MarcAnthony 's BestNetTech Comments

Latest Comments (98) comment rss

  • On the post: FBI Claims It Has No Record Of Why It Deleted Its Recommendation To Encrypt Phones

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 29 Feb, 2016 @ 06:56am

    It's always in the last place you look

    ...we conducted a search of the locations or entities where records responsive to your request would reasonably be found.

    If the information exists at all, it may have been put somewhere it would not reasonably be found. Whenever I lose something, that's typically where I find it.

  • On the post: Federal Judge Says Recording Police Not Protected By The First Amendment

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 24 Feb, 2016 @ 08:35am

    Fair notice

    The judge’s requirement that the action be explicitly in opposition of police activity shows that we need reform in how judges come to sit—and how they can be removed—from the bench, because that's not a cogent or defensible thought. Speech doesn’t have to be words; it can be symbolism that is oppositional, supportive, or even neutral, and the majority of photography is the latter. Ruling that the right to speech is contingent on vocal opposition or “fair notice” to a officer is actually compelling you to speak, where no such duty is owed to secure that right.

    The act of neutrally monitoring law enforcement is, itself, a political statement—we don’t trust you not to misbehave. Even if that were not expressive, at the moment a cop tells you to stop performing a perfectly legal activity, any non-expressive action on your part is instantly converted to an action of recording your opposition to that conduct.

  • On the post: FBI Director: We're Only Forcing Apple To Undermine Security Because We Chase Down Every Lead

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 22 Feb, 2016 @ 09:19am

    Re: Conversation

    The "conversation" that the FBI wants to have is like the conversation we've had over the TPP—the one negotiated in secret with the text locked in a guarded room. Similar conversations are had when two wolves and a sheep discuss what's for dinner.

  • On the post: Lawmakers Speak Out On Apple Being Forced To Create Backdoors; Some Wisely, Some Ignorantly

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 18 Feb, 2016 @ 08:09pm

    Re:

    Apple is not an arm of law enforcement, and the idea that they are obliged to create a new system of forensic analysis for one phone is ridiculous, and is such regardless of whether or not they are being compensated. Every moment they have to spend on that is a moment taking them away from making or improving their own products—the reason they’re in business. The propagandists can try to make this about Apple protecting terrorists, pedophiles, et al., but the real issue is one of basic freedom. It’s too neutral to say they are being “compelled” to comply in this situation; due to an act in which they played no part, they are being enslaved in the service of the state.

    If they create a workaround that compromises the security of their product, Apple will lose everyone’s trust, and they will suffer epic financial losses that will rip through the economy. All of this will happen for a device that likely has little to no intelligence value. If the government’s intent is to destroy their business anyway, then they should just close up shop in protest, like Lavabit.

  • On the post: If The CIA Apologizes For Lying About Torture, But Doesn't Tell Anyone About The Apology, Does It Really Count?

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2016 @ 11:12am

    Crocodile tears

    When the culture of an organization is such that it’s willing to break laws and hurt people to get what they want, would that group’s publicly expressed apology have counted any more than a hidden one?
    “We gave some people coffee enemas and other nightmare fuel for the rest of their lifetimes for no good reason… our bad.”

    The most sincere avenue to apology would be criminal charges for everyone involved; this would, at least, be some assurance that this type of thing is not likely to happen again.

  • On the post: Court Says 10 Weeks Of Warrantless Surveillance Is Perfectly Constitutional

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2016 @ 10:30am

    Public observation is casual

    A necessary condition of being a passerby—on a road or otherwise—is that your observations are time-limited and coincidental. If law enforcement is engaged in any form of examination that a member of the public could not do in passing, then it’s a search, by definition.

    If we reduce the 6th Circuit’s argument to its absurb conclusion, then cameras could be installed outside every private home, trained on us 24/7, and we couldn’t complain. Nobody reasonably expects—or would tolerate—such monitoring.

  • On the post: UK Investigative Agencies Want To Be Able To Send Warrants To US Companies

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 08 Feb, 2016 @ 10:49am

    Constitutional warrant requirements

    If only we could harness the power from the rotational forces of the founding fathers collectively rolling over in their graves…

    Without probable cause, there is only a general warrant, which is unconstitutional. We have no business assisting in enforcing legal standards that differ from our own and which we abandoned as inferior.

  • On the post: Proposed Hungarian Law Would Allow Government To Suspend Key Human Rights Whenever There Is A 'Terror Threat Situation'

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 05 Feb, 2016 @ 08:10am

    Re:

    This. I can’t tell which is more dangerous—a government that wants to publicly and explicitly codify powers that take priority over those of its citizens’ rights into constitutional law, or the government that has planned in open secret to seize that same authority.

  • On the post: Cops Getting Free License Plate Readers In Exchange For 25% Of The 'Take' And All The Driver Data Vigilant Can Slurp

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 28 Jan, 2016 @ 12:37pm

    In other words...

    The officer then pulls the driver over and offers them a devil’s bargain: go to jail, or pay the original fine with an extra 25% processing fee tacked on

    So, extortion and usury?

  • On the post: BestNetTech Reading Club: The Boy Who Could Change The World: The Writings Of Aaron Swartz

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 08 Jan, 2016 @ 09:11am

    Re:

    Then again according to US law, even wget is a hacking tool if the stars align correctly.

    You may be correct, but I'm not aware of any official classification of wget as a hacking tool or of there being anything intrinsically illegal—or even detrimental—about it. It's described as a "command-line web browser," and it's the same utility that Mark Zuckerberg used on the road to building his Facebook empire. If a site honors a request for downloads, is that not tacit approval to do so?

  • On the post: Judge Helps Ensure That The More Ignorant Law Enforcement Officers Are, The More They'll Be Able To Get Away With

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 06 Jan, 2016 @ 09:05am

    Re: Speaking of probable cause...

    This is my question, as well. By staking out a gardening center's every customer for plate info, are they not already technically engaged in a mass warrantless search/seizure? Considering how many people garden as a hobby, it's a baseless presumption that a consumer at such a shop must be up to something illegal, and having the government tracking citizen whereabouts without a bona fide reason is not the intent of the 4th amendment.

  • On the post: Telekom Gets Smartwatch Maker To Change All Its Logos Because Magenta

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 19 Dec, 2015 @ 08:32am

    Evil triumphs, when good men (and even companies) do nothing

    A mere opposition notice prohibits disclosure? I thought a court had to issue a gag order or injunction. At any rate, this is silly; the two tints are discernibly different.

    OXY really should have challenged D.T. in a legal battle. They could probably have requested summary judgment against the trademark on the grounds that magenta doesn't even exist; it's a creation of the mind. http://boingboing.net/2009/02/16/magenta-isnt-a-real.html

  • On the post: Congressman Who Supports Undermining Encryption Says We Need CISA (Which Undermines Privacy) To 'Protect Privacy'

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 17 Dec, 2015 @ 03:29pm

    Our and we

    Schiff's use of "our" and "we" in the first block quote makes perfect sense, when you realize it refers to the privacy of the surveillance state, rather than that of the citizens. They would love to go back to the pre-Snowden days and not subject themselves to the intrusiveness of others knowing that they're doing all that pesky illegal spying. Everything the government does lately just further entrenches the whole apparatus.

  • On the post: Pepperidge Farm Sues Trader Joe's Because It Too Made A Cookie

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 11 Dec, 2015 @ 10:07am

    Does PF claim trademark on all shapes?

    Pepperidge Farms cookies come in myriad shapes; e.g. oval, braided, tubular, and round. Their Brussels cookie is basically a round Milano. Do they claim ownership of all these shapes? Many others have made similar looking cookies for decades, such as the Royal Dansk sugar cookies that get sold in tins. Some of Pepperidge Farms cookies bear a striking resemblance. Trademark violation!

  • On the post: James Comey, Dianne Feinstein Team Up To Mislead About Encryption; Promise Legislation To Undermine National Security

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 09 Dec, 2015 @ 04:03pm

    Asinine PlayStation hypothetical argument against encryption

    If the receiving party is in communication with someone via their PlayStation, then they obviously have both a copy of the message and the ability to read it. That person can assist in the investigation by turning over the console to the authorities. Someone on Slashdot pointed out that Feinstein's granddaughter is 26. If she still needs legal protection from pedophiles, perhaps she should look into using the built-in parental controls.

  • On the post: Court: Your Fourth And Fifth Amendment Rights No Longer Exist If You Leave The Country

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 28 Oct, 2015 @ 07:49am

    Re: Unintended consequences?

    The unintended consequence is that the rights of every American citizen are chilled. The respect for human rights is the only real inherent value of citizenship, and that appears to have been unawfully and unethically exchanged in the service of unsubstantiated national security claims and the perception—which appears to have been false, in this case—that someone is a terrorist. If you value your life, you don't dare consider travelling outside of the country.

  • On the post: Court Says USTR Can Continue To Keep The Public From Seeing The Trade Agreements They'll Be Subjected To

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 02 Oct, 2015 @ 08:15am

    Representation

    There is only one reason for a government to keep trade secrets from its people, and that is that the populace won't like what it sees. The fact that multiple branches of government are colluding to maintain a veil of secrecy is all the evidence needed to prove that they're selling somebody down the river and that they're actively denying those parties' ability to stop it.

    You can't be represented in something about which you don't know, and this flagrant denial of democractic participation mirrors—in degree—the events that sparked the American Revolution. There should be a no confidence vote against all government actors that participate in such shenanigans before civil unrest becomes a very real possibility.

  • On the post: One Man Troll Army Arrested For Supporting Terrorists: Where's The Line Between Trolling And Terrorism?

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 14 Sep, 2015 @ 01:42pm

    Satire or mental health issue?

    If this person is getting a thrill from stirring up the pot by pitting his own aliases against each other, that moves into personality disorder territory. Whatever pathology is behind trolling, it's not a crime. Make-believe is a free expression. I thought the TSA had the imaginary threat market cornered, but it looks like there aren't enough legitimate terrorists for the FBI to concern themselves with either.

  • On the post: Appeals Court Strikes Down Ruling Finding NSA Phone Records Collection Unconstitutional

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 28 Aug, 2015 @ 01:23pm

    Re: Illegitimate

    Correction: horseshit.

  • On the post: Appeals Court Strikes Down Ruling Finding NSA Phone Records Collection Unconstitutional

    MarcAnthony ( profile ), 28 Aug, 2015 @ 01:11pm

    Illegitimate

    But such is the nature of the government’s privileged control over certain classes of information. Plaintiffs must realize that secrecy is yet another form of regulation, prescribing not “what the citizen may do” but instead “what the citizen may know.”... Regulations of this sort may frustrate the inquisitive citizen but that does not make them illegal or illegitimate.”

    Asserting privileged, secret control over citizens in a supposed representative democracy can only lead to an inauspicious outcome. Such regulations are inherently illegitimate, as they don't jibe with the right to redress grievances. The judge's statement is totalitarian horsehit.

Next >>