Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Fine! (Score 1) 365

by SuperRenaissanceMan (#47995855) Attached to: Microsoft On US Immigration: It's Our Way Or the Canadian Highway

For example the non-profit can own his house, car, boat, etc and provide for his use free of charge. This protects his assets while still giving him control of them, on top of this it is deducted from the non-profit as an operating expense. Remember, a non-profit can spend 90% of it's income on operating expenses and 10% or less on the charitable actions.

It does not follow from the fact that non-profits can be abused in this way that Gates is abusing his.

Comment: Re:Judicial proceedings should never be secret (Score 4, Funny) 146

by SuperRenaissanceMan (#47159637) Attached to: Local Police Increasingly Rely On Secret Surveillance

No, if you look at the Supreme Court Case [Redacted] vs. [Redacted], you'll find that Justice [Redacted] made the very clear argument that sometimes [Redacted] is necessary because [Redacted]. Honestly, how can you contest that precedent?



+ - DOJ: We can force you to decrypt that laptop-> 1

Submitted by suraj.sun
suraj.sun (1348507) writes "The Colorado prosecution of a woman accused of a mortgage scam will test whether the government can punish you for refusing to disclose your encryption passphrase.

The Obama administration has asked a federal judge to order the defendant, Ramona Fricosu, to decrypt an encrypted laptop that police found in her bedroom during a raid of her home.

Because Fricosu has opposed the proposal, this could turn into a precedent-setting case. No U.S. appeals court appears to have ruled on whether such an order would be legal or not under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which broadly protects Americans' right to remain silent.

CNET News: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20078312-281/doj-we-can-force-you-to-decrypt-that-laptop/?tag=topStories2"

Link to Original Source

User hostile.