Because kindles would actually cost more and have less software. And computer labs are useless. Having worked in K-12 anything that is not 1-1 is useless. To really utilize a technology teachers have to know every student has full access.
Any device can be reset to defaults that's not much of a hack and if the kids do it, the school will know the second it hits the school network. (If their IT people have any skills at all) Bypassing the lockdown on a device is only an issue if you can do it without being detected.
Quit using the term DRONES. To quote Mr Montoya ' it does not mean what you think it means'. Drones mostly do not exist outside the lab and are illegal to fly in the US. UAV's are just planes where the pilot isn't inside it. However the pilot is in control and as such a UAV should be legally considered an extension of the user. If the UAV trespasses the user trespasses. Flying over your neighbors house is illegal for the most part. Flying above your house to get a good view of his...well its no different then standing on a ladder, your roof or some other platform. Should we ban windows more the 20ft above the ground.
Cruise missiles are more of a robot then a drone is. Fact is drones are just remotely piloted planes. The problem isn't their existence but there misuse.
The Slashdot is bad. It tracks users just like about every other site on the web.
OMG location based features know our location!!!!! Who would have thunk it.
nope android users aren't dumb at all. Hey clueless they're your wireless carrier. If your phone is on they are tracking you! Do you think when you make calls they have no idea what phone is connecting to there network? It doesn't matter what phone or what carrier if you connect they know where you are. It's part of the connection protocol and can never be turned off. And unless your VPNing they know every site you visit.
No valid copyrights involved here.
My question is where and what authentication happened. It sounds to me (maybe wrong) that the fraud was to access the local network and once there access to JSTOR was open. Is it wire fraud to lie to get into a club and use their free WiFi?
Nope the communication has to cross state lines.
The law actually differentiates between the two. Finacial data crime. Random data not neccasarly.
It is if you're doing it to gain access to a computer that otherwise doesn't want you accessing it.
Nope still not illegal. Has to be a government or "protected computer" used for commerce.
Such things can be used as evidence that not only did Swatz break the law, but that he did so intentionally. Also the first two bits, the changing of the MAC address and providing a false email address might become supporting evidence for the argument asserting wire fraud.
Can't convict on wire fraud for access to the network as it did not cross state lines. An element of the crime.
Actually no it's not a crime. There are other required elements under the current law. I'm not sure that in this we are even talking about a "protected computer" as defined by the law.
If this was a local copy of the archive I don't think he broke any laws at all and the Feds have no jurisdiction. If the MIT computer has connected to and retrieving info from a JSTOR server it much more complex. Is accessing a system that gets info from another the same as connecting to it directly?
Wire fraud requires that it cross state lines. It seems he only accessed from withing the building.
Beyond that I'm not sure they can make the case that his false statements are material as the service was provided for free to anyone.
Actual this is correct. Simply using someone else's property is not theft. It only becomes theft or more accurately conversion if the owner is denied his use of the property. That's why with IP it's civil infringement and not criminal theft. Copying something does not deprive the owner of the original of its use.