That's right. The officer doesn't. Those records are actually best and easily obtained from the wireless carrier with a warrant. The evidence (in your example) won't change state if the investigators follow the constitution.

Another issue is that a lot of developers are writing mobile applications the same way they might for a desktop computer in an office with a significantly more reliable Internet connection. They aren't considering the reality that a connection may be intermittent, or drop off unexpectedly, and the effort the phone goes through to re-establish that connection.

Boo to the Eastern District Courts of Texas!

Don't be fooled by that. Management always gives some abstract time period during which the employees will need to sacrifice. It's like "War on drugs" or "War on terrorism". You'll work like a bitch, and in the end get nothing.

Don't tell me that your company gets revenue from advertising, too.

Comcastic!

Like why I can drive while getting a blow job.

I used to work there back in the early 90s when it was still the Public Affairs Video Archives. Not long before I left, I wrote software to parse closed-captioning and generate metadata for the program. It would collect things like what part of the session congress was in, the topics being discussed, who was talking, vote outcomes, etc.

The biggest problem by far was there because it is a live program, there were a lot of misspellings that had to be accounted for, as the people doing the closed captions didn't really pay any attention to what was being said, just what sounds they heard. A lot of times, a word or part of a word, would be spelled like a similarly sounding word.

I'm not sure what ever happened to it after I left.....

This student from Yale (I don't even see why that matters, does it give him some sort of credibility? You know, like John Kerry and George Bush) has really only focused on the application of a DNA profile to criminal investigations. He makes some poor argument about how the DNA profile can't be used to glean physical characteristics, etc. To build a DNA profile, they use an actual DNA sample, which does contain that information. What happens to all the blood and saliva samples used to collect DNA? Does he think that those samples will be disposed of, and that's that? Guess again.

He also seems to think that the only privacy exposure is what your genes represent (i.e. blue or green eyes, or a disposition to diabetes). The government doesn't care about any of that. They care about tracking people and finding out what they are doing, regardless of any criminal intent. That's what DNA will be used for.

It's all about liability. If you take the update and your car does something it obviously shouldn't, at least to have some legal recourse against Toyota. If you don't take the update, it's the same as absolving Toyota of all future problems you may have. All Toyota has to say is: "It's really tragic that he lost his left arm in that accident when his car sped out of control, after foolishly choosing not to take the free firmware update that would have prevented the accident, thus giving us indemnity."

Dumb ass.

Seriously, as a former sys admin I can't count the number of times I've wanted to put three slugs into somebody else's computer.