Except that it's a known key with a known loophole?

You may as well try to tell me WPA-2 encryption is meaningful. It's not.

Maybe because they're trying?

You can't just magic your way into a SCOTUS review.

No, it doesn't sound like a good strategy.

It sounds like "Spray and pray". In fact, people who don't use google do not exactly jump to searching on Bing, mostly because bing is terrible at being a search engine. Are there alternatives? Yes. Is this a way to bring light to them? Not even remotely.

Yahoo is bing, so using yahoo is using bing and is just as much garbage as bing.

The fact that the FAA is attempting to define commercial activity with a drone is exactly the problem.

Maybe the part about "I deleted all the unimportant emails. Trust me" part?

I can't wait to hear what happens when forensics gets to their machines and hopefully finds tons and tons of illegal activity.

No person should ever be allowed to do this, especially someone who doesn't understand the impact of doing this from a technology perspective and only from a political one.

You're misunderstanding. If you create a form of encryption to which you do not hold the keys, all of the compelling in the world isn't going to do anything. Which is what most modern OS's including ios do.

"Apple doesn't mine it"

Yeah, ok. Show me where/how you can guarantee that any more than anyone else who already has your data? Apple in this case *already has your data* without HealthKit. Apple is identical to google and facebook and every tech company that collects user data in this regards.

Sirius isn't free, you pretty much have to buy the hardware too.

Also, 90% of their stations are outright garbage and far less personalized than Pandora.

At the same time, Pandora is ridiculous because it's treated more like a radio stream and less acknowledging basic functionality like "I want to play a song again" or "I want to restart the same song". Spotify is equally garbage in this regards as you are limited on the number of streams and the selection is limited. Google music is the next closest thing at $8/mo, but in reality it's no better as well.

Until you have a streaming service that doesn't have to resort to covers to play certain songs just because the big bad publishers think their music is so magically valuable (it isn't), we're going to be stuck with garbage solutions like this.

What isn't mentioned about every music streaming solution? None of them pay the artist *anything*, because this assumes artists actually get their tenth of a cent per stream. It's unlikely, because that's probably split 20/80 with their publisher, assuming they even get the money and that a publisher isn't somehow taking all the money from the artist who doesn't even work for them.

Uh, your mistake would not be smart TV's. Your mistake is buying a smart TV's that have some sort of voice/audio control. There's no reason to trust any mfr with audio information.

Roku TV's for example, do not do this - they don't have or need a microphone, really.

Claiming that politics have gone in ANY direction is a facetious statement at best and misinformed, to say the least.

This country is not any more leftist than it is any more rightist which it isn't. This country is corporatist, which means that whether anyone anywhere politically is in power the vested interests are going to support corporations which benefit either way.

So whether you have democrat a, republican b, it doesn't really matter unless you fail to understand where the real politics is.

Nah, it became a lot cheaper in some countries, notably everywhere except the US. In the US however, it was unchanged.

The only reason taxing consumers (taxpayers is not the correct term, it's redundant) is what happens is because the government has created such a structure. It's times like this that things such as alternate taxation options and things other than having to pay for sales tax would be a boon instead of a flaw.

Example: we have now added sales tax to amazon, so now everyone pays double sales tax - amazon pays sales tax on it's profits and we pay sales tax on our purchases. This is a terrible structure and the opposite of whatever perverted goal of profit exists.

The gov would literally make hand over fist amounts of money if they actually came up with a sensible tax system but I don't believe that's the intent of this economy.

This isn't to stop those companies that are abusing the system on any level.

This is to give them a giant windfall for the YEARS they have been exploiting it, to let them come back and "start fresh" again with zero taxes and do it all over again. This is another tax amnesty for those who have exploited tax loopholes.

It's referring to killing one innocent, not imprison.

Imprison sounds like "whoops, we fucked your life", but at least isn't taking one away. Killing an innocent refers to what happens in Texas regularly.

I can see why this would be mentioned as a focus, but I can see this being the straw that breaks the camel's back.

It's one thing to at least require an agreement to let your privacy be violated in return for X functionality (sadly because there is no other option from how companies have designed it), but it's another to just do this outright.