Posts by Kyhwana
-
If they've installed backdoors that are discoverable from either inside/outside, other people can use them.. (think about that one for a bit)
-
Hard News: It's worse than you think, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
See http://techliberty.org.nz/jailing-people-for-remaining-silent/
(Counter Terrorism Bill 2003, if you don't give them your encryption keys, they send you to jail) -
While the government/police could use the terrorism act to force you to give up the passwords to encrypted texts/emails, you'd at least then know they were looking and it would be a PR field day if they did that to any journalists. (Especially if that had happened in this case).
Journalists (especially, though "normal" people should be trying as well) should begin encrypting _everything_ they do/send between themselves and their sources. While it wont protect against metadata, if done properly they'll know when the government is onto them, assuming the govt can't decrypt their files/messages.
For instance, there's Redphone/Textsecure for android phones (iphones soon) and S/MIME/PGP for email that's pretty well supported almost everywhere.
-
Up Front: Sex with Parrots, in reply to Martin Lindberg,
All I can say is, it's probably more common than most people think!
(Either that or there's a bias because i've been in a poly relationship before and both know more poly couples because of that and because of the various fandoms i'm involved in) -
Up Front: Sex with Parrots, in reply to Robyn Gallagher,
I've been in one in the past, in the US, does that count? :P
(It was quite complicated) -
Hard News: Media3: Where harm might fall, in reply to Angus Robertson,
Unless the pro-religious sites got in first and accused you of hating on a religion or culture.
Then I counter attack and get their stuff taken down as well :P
-
Hard News: Media3: Where harm might fall, in reply to Bart Janssen,
I don't know the answer, but I suspect it is related to the fact that all our methods of learning appropriate social behaviour relate to the real world and perhaps are not adapted well to the online world.
I think that depends who you ask. Digital Natives have already adapted social rules to the 'net and while they might be different from IRL ones, they are there.
The problem is when you have Kids These Days jumping online now without these rules or already established etiquette (depending on the places you go) and flailing about wildly :P
You also have a choice of where to go and who to reply to in most cases online -
Re Principle #10. That sounds like I can get any anti-equal marriage blogs/posts/websites taken down because they cause me emotional harm and spread falsehoods about gay people.
While this would be AWESOME in one way, it completely violates these peoples rights to free speech and my right to call these people idiots and point out why they're wrong.
(It also stops everyone else from reading their crap and drawing the hopefully correct conclusions that people like this are crazy nutjobs) -
Speaker: How's that three strikes thing…, in reply to nzlemming,
The ISP has to pay its upstream provider for the data that is downloaded and only makes money when the amount being paid for exceeds the amount being used.
ISP's don't pay their upstreams per GB downloaded, they just buy <x> mbit/s pipes to various places plus transit/peering costs.
Your statement about how they make money is incorrect as well. They can't "exceed the amount they paid for" because they've only bought <x> mbit/s and that's all they get. (Unless they want to fork out for fatter "pipes")
-
Hard News: Last Words, in reply to ScottY,
Sadly, I think it's illegal to do that. You can't try to get people to vote or even tell them NOT to vote! (For anyone!)