Anyone could do this, if not now, certainly in ten years. There is really nothing preventing a smartphone in a GPS mount from doing this, though I can't think of any benefit to someone doing it.

I don't understand the problem. Maybe I will someday, because there doesn't seem to be a practical way to avoid this. It's like taking pictures or video in public. Is the answer to have maximum data retention laws? That apply to every level of government... only?

We have that here, the moderation system hides what you were replying to so you have to quote it.

Who, the hell, said anything about Windows OR Linux besides you? OpenSSL runs on everything.
Do you really think we shouldn't hold OpenSSL, or any open source software to a higher standard, "because Microsoft"?

. ... are your parents OK with you using the Internet all by yourself?

Most people should grow out of that at what, eight years old when they learn how to play most games themselves?

I understand why people would rather watch things than participate because of the risk, expense, or physical exertion, but why are we making video games that intimidate wider and wider ranges of people?

By all means, please invent a sport involving motorcycles on ice with chainsaws, but not another real time strategy game that people are afraid to play. Computers shouldn't harbor exclusivity.

First, I think Germans under the Stasi would have traded us all their national security/law enforcement & intelligence folks for all ours today in a heartbeat, and if you think otherwise you are stark raving mad. Intelligence isn't evil, getting arrested for dissent is, regardless how you're found out.

What the hell are you talking about, his goal was to amend the Freedom Act. The Senate passed the unmodified House version days later. This is right out of Senator Paul's mouth days ago. http://www.paul.senate.gov/new...

"Tonight begins the process of ending bulk collection. The bill will ultimately pass but we always look for silver linings. I think the bill may be replacing one form of bulk collection with another, but the government after this bill passes will no longer collect your phone records. My concern is that the phone companies still may do the same thing.

Currently, my understanding is the N.S.A. Is at the phone company sucking up the phone records and sending them to Utah. My concern is under the new program, that the records will still be sucked up into N.S.A. Computers but the computers will be at the phone company, not in Utah. "

So there is some big concern about the NSA having your datas, but nobody gives a shit about the phone/email/whatever company not having any restrictions on use or distribution of "your" data in the first place. What is wrong here.

Citation?

http://www.paul.senate.gov/new...
"We went to the court, the Second Court of Appeals, the highest court in the land just below the Supreme Court, said that what they are doing is illegal, but we don't yet have a ruling on whether it's Constitutional. One of my fears about the bill that we're going to pass, the sort of in-between step that some think it may be better, is that it will moot the case. "

Update... besides HIPAA there's... what?

At least you're on the right track because the constitutional angle is just crap.

My biggest problem with all this is when people throw around words like freedom, liberty, constitution because they are too mentally lazy to admit we don't really have much in the way of privacy protection laws and the Constitution doesn't actually go there. So each and every time I hear "fourth amendment" instead of "privacy" I tune out a little more from this spying debate.

Terrorism is defined by the US military roughly as violence or threats of violence driven by religious, ideological or political reasons.

An attack on a strategic building like a command and control center doesn't fit any more than your average serial killing spree does.

It does't have anything to do with who is involved, and it's not simply "scaring people". Terrorism is a label we use to describe a type of conflict that we didn't have another a good word for. Not everything ISIS does is "terrorism", but that shouldn't change how anyone regards them. Don't get hung up on labels...

Use the left lane?

Heh Heh.

"You SHOULD roll your own encryption, and you can't be too careful so don't forget to make your own PRNG too." -- Well Funded Intelligence Agency

I made that up. But you know it's true.

Are you even aware that there are businesses outside of hi-tech industries, or business functions that are not obviously hi-tech?
No, you're not classic IT, but you're not far from it either.

Who deals with ediscovery software, your legal or generic OS/networking IT?
Payroll software, is that your HR or OS/networking IT?
ERP, accounting, marketing, sales, business intelligence, customer support, etc.

Are all those teams equally equipped with tech-ninjas or has every facet of the company that doesn't deal with making visual effects been outsourced too?
How is your company NOT full of technical consultants and contractors?
What about other businesses, logistics, fraud, risk, billing, patient records, photography, blah blah blah blah... these are not all on the same page in the technical spectrum.

Fucking developers, I swear. The fact you even know what Linux is makes you such an outlier and you don't even know it.
Technology benefits more than just companies that "make great visual effects" ... I should have just said that and saved a lot of typing.
The problem is even if more business leaders understood technology, the solutions are just awful.

To hell with STEM, lets start pushing business, economics, and leadership training for everyone, there's clearly a supply problem here...

What's tapping, paying someone outside the IT department market rates to administer the highly specialized, complex software different parts of the business need that the IT department typically doesn't want to give up headcount for because they have a broader mission?

The software regular IT people deal with is, as a rule, more complex than it needs to be, and specialized business software that can really make a difference to the bottom line requires knowledge of the respective business function and is LUDICROUSLY more complex than it needs to be.

These digital demands, we're talking about stuff your brightest guys in IT don't even want to touch. So sure, if you think you all can pool your collective PC skills to supplant some overpaid contractors, nobody from your CIO down is stopping you, it just does't work.

I went to rt.com to get the other side, and it's really about the same as the CNN one.
http://rt.com/news/261201-rosc...

They also have some enlightening articles right on their front page:
"Internet troll convictions on the rise (VIDEO)"
"Counter attack: MP asks law enforcers to protect Russians from Google page counts"
"Putin signs bill on ‘undesirable foreign groups’ into law"
"Defense Ministry to improve conscripts’ preparedness through military lessons in schools"
"Snowden leaks aided terrorists, damaged spy agencies – neocon think-tank"

Oh, and they have hardly any ads on their site and no subscription plan, so I guess their funded some other way... neat!

I'm sneering at your "slippery slope"

You're saying case law is a slippery slope, which is asinine because a judge's job is to interpret the law that legislators write. It's not to make you happy, and that's why you don't elect them. In this case, we're talking about Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - it doesn't do what you want it to.

If you don't like that, then man up and talk to your legislators and get new laws or amendments passed, or at least acknowledge that's what's needed. Laws that aren't interpreted the way you want are not "slippery slopes". There may be unintended consequences, and you will have to deal with those in ANY new law you propose, that's how the system works. You can't just wish all existing laws into covering every situation the way you want them to. Our legal system is not in a vacuum.

True, but big heads have other purposes.

Some people used to give Quake Team Fortress player models a long spike on their head and a Pinocchio nose to see them coming from a lower level and through walls in 2fort. Mark up textures with glow-in-the-dark "fullbright" pixels, increase the volume on grenade priming, footsteps, etc...

So... you still really don't want to allow client side mods in multiplayer, because there is a whole more than physics to mess with.