Vixenu. Pronounced Vich-eh-noo.
Vixenu. Pronounced Vich-eh-noo.
That wouldn't be true in Finland. I doubt it would be true in any EU country.
Yes, of course "within applicable law" could be added to that, but then in the words of Richard Hammond, they don't put up signs saying "no murdering" on every street corner, do they?
In my country, for example, monitoring of employees is allowed if and only if the employees (via their elected representatives, I'm not talking politicians but intra-company employee councils) agree to it. I've been on such a council, and we did agree to some requests and rejected others.
. The "Root CA" referred to by the original post is the public key of the
Which is why I explicitly wrote "the private key part" as being a potential danger. You do realize that if there's a public key, there's also a private key, yes?
Of course a public key is not a danger, that's why it's called a public key in the first place.
Some of these days I feel old. There used to be a time on
So if I walk around with bright red clacking cameras on the tips of my shoes, I'm in the clear?
I'd bet not, wording of the law or not.
What was that case where some underage girl sent naked pics of herself to her boyfriend, and they wound up in dutch for kiddie porn? I think there's a parallel here.
I would guess the reason it went through so fast is because some legislator was themselves a 'victim'.
I'm reminded of a dangerous intersection where I used to live... it stayed that way for decades despite numerous accidents, until the mayor's wife got broadsided there. The intersection was altered within weeks (not really for the better -- now instead of a dangerous crossing, you had to go half a mile down and make a U-turn to get to it. But, hey, no more broadsides!)
Compare this to the legal perception of kiddie porn, which has been expanded to include drawings where no actual children are involved, and you can see why the other poster voiced this concern.
This is kinda like how ALL Norwegians go back to Harald the Great. (I've forgotten the details but that's the gist of it.)
As a businessman I think he is right, the human body is extremely complex because it tries to be a one size fits all solution to everything. Robots can be modular so instead of using a complex human hand to hold a hammer use a set of simple, cost-efficient special purpose robot tools. And you really don't need the human legs that can go on a mountain hike to navigate my living room floor. Basically solve one thing and solve it well and you can have a salable product rather than trying to solve everything, spend a bazillion in R&D and in the end maybe end up with something so complex and expensive that the market doesn't want it. I think he's advocating the Swiss army knife kind of robots, multitools but not trying to cover the entire human scope.That trying to "replicate" humans is more like basic research for robotics than the R&D to make products.
No, it isn't. You utterly fail to understand whats going on here or how SSL and PKI in general works.
You wanted to misread me and succeeded. I'm not speaking about the pupils notebooks. I was clearly talking about the security of the private key part, wherever it is kept. I explicitly added that word to my response, specifically so people wouldn't misunderstand it in the precise way that you did.
On domestic flights here in Norway they don't check IDs anymore, they used to but basically nobody really looked twice at it and you could go anywhere by car or train or bus or whatever anyway. The security control is supposed to pick up on anything dangerous you bring along. That you can travel on a stolen passport is more a customs and immigration problem, if it turns out these people were able to bring explosives or something to bring the plane down that's the problem whether they were travelling under their real name or not.
I haven't heard of a single company that doesn't have limits on how many employees can travel with the same aircraft/bus/hovercraft/whatever. It's simple, quite cheap risk management.
A previous company I worked with put 180 of the 250 employees on the same flight to a company gathering - the other 70 came by another plane. Even at say a max limit of 40 you'd need seven planes instead of two and when each route has one plane/day either you need to fly them in stages or fly to other nearby cities and have them shuttled in, it would be a huge logistics nightmare. And I don't know any company I've worked for that wouldn't load up a rented bus full of employees. I think the alternative would be to never, ever go offsite with your employees for any meeting, never arrange any social gathering with organized transport and I think such a company would quickly die because people don't want to work there. YMMV.
First, a school network is not a public network and it can run any policy it wants, including intercepting and monitoring traffic. You don't have to sign anything, using the network is implicit consent to the rules it is run by. The only legal requirement in my country (so your laws may differ) is disclosure of those rules, you must be able to look them up somewhere.
Second, regarding danger. The danger is exactly equivalent of the lowest security among the machine(s) that have a copy of the school root certificate (the private key part). If any of them gets compromised and the attacker gets a copy, he can do everything the school does, including interception and manipulation of traffic. If the school rates that as "low", then it assumes that users of the network don't do anything of personal importance, like online banking.