In English, my address might be tree.rock.squirrel, while in spanish my address might be tango.juevo.puerta (because they can't use translations of the same words for the same place--here aren't enough words in the other languages and also words often don't translate cleanly). I was playing around with the map--squares very close to each other have completely different "addresses." And there is no way to address a larger quadrant, which is trivial in GPS by simply removing a digit.

I understand the issue with a GPS user's device having accuracy problems, but I don't see how the 3x3 system solves that. I think the versatility of the GPS system compared to the 3x3 system makes it ultimately superior, despite the comparative difficulty of memorizing "addresses."

2 comments in response to this:

1) The 3 words narrow things down to 3x3 foot squares. The GPS coordinates narrow things down to approximately a housing block. I'm not sure how many digits it would take to get GPS down to the specificity of 3x3 foot squares, assuming it is possible. The point the creators are trying to make is that more detail is needed for most places.

2) I'll give you 60 seconds to memorize the GPS coordinates of a housing block versus 60 seconds to memorize 3 English words. Guess what will be easier for 99% of the population.

I am not a security expert, but my thoughts are that "Anonymous" isn't really hurting anything.

1) An article from The Guardian speculating that Anonymous might be doing more harm than good does not equate to national intelligence agencies complaining that Anonymous is doing more harm than good.

2) If intelligence agencies are watching Twitter accounts for covert intelligence, that is idiotic. Twitter posts are public, easy to find, and unencrypted (I suppose you could hide a secret message in a Twitter post, but anyway...). It seems to me that the Rickrolling is perfect for disrupting ISIS sponsored Twitter recruitment accounts. When it comes to actually planning attacks, I imagine this makes no difference whatsoever--that is more likely done by ISIS on encrypted non-public channels that the intelligence agencies are trying to find and decrypt.

And also, why is Baidu interested in this information?