I still like https://keybase.io./ Nobody has the private keys but me... and thatâ(TM)s a good thing. Could use a bit more data gravity though.

I suppose if one considers desktop support the sum total of IT, this might be accurate. But thatâ(TM)s a âseriouslyâ naÃve viewpoint. Many of us in IT are pretty happy to let that portion of the field shrink.

That's the thing about C. There's always another pointer referencing the original variable... or constant, as the case may be.

Unfortunately, I think it's a nervous and fearful laughter that they hope will somehow make them feel a little safer. As for nobody trying to leave, people renouncing their US citizenship is up 800% since 2008.

Most companies I work with don't even have fax anymore. Not sure how it is in other areas though.

Most IT departments don't know the first thing about email encryption, but if you âdoâ get one, it's more likely to be S/MIME rather than PGP. The former is built-in to most email systems and the latter requires them to deploy additional software, which they won't want to do.

The other problem is that the rights enshrined in the US Constitution are usually seen as applying only to US citizens and not people in general.

Most services already have an option (if not a default) to use encrypted communication. If privacy is further restricted, advocates will encourage hard drive (or at least personal folder) encryption to be used by default.

The next logical step would be to make use of cryptography illegal, but then it reaches the point where the majority of the population is breaking the law routinely. When the law has turned the majority of the population into criminals, it becomes unenforceable and completely toothless.

It's an escalation in the balance of power between the legislature and its electorate. While democracy prevails, the electorate will always win.

Although most QR codes âdoâ contain URLs, this isn't the only possible use. If the QR code contains a hash of the bill's serial number that is generated by a sufficiently complex process (private key, anyone?) then it's just a matter of verifying the hash against the serial number for verification.

It's an interesting way to sidestep the German decision. I wonder if Motorola can similarly sidestep the issue if their German subsidiary enforces the injunction while the US parent stands by and does nothing in violation of the order?

I'm just trying to imagine a Science Fiction or Fantasy cast using a Newfoundland accent and it's just not clicking in for some reason. "What're ye at wit dat sword, me son?" Nope.

Iran may be up there on the oil production globally, but they're not even in the top 10 for US imports... so I don't imagine that's much of a factor in a decision to go to war.

Okay, so the message when visiting with Safari says "We're sorry, but this content was designed with the browser Google Chrome in mind. As a result, it may not work properly in your current browser. We recommend using Google Chrome." So I think, "Well, Chrome essentially cribbed their HTML5 engine from Safari, so I should be good. I'll give it a try." Unfortunately, there's no way to get past the message. Perhaps they should rephrase "It may not work in your current browser" to "We won't let you view this with anything but Chrome." Ah well. It will take more than an interactive movie video to make me install Chrome. *close*

Being a member of the regional NIC isn't that big a deal. Much of the time we've only been using provider blocks because the NIC's policy won't let us get provider-independent space without significant justification, or because the provider just won't permit provider-independent blocks to be advertised through them. The former goes away with IPv6, and the latter can be solved by switching to a provider that is more sensible about customer requirements. Redundant Internet connections are going to need portable space, just like they did in IPv4 before the NAT hack was added to the protocol. Per my previous paragraph, getting that isn't going to be tough. This is the IAB's recommended approach, per the RFC 5092. Without NAT, local applications can read the IP address directly from the NIC, should they need it. Remote applications can just use DNS. As for DNS records, DHCPv6 in combination with IPv6 auto-configuration handles DNS updates dynamically. I have yet to see a need for port remapping where more than a single global IP address is in play. The smallest block allocated under IPv6 is a /64, which means that you can assign an IPv6 address for every service that you want to make available and then move the global IP of that service from machine to machine as needed. It's a different paradigm. IPv6 has been around in test for a decade. NAT was never needed in IPv4 until people started worrying about IP address depletion. It will likely never be needed with IPv6.

From my perspective, they started late. I tuned in at 9:30am EST to be greeted by background music and no video. I left it on while I went to do other work and heard voices start up around 10:00am. All-in-all, it was informative, but more for the average joe than for the networking types.