johSho7w

6 ms·

1.
by johSho7w 16y ago
> without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him See, the problem is that according to the law you quoted simply picking up and taking the lost phone home is itself not equivalent t
2.
by johSho7w 16y ago
It means that the DA and Jobs are buddies. Simple as that.
3.
by johSho7w 16y ago
It's not bias when an organization that believes bloggers are journalists makes a statement that it believes bloggers are journalists.
4.
by johSho7w 16y ago
That's interesting, but I don't think that's what positr0n was describing. The Washington Post reporter describes Gawker's work repeatedly as journalism. Even the photograph caption uses "Gawker Web site reporter" to mean blogger. It does
5.
by johSho7w 16y ago
How's that a conflict of interest? It's valid context, but in what ways are EFF obligations in conflict?
6.
by johSho7w 16y ago
Do you have any sort of specific criteria for what is considered a journalist? It seems like the discussion here tends to equate journalists with reporters and then speculate to what extent Chen should be considered a reporter. The problem
7.
by johSho7w 16y ago
I think a bigger question is whether the warrant would have been issued/executed against his home if he didn't work from home. Somehow I doubt the DA would have had the balls to raid Gawker's offices over this.
8.
by johSho7w 16y ago
This same old tripe again. Did Gizmodo return the phone to Apple immediately when Apple finally admitted it was theirs? Did Gizmodo demand payment from Apple in return for the phone? Did Gizmodo ever dispute Apple's claim to the phone? I
9.
by johSho7w 16y ago
Are you talking about trade secrets or theft? Gizmodo never disputed that the phone was Apple's property and they returned it to Apple as soon as Apple claimed it. If Gizmodo physically damaged the phone they should be responsible for the d
10.
by johSho7w 16y ago
The question is the difference in public response at the two cases. Just FYI for the ESLs and reading-comprehension-impaired.
11.
by johSho7w 16y ago
If you lose your wallet and assume that credit card numbers are not compromised you're an idiot. Are you saying Gizmodo refused to return the phone to Apple claiming it was now their own property? Or that Gizmodo demanded reimbursement from
12.
by johSho7w 16y ago
So, how exactly is it necessary to test the phone while the user is inebriated with access to the public? They couldn't host a private party for that? Test it at workers houses? Why is access to the public so vital? It's not. If Apple condo
13.
by johSho7w 16y ago
If these secrets are so valuable maybe Apple should rethink its policy of letting them walk out the door to go to a bar.
14.
by johSho7w 16y ago
If Apple is claiming trade secret protection, they need to demonstrate that they attempted to protect the secret. Apple authorized taking the phone into the public. These "secrets" were not taken from the Apple campus or workplace.
15.
by johSho7w 16y ago
If a company can't keep its own secrets it should be their problem. We give protections to patents and copyrights for a reason.
16.
by johSho7w 16y ago
...and here I was thinking about X11 authority. Silly me.
17.
by johSho7w 16y ago
Not to mention that Apple had just burned Adobe with the whole ditching Copland fiasco. I'm sure Adobe was thinking, "Oh, sure yet another framework from Apple." Also, remember at the time Apple was promising windows availability of OpenSte
18.
by johSho7w 16y ago
Don't you usually pay more for the "professional" cameras or the "professional" phones. Apple seems to play it the other way. Charging more for the dumber hardware.
19.
by johSho7w 16y ago
Are you saying they are supposed to leave the baby attached to the placenta while the afterbirth is delivered? I would imagine that remaining attached to the afterbirth as it is delivered is an infection and antigen exposure risk for both t
20.
by johSho7w 16y ago
And yet: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34149853/
21.
by johSho7w 16y ago
After the cord is clamped, how is the blood on the other side expected to get into the baby?
22.
by johSho7w 16y ago
The problem with He is also why it's so useful--it doesn't react with anything. It's a bitch to filter because the only strategy you have is to get rid of everything else.
23.
by johSho7w 17y ago
How does anyone decide to trust mint.com? It gives me the security hebbie-jebbies and all their claims of security assurances make the jebbies worse. They're still storing accounts and passwords in a form that can be recovered as plain text
24.
by johSho7w 17y ago
Well, they do have hardware to seize a running server without shutting it down (by splicing into the power cables/power lines at the wall plate and introducing battery power). How secure is a running machine sitting in a forensic lab? If yo
25.
by johSho7w 17y ago
I was skeptical but I'm really swayed by a victory that occured six years prior to the PATRIOT act.