Jump to content
 
Sign in to follow this  
kuhla

If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear.

Recommended Posts

Malaphax   

While I understand that is massively intrusive it's also absolutely retarded that anyone would willingly subject themselves to that. If someone told me I needed to give full admin access to my computer in order to sit for an interview, I would ask if I could schedule this interview in person and if they declined I wouldn't pursue it further.

 

Anecdotally I've heard Amazon is garbage to work for. They work you to death and because of their highly competitive ranking systems, the internal politics are toxic and full of soulless people willing to throw you under the bus in an attempt to get ahead. Not that these exact conditions aren't prevalent at other corporations, but I've heard Amazon can be especially bad.

 

The actual merits of a "test interview" like this are complete shit. I've heard some people suggest a "working interview" where you hire the candidate as a temporary contractor for a week (maybe 2) and see if they can perform some of the tasks expected. This system makes far more sense than some sort of automated test proctored by a third party and done in "sterile" conditions.

 

The unfortunate reality that any manager faces is that you will not have a perfect success rate in picking qualified people. I've heard that most hiring managers average 60-70% chance of hiring a qualified candidate. If your new employee ends up being unqualified/poor fit, logic says you should quickly address the issue and move on. Sadly we all know that doesn't happen either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kuhla   

source - http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/child-porn-suspect-jailed-for-7-months-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives/

 

 

[....]

 

The suspect, a former Philadelphia Police Department sergeant, has not been charged with any child porn crimes. Instead, he remains indefinitely imprisoned in Philadelphia's Federal Detention Center for refusing to unlock two drives encrypted with Apple's FileVault software in a case that once again highlights the extent to which the authorities are going to crack encrypted devices. The man is to remain jailed "until such time that he fully complies" with the decryption order.

 

[....] [more at source]

 

 

 

Encryption is a crime. That's it.

 

This same story is still going.

 

source - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/man-jailed-indefinitely-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives-loses-appeal/

 

 

On Monday, a US federal appeals court sided against a former Philadelphia police officer who has been in jail 17 months because he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. He had refused to comply with a court order commanding him to unlock two hard drives the authorities say contain child porn.

....

 

In deciding against Rawls, the court of appeals found that the constitutional rights against being compelled to testify against oneself were not being breached. That's because the appeals court, like the police, agreed that the presence of child porn on his drives was a "foregone conclusion." The Fifth Amendment, at its most basic level, protects suspects from being forced to disclose incriminating evidence. In this instance, however, the authorities said they already know there's child porn on the drives, so Rawls' constitutional rights aren't compromised.

....

 

"We already know there is ___________ on there. It's a foregone conclusion. Fifth Amendment does not apply. Give us the files or stay in jail indefinitely."

 

Encryption is a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kuhla   
On 3/27/2017 at 3:26 PM, kuhla said:

 

This same story is still going.

source - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/man-jailed-indefinitely-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives-loses-appeal/

"We already know there is ___________ on there. It's a foregone conclusion. Fifth Amendment does not apply. Give us the files or stay in jail indefinitely."

Encryption is a crime.

source - http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article153373524.html

Quote

 

A Hollywood man must serve 180 days in jail for refusing to give up his iPhone password to police, a Broward judge ruled Tuesday — the latest salvo in intensifying legal battles over law-enforcement access to smart phones.
....

Wheeler will eventually be allowed to post bond pending an appeal. If he gives up a working pass code, he’ll be allowed out of jail, Judge Rothschild told him.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kuhla   

source - https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/why-are-dc-police-keeping-their-body-cameras-during-inauguration-and-womens-march

Quote

 

Why Are DC Police Keeping Their Body Cameras Off During Inauguration and the Women’s March?
....
It’s not an ACLU “demand,” it’s actually DC law. True, the ACLU of DC supported and encouraged adoption of that law, but the wider District of Columbia community as represented by its city council agreed with us. And that law is not absolute; in its full form it says that:

    MPD officers may record First Amendment assemblies for the purpose of documenting violations of law and police actions, as an aid to future coordination and deployment of law enforcement units, and for training purposes; provided, that recording First Amendment assemblies shall not be conducted for the purpose of identifying and recording the presence of individual participants who are not engaged in unlawful conduct.
....
Such concerns are why the ACLU recommends (including in our model legislation) that police department adopt a policy against the taking of video of people who are merely exercising their First Amendment rights.

Of course, none of this means that the police cannot turn on their cameras during the inauguration or march if something goes down. The policy of the DC police, like most, stipulates that officers are to turn their cameras when engaged in “police actions” such as calls for service, pursuits, searches, stops, etc. Thus, if a fight breaks out, or some larger disturbance, the cameras would go on.
....

 

Much more in the article.

I kind of understand what they are saying, it does seem like a fairly relevant privacy issue, but I feel like you have to pick the lesser of two evils here. I'm a fan of body cameras and generally think they do more good than harm. Requiring that they be turned on and off for this reason seems to open up a huge can of worms. Is there a master on and off switch? Who decides what activities qualify for on and off? What if something short-and-fast occures while it was turned off for the cited reason and now there is no record then who made a mistake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kuhla   

source - http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Says-It-May-Soon-Charge-You-Extra-For-Privacy-139840

Quote

 

....

AT&T was heavily criticized for the move, and ultimately stopped charging the extra fees -- but only to help secure regulatory approval for its Time Warner merger.

....

But with AT&T getting every indication that its latest massive merger will be approved by Trump...
....

In a an interview on C-SPAN, AT&T Senior Vice President Bob Quinn was quick to acknowledge that the idea wasn't popular among consumer advocates and customers.

"We got an enormous amount of criticism from privacy advocates when we rolled out, in Austin, Texas, an ad-supported Internet service...Privacy advocates screamed about that," said Quinn.
....

"As the privacy revolution evolves, I think people are going to want more control, and maybe that's the pricing model that's ultimately what consumers want," said Quinn, who repeatedly tried to insist this was simply "ad-supported Internet service" that the company would be revisiting eventually.
....

Also note that while paying this additional money stopped you from seeing targeted ads, it didn't even truly stop AT&T from collecting this data.

 

Welp. Guess it's time to setup my browser at home to stay on proxy 24/7. I guess I'll try to set that up tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Malaphax   

Report back if you can get it to work properly.  When I initially looked into this, I ran into multiple issues regarding their VPN/proxy plugins not supporting the same connection type and authentication as PIA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Malaphax   

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41008141

Quote

Flock's sensor, which it offers for $50 a year per house, logs the number plates of every car that drives into a street and takes a picture. The sensor could eventually provide facial recognition.

Residents of monitored neighbourhoods can opt-out of being tracked - but visitors, or people passing through, cannot.

A privacy expert said he believed the data collection to be legal according to US law, but that the idea could ignite a debate about the "right to be left alone in public”.

“One of the great weaknesses in US privacy law is that we only protect against intrusions into private areas, not public spaces,” said Albert Gidari, director of privacy at Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society.

Well I guess it was only a matter of time for the private citizenry to get in on the action.  I suppose it's only fair that anybody can collect as much data as possible as long as it's "in public."
Sadly no politician will touch stuff like this because it could be construed as being "weak on crime" or some such nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kuhla   

More from a technical point of view but that systems seems like it would be severely undermined by a huge amount of false positives which I would define as unique visitor in non-sensitive area but non-malicious activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Malaphax   

I think it's more focused on logging than for prevention.  They briefly mentioned that it "caught" one thief, but if no crimes were committed I doubt they'd have any reason to check their logs.  However if there was a crime you'd have a record of all non-residents and could even look back in records to see if the suspect cased the place before burgling it.  I expect these things to be heavily marketed to gated communities and other places with heavy HOA influence. 

I know there's no legal issues with this, but it rubs me the wrong way that governments and private citizens would record my face and license plate just while I'm driving around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kuhla   

It kind of makes me think about the theme of technology rushing way ahead of society and laws like one issue that was described in one near-future novel I was reading where people had the ability to build drugs/compounds at home from almost raw material so many people, who simply ignored the laws and did it quietly, practically had their own pharmacy at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×