If you were a Korean you wouldn't feel that way.
I spent a month in Japan with a Korean friend and we didn't have any problems, though we stayed mainly in the cities, perhaps things would have been different in smaller towns.
That type of logic is flawed. It basically comes down to "this is worse than that so why bother with that?". It is used in many instances such as comparing murders with traffic violations; Why is that cop pulling me over when he should be out catching murderers? Different departments have different priorities. In this case Border Services has nothing to do with internet traffic but they do have responsibility for who and what come physically across the border. The fact that everything on the internet is not searched has nothing to do with the investigation techniques at the border.
I thought it was more of a case "That is allowed, so why not this?" If the government required that all internet communications into the country were decrypted for inspection, then sure, it would be logical to require that personal storage devices be decrypted as well.
But I don't see why data is subject to inspection when you're carrying it, but not when you're sending it electronically. Why is it fine to send a private email to your drug dealer while you're standing in line at customs, but as soon as you reach the agent, you have to decrypt the storage you're holding in your hand?
Terabytes (Petabytes?) of encrypted data enters the country every day from across the world via the internet, yet Border Services thinks they need to inspect the data on everyone's phones?
I sincerely hope he wins the case.
But seriously, that's pretty fun. I hope they don't screw it up.
I tried it but it wasn't that fun, my Mistress just said "What are you doing!? That's disgusting, pull your pants back up!", then she slapped me across the face and walked out -- she's quite harsh.
Two hours for a one-way commute? That doesn't sound like a very good life balance. I think if that was our teams that we'd end up doing a mixed online/f2f meeting as if some of the team were remote.
That's why we have flex-hours and most people work from home most of the week. Right now, we don't even have enough desk space for everyone if they come to work at the same time.
In this area, it's not just work-life balance, but housing-work balance -- the farther you drive, the cheaper your house, which can make the difference between being able to afford living in the area or not. Even if you can afford the mortgage on a $750K starter house, not everyone can cover the downpayment, and when making offers they are competing against people paying cash.
If he "requires" that and consents, the trial will be held behind closed doors without the promised cameras
Then he's just proven to the world that the USA is not to be trusted.
If he can safely stay in Russia, he'd be well-advised to do so. If not, it would still be better to try to disappear to some other place. Going to the US, no matter the promises, is suicidal.
If it were me, that's what I'd do, but I'd lay low and stay out of the news.
How about just tell them to be in the room when you do the standup? This solution is simple and costs absolutely nothing.
Unless your employees live in the same building as your office, there's a non-zero cost to having everyone in the office for meetings. At my office, even though employees are all "local", depending on traffic it can take up to 2 hours for some of them to get to the office.
Pretty much every company ever has already solved this problem with polycom (or similar) conferencing phones(ranging from a few hundred dollars on up)
http://www.polycom.com/product...
Also conference phone numbers like Webex at all so lots of people can call in, if you need that sort of thing.
This is not a new or unsolvable problem, this is "standard office gear" since the 1990s.
Exactly, we have a 30 seat conference room with a polycom and 2 extension mikes. For company meetings, remote employees dial-in to the conference bridge, and the phone works surprisingly well, everyone in the room can be heard. (it does get confused though when more than one person speaks at once -- it doesn't know which microphone to use, so the two voices fade in and out)
No need to ditch working solutions just because they are "old school" -- most of our remote users use some VOIP solution to reach the conference bridge (google hangouts, skype, etc)
Snowden has no bargaining power. Nobody can trust any agreement he offers to make - the crime he committed was breaching an oath. Plus, he has repeatedly said that he no longer has the information he stole in his possession.
Once he's in custody, it's physically impossible for him to refuse to accept the results of a "fair trial".
As part of his re-patriation agreement, he should require cameras to be rolling throughout the entire trial with a live uncensored feed available to any organization that wants it (News organizations, EFF, ACLU, etc). If the government shuts down the cameras for any reason, then the agreement is null and void and the USA guarantees his return to Russia.
Then the american people can decide if the trial is "fair" -- if the government tries to redact all of the evidence due to national security reasons, then it's hard to see how the trial can be called "fair".
I realize that the USA will likely ignore the agreement once he's on american soil, but at least it demonstrates that the USA government can't be trusted to abide by its own agreements and it validates Snowden's reason for fleeing to Russia.
Why trust users to know what file extensions are "safe" and which are not? Surely the same computer that shows "ImportantFile.doc" to the user when it's really "ImportantFile.doc.exe" can be smart enough to pop up a message when someone clicks on it: "Hey, this filename *looks* like a document, but it's really an executable so instead of opening a document, I'm going to run it. It's probably a terrible idea to run it, so I'm not going to do it, you'll have to rename it to something less ambiguous if you really want to run it. But you should't do that. Really. I'm not kidding."
I never understood why Windows hides file extensions by default. Doing so makes Windows much more difficult to use. Changing that setting is literally the first thing I do with Windows. Hiding file extensions was one of the worst decisions made for Windows.
The people that find visible file extensions to be useful are the same people that know how to change the default setting to show them -- for the rest of the world, file extensions are meaningless, they'd rather see the MS Excel icon on Excel Docs than have to remember what file extensions will open into an Excel doc.
1.2 pedobytes.
According to the article, they seized more than 4 times more child porn than the Library of Congress has.
But unlike past investigations into the distribution of child porn, which typically involve targeting suspects individually, police have instead seized over 1.2 petabytes of data—more than four times the amount of data in the US Library of Congress
I'm kind of surprised that all congress could only manage to accumulate 300TB of child porn.
The summary says "Reads and large writes run at about the same speed as on a conventional drive, and at $280 it costs less than a pair of decent 4TB drives", one of the 7 links in the summary mentions a 5TB model. 5TB for the price of two 4TB drives doesn't sound that great.
So I wonder if all of this excess interference means that a Stingray detector could be created? Privacy minded volunteers could run a SDR that looks for an increase in the noise floor or other indications that a Stingray is in use, and update a central repository for a real-time map of everywhere a Stingray is in use.
If Law Enforcement won't reveal when they are using it, maybe citizens can find out out their own.
"The four building blocks of the universe are fire, water, gravel and vinyl." -- Dave Barry
