Directly below the video I see a link "Hide/Show Transcript", and clicking it expands and shows the transcript.
Or a more vague description and question. Like "Officer, how exactly did you know the location and contents of my client's cell phone data?" Somehow I don't think many courts will accept "Officer Y told me" (hearsay evidence, inadmissible) or "I can't answer because I signed an NDA with the FBI" (secret police don't often go over very well with American jury).
Exactly. All this NDA needs is an admissibility test in court "Will the officer tell me how he knew my client was at X?" "I can't, I signed an NDA with the FBI" probably will not fly.
Why doesn't somebody build a couple of encrypted paired bluetooth headsets and just provide end-to-end encryption across the distrusted network?
Sunday Assembly tithes to their "church", well, as much as Catholics do (where tithe is barely 1% of income and barely enough to keep the church running and the remaining 9% is given to various charities outside of the Church).
I agree the fundamentals are, but then again, fundamentals are chosen by cherry picking.
Right. So when any of the normal annual changes take place (the way they handle certain experimental drugs or therapies, the way they handle certain hospital scenarios, etc), the insurer can no longer provide the plan - the ACA shuts it down because it doesn't provide post-menopausal women maternity care, etc.
So I am a bit confused about why that is a problem. The cost to the insurer of offering maternity care to post-menopausal women should be about zero. Why not tack that onto an otherwise good plan if that's what the law requires? Wouldn't that make more sense than scrapping the plan for such a flimsy reason?
Do these chatbots want the law deciding your fate in various contexts based on your skin tone? Your sex? Your orientation? While some of these chatbots would want that done with their religion as the guide, it's the democrat chatbots who have pervasively done this in the name of 'equality', social 'justice', and human 'rights.' the scarequotes denote newspeak use of the terms.
Upload the file(s) as a single encrypted image file. Break that image into stripes. Store each stripe and the decryption key in a different legal jurisdiction? Not foolproof but it does make it more difficult for a single entity.
If you do that, how is the site supposed to publish your documents in the event of your death? They're going to have to get access to the data so they can do the job.
You only do the uploading of the image. The service does the striping and jurisdictionally diverse storage.
The USA would have the keys to all of them, since they seem to 0wnz the entire world's internet. (NSA spying on all the pipes, etc.)
Believe it or not, it is possible to move digital information (like a key) around the world without using the internet.
Drive that station wagon full of tapes to a port and have the station wagon loaded into a cargo container?
But then stopping any of the stripes will stop the entire revelation.
OK. That's not the problem I was trying to address, but I think striping can help here too.
Rather than an additive approach use a subtractive approach. For instance instead of each site having only 1 of 3 pieces, it has 2 of 3 pieces - 1 piece missing. Each site is missing some number of stripes, so a single entity can not read on its own. However there would be redundancy in that any particular stripe is in more than one jurisdiction. So coordination between jurisdictions is need for both release and denial. Again, not foolproof.
Just pointing out that I didn't create the labels "God is Good" and "Freedom From Religion Foundation".
Where your link, for instance, just proves the existence of God for a theist. Nice planet, God!