I don't think it makes a difference either. The court probably waited too long before getting his fingerprint. If the phone had to restart for any reason, then the fingerprint won't work anymore. It will need his passcode. Both iPhones and Samsung phones require passcodes on restart.
Back to square one. The police will probably need a court order to get his passcode now.
It's not the internet interconnection that is being damaged it's the terminals (the sites). there isn't a solution. Even a Tor can be peeled.
For one thing, having access to the sim card means they can clone it. Also, it sounds like she had multiple phones, so it's likely she used a cheap burner phone when she was abroad instead of using her main one.
Dating is only tiny sliver of what meetup.com. Take for example the hundreds of these politics-related meetups.
And if the results are bad for the Dems, will you all publish?
Of course, they will. Avast is a scamware company. They thrive on misinformation, fear, and publicity.
Avast's CEO has even blamed its affiliates for their scams, which he claims they deactivated and are no longer forwarding phone calls from their 800 numbers to, but once the bad press died down, nothing changed, and their current affiliates are still scaring grandpas and grandmas everywhere into shelling out hundreds of dollars for worthless Avast products that claim to fix problems that those people didn't even have in the first place.
The only story that everyone seems to be missing right now is the fact that a well-known scamware company was able to place wireless hotspots within the Republican National Convention, and is actually bragging about it after the fact. I ask you. How many convention goers used their credit cards from the convention floor during that time? How many people logged into their banks to wire donations? How many used those hotspots to check email from their own private insecure servers sitting in their homes? Don't tell me that Democrats are the only ones doing it. Colin Powell, for instance, admitted as such for when he was Secretary of State.
By letting Avast scam artists get into their convention, the republicans really made a huge mistake.
the new design allows you do drop your laptops guts into the toilet. Whereas before it was fairly hard to drop your chromebook in, an android phone will slip into the porcelain bowl of doom easily.
One of the oldest economic principles!
Ecomonies are not a collection of processes all known. They are a collection of agents, mostly unknown with hidden internal states. Another way of saying this is that gathering information for centralization cost money. Economies process that information at many local and global levels and don't share it past the point of economic efficiency. That's in an idealized system. In an non-indeal system there's even wrong ideas.
A classic example of this is the maxim that the bad apples drive out the good apples. Meaning if you can't tell the difference between a good tasting apple and a bad tasting apple from the look (without tasting it) and if it costs less to produce a bad apple then the good apples won't sell as they are indistinguishable. In order to sell those apples you need to incur some cost. Do something that actually raises the price or lowers the profit like constitute an apple certification board, and set up a set of agents to test apples regularly for different farms, and persuade the consume your certification is valuable by giving away free taste demos. Otherwise there isn't information available to make a decision other than price. A similar thing occurs in how bad (debased) money drives the good (full gold) money out.
You can create systems to optimally manage agent based systems. Interesting there is work now that shows how denying information to consumers can increase econmoic efficiencies as well. This should come as no surprise to people familiar with Braes paradox in traffic control.
One of the core faults of communism is that while it can achieve some good results from linear programming notions of optimality is that it ignores that capitalist economies actually are information gathering systems that are very efficient).
I don't need to stand by the rotation theory. However, the 2.5 degrees that the Earth rotates are about equivalent to the downrange distance.
The first stage is going about 1/5 of the target LEO orbital velocity at separation. While you might well model the trajectory as a parabola over flat ground, given the lack of fuel I would expect that SpaceX puts a lot more care into their trajectory. So far I've failed to attract the attention of the person responsible for Flight Club, the most trusted modeling of SpaceX flights, but I'll message him directly.
You sell advertising. It's not always by using non-personally identifying information. That's the difference in this instance. *shrug*
I don't know why people think companies are always making shit up. Why would they "get around to it?" If they were doing it before without telling users, they'd still be doing it without telling users.
Well, it was unlimited while they allowed the grandfathered people on the plan to use it. Now that they're telling them they have to switch plans, to a plan they don't call unlimited, which will not be unlimited. I'm not sure you understand what false advertising means.
I've not been to Nevada but I thought it was at least in some places...
Everywhere outside Clark and Washoe counties (home to Las Vegas and Reno, respectively).
Well, Alastair, you should probably not get snotty and ad-hominem, unless you want me to comment on how a one-time sci-fi author and the Unix guy at Dish doesn't really have more authority than the random person one might find in the SpaceX group on Reddit.
It happens there are a few people over there who are rocketry professionals, have the math, and have followed SpaceX long enough. So, sure, their opinion can indeed be trusted.
So far, we have a suggestion from one of the lesser folks there that raising the apogee takes advantage of the Earth's rotation. We'll see if we get the attention of the right people.
Q: How many IBM CPU's does it take to execute a job? A: Four; three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.