That this is a legal question has escaped many of the newscasters, who as far as I can tell make the mistake of spewing that there's something special about USA citizenship. The executive branch's control over foreign policy gives it a lot of leeway regarding foreign non-USA citizens that it does not have over citizens or in many cases non-USA citizens within the country. Rest assured that your country (I would love to be educated on any exceptions) has similar allowances for its military's commander in chief.

Assuming that the NSA has obtained information on a US citizen unconstitutionally, they can't constitutionally use it in a court proceeding: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree. They'd have to go get a warrant based on entirely unrelated justifications in order to "rediscover" the evidence and make it maybe viable. It can get complicated (and lawyers love to argue).

However, I am not aware of any way that one could "send them to prison" or force the government to stop collecting information on everyone because you think (without proof) that they've probably caught your stuff when they shouldn't have.

IANAL, etc.

If your friend tells you that, and you still ID them, they will:

1. Change
2. No longer be your friend.

Semi-related question: does wiretapping law protect someone operating like you? That is to say, since presumably you don't notify everyone that you're running tcpdump to see their activity, and something as benign as recording the hostnames in DNS queries could be considered wiretapping, does the individual connecting to your network bear the responsibility of "assuming" you could do such a thing?

I ask because I remember in college we were specifically told we could NOT use the internal network for "real world" traffic data, and that recording anything, either in promiscuous mode in a crowded lecture hall or even at a router behind the WAP would be illegal/unethical/both

This is unfortunately the most useful post on this rah-rah thread. Shame you're AC and I have no mod points.

Practical reasons: Google's NYC office is a full block between 15th and 16th St and 8th and 9th Ave, in the north-east part of the coverage area. They probably are reusing some of the network infrastructure they built out already to support that office.

Model.where(some_field: 5) is not the same as Model.find_by_some_field(5). The #where method returns a lazily evaluated database request which functions more or less like an array. #find_by_... returns either the "first"* model to match or nil if no models match and is much more useful for one-liners

* IIRC no ordering is guaranteed unless you have an #order portion in your model default scope

Non sequitur

The part of the internet that "was meant to be resilient to nuclear attacks" (if that's even true) would be the routing. If a nuclear strike hits the machine you're trying to talk to, redundancy among communication channels doesn't do anything. The endpoints went down, and so things failed.

So nobody is doing any clickjacking, there are plenty of legitimate reasons people who don't "like" Romney might capital-L "Like" Romney's feed, and Facebook's mobile interface is a little cluttered.

This is not a story, this is a series of banal statements including "clickjacking," "Romney," and "Facebook" to drive traffic (and it unfortunately worked on me).

What would you file a suit for? No tort or crime was committed. This is a price change for a non-essential service which you don't need to purchase, and entirely legal.

They probably figured that people who don't really care would rather be listed, but were unlikely to pay for it specifically. Assuming they have to hire people/design a system to list some numbers and not others, they pushed the cost onto people who would be willing to pay. Yawn.

Why it's a monthly instead of a one-time fee, I couldn't tell you. Trying to make a continuous revenue stream out of privacy fanatics I guess.

Because you saw the words "room-temperature" and you missed the last sentence of the first paragraph where it says the findings were published in one of the most widely respected peer reviewed journals?

Or just didn't read TFA ;)

This is a trademark, not a copyright, so there's no license to grant. If you don't defend it against all attacks, you lose the trademark and cannot defend it against any attacks.

IANAL, etc. but this was my understanding of one of the critical differences between patents, copyright, and trademarks.

If you're in an IT department of an org with any Linux machines, you may be allowed to access port 22 on the internet. Get the cheapest hosting you can find (I have a tiny VPS for $10 per year). PuTTY runs in userspace so you're likely not prevented from downloading it, so use dynamic port forwarding as a SOCKS5 proxy.

The endpoint DLP will still catch things like credit cards/SSNs/monetary values/addresses/client names, but the proxy won't have your browsing history so you can read things which are blocked by your ironport ISA.

Retarded people are human beings. You have an interesting definition of respect.