lol, it was a 2-1 ruling, and the third judge (appointed by Bush 1) wanted to put no limit at all on the jail time.
This guy seems to be a pedo. Yet as H.L. Mencken said, if you want to defend justice, the unfortunate fact is that most of the time you will be defending scoundrels. Because rest assured that they try things on pedos first, who have sympathy from no one except the deep state, and then move to dissidents.
He's definitely a pedo. They already found CP on devices that they were able to access. But yeah, this is an awful precedent, and it sounds like it goes against previous 5th amendment jurisprudence that demanding passwords is self incrimination but biometric data is fair game (I don't know how they came up with that one).
In the interest of defending scoundrels, the evidence presented is a sister snitch claiming he openly showed her all of it (which doesn't mesh well against a guy smart enough to encrypt his shit on an external), and a handful of pictures "focusing" on the genitals of his niece. Which isn't CP and can simply be badly taken pictures among hundreds of shots unless you can prove the intent was pornographic.
Which they can't or else they already would have. The article makes it clear that they don't really have anything strong enough to make a case on, which is why they were so adamant about the drives.
Like, I'm sure he probably is a pedo based on all the smoke. But so far the only "damning" evidence is them telling us a bunch of clothed photos of a family member were totally uncouth bro just trust us. Which isn't enough for me to even say a court case was ready to be brought.
Color printers, yes. Still quite visible with a blacklight and a loupe. Black and white printers may have their own constellation embedded in the dithering but EFF is no longer a friend to computing freedom so they might just be keeping quiet about news on the subject in alliance with other leftist orgs.
I'm thinking of the sure-to-happen future where any file produced by your computer will be cryptographically signed with identification marks about the computer. Files lacking the signature will wind up being the odd ones out that won't load, or get flagged by applications that send files (or sites that host them).
Yeah, how on Earth doesn't this violate the 5th ammendment?
Particularily if they haven't proved you were the one to encrypt the drive (randomware etc), unlocking it would show that you encrypted it and thus incriminate you for anything found on it.
The only reason I said 'seems to be' is because all the article contained was government claims. And while I have no reason to believe that they're lying in this case, I can't totally rule it out either.
They don't usually ask for passwords these days. They seize the electronic and file warrants to use Cellebrite until they finally get a warrant approved.
Because rest assured that they try things on pedos first, who have sympathy from no one except the deep state, and then move to dissidents.
Absolutely nailed it. And too many people are like, “well, I don’t mind if they do it to THOSE people…”
I’m honestly super worried about how easily people accepted the idea of sex offender registries. I get the impetus behind that support, absolutely, but now the public is primed to support the next type of registry.
lol, it was a 2-1 ruling, and the third judge (appointed by Bush 1) wanted to put no limit at all on the jail time.
This guy seems to be a pedo. Yet as H.L. Mencken said, if you want to defend justice, the unfortunate fact is that most of the time you will be defending scoundrels. Because rest assured that they try things on pedos first, who have sympathy from no one except the deep state, and then move to dissidents.
He's definitely a pedo. They already found CP on devices that they were able to access. But yeah, this is an awful precedent, and it sounds like it goes against previous 5th amendment jurisprudence that demanding passwords is self incrimination but biometric data is fair game (I don't know how they came up with that one).
In the interest of defending scoundrels, the evidence presented is a sister snitch claiming he openly showed her all of it (which doesn't mesh well against a guy smart enough to encrypt his shit on an external), and a handful of pictures "focusing" on the genitals of his niece. Which isn't CP and can simply be badly taken pictures among hundreds of shots unless you can prove the intent was pornographic.
Which they can't or else they already would have. The article makes it clear that they don't really have anything strong enough to make a case on, which is why they were so adamant about the drives.
Like, I'm sure he probably is a pedo based on all the smoke. But so far the only "damning" evidence is them telling us a bunch of clothed photos of a family member were totally uncouth bro just trust us. Which isn't enough for me to even say a court case was ready to be brought.
It's the typical MO. Heinous crime of indefensible nature exploited to violate rights of everyone else.
Of course the government has to be able to scan all your files, because CP!
Of course the government can force you to break your encryption, because CP!
Eventually it'll be:
Of course the government has to force manufacturers to embed serial number watermarks in your content, because CP!
Of course the government has to install video cameras in your house, because CP!
Don't printers already print a secret watermark, or is that an urban legend? It's not as if people are actually printing that garbage (I assume).
Color printers, yes. Still quite visible with a blacklight and a loupe. Black and white printers may have their own constellation embedded in the dithering but EFF is no longer a friend to computing freedom so they might just be keeping quiet about news on the subject in alliance with other leftist orgs.
I'm thinking of the sure-to-happen future where any file produced by your computer will be cryptographically signed with identification marks about the computer. Files lacking the signature will wind up being the odd ones out that won't load, or get flagged by applications that send files (or sites that host them).
https://www.eff.org/issues/printers
Yeah, how on Earth doesn't this violate the 5th ammendment?
Particularily if they haven't proved you were the one to encrypt the drive (randomware etc), unlocking it would show that you encrypted it and thus incriminate you for anything found on it.
The only reason I said 'seems to be' is because all the article contained was government claims. And while I have no reason to believe that they're lying in this case, I can't totally rule it out either.
They don't usually ask for passwords these days. They seize the electronic and file warrants to use Cellebrite until they finally get a warrant approved.
Absolutely nailed it. And too many people are like, “well, I don’t mind if they do it to THOSE people…”
I’m honestly super worried about how easily people accepted the idea of sex offender registries. I get the impetus behind that support, absolutely, but now the public is primed to support the next type of registry.
I do support sex offender registries - do see how European countries don't have them, even though they crack down more on political speech.
I think no fly lists are a more proximate reason. Sounds great, until you're put on one for no reason at all.