halviti

This differs from stories that I've heard, like how they used a plainclothes female agent yelling at him to throw him off so they could grab his laptop.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/dead-end-on-silk-ro...

Why leave out these details, I wonder? It makes for a much better story.

Also, this article leaves out all of the details on how they found him. Presumably the FBI found the server from the unsecured captcha page... but these claims have been shown to be false

http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/10/silk-road-lawyers-poke-ho...

Which still leaves everyone wondering how the FBI legally found the server in the first place.

This is the part of the story that I would like to see more about.

This is correct. I actually contacted Filezilla's developer (Tim Kosse) regarding this several months ago, and he let me know that this bundling was intentional on the part of Filezilla.

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

-Hermann Göring at the Nuremberg trials

I thought it was emoticons at first. Now I can see the title.

Works fine on chrome for mac, doesn't work on chrome for windows.

For people like me who enjoy a non-electronic way to organize all of this, I've found bullet journaling to be very helpful

http://bulletjournal.com/

go back to reddit.

For me, the fact that Microsoft worked directly with the FBI to integrate OneDrive into PRISM makes the whole product something I would never touch, so it's great to see alternatives picking up the slack.

http://cryptome.org/2014/11/ms-onedrive-nsa-prism.htm

The FBI was shown to be lying about the captcha story.

http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/10/silk-road-lawyers-poke-ho...

Not according to the article. Belkin claims that it was a problem with the server they used to allow the router to check for internet connectivity.

If it comes out that Belkin is actually routing their users through their own DNS, I would hope it would be a huge privacy scandal.

There is no reason for them to run a DNS infrastructure for their clients, and doing so provides them no direct benefit, has no clear applications for building routers at all, costs money to maintain, and is a huge point of failure.

I can't imagine them doing such a thing for a few advertising dollars.. the only reason a router company would do that is if they were paid by the government or something. This way Belkin could reroute your internet traffic through whoever's servers whenever they wanted, and you would likely never know.

Anyway, that sounds a bit far-fetched, so I'm going to hope that Belkin is telling the truth.

It's likely the biggest power drain because of processor consumption because many people spend a lot of time on a laptop on the internet.

Further, if you read the article, you'd know that this problem does not affect macs.

Please don't comment unless you have something to contribute other than an unsupported opinion.

Payment processors like bitpay put cash right into bank accounts, and people at newegg will likely never even deal with a single bitcoin themselves.

If you're sorry a business has found another way to make money with little effort, you're probably not the audience for this forum.

Everything I have read seems to suggest that the problem is not with the product and more with the individual and what happens when you allow something to cover your skin and never take it off for a long period of time. The larger surface area of the force being the biggest problem.

I don't think a recall taking a few months is extreme, as an investigation into what is causing a medical problem might not be the easiest thing in the entire world, not to mention the fact that it just takes time to investigate period. I'm also sure that the decision to stop selling them entirely and to ask everyone to return them, likely to have them never be sold again, is not something that is often decided at a moment's notice because someone complained on an internet forum.

Since we're being pedantic, many cities have different rules for what is allowed in a front yard vs. a back yard, which may actually be the problem... this often leads to the occasional news story about the town that forces someone to remove a garden in their front lawn, etc.

It doesn't matter how common it is.

You never steal focus from the user, unless you're designing a system to purposefully interrupt someone.

Because I use the translate feature all the time! I don't want it gone!

Here's a simple example for you:

Bob lives in Norway, but doesn't know perfect Norwegian.

He likes that google chrome/translate helps him read Norwegian webpages.

Bob is always losing focus on his cursor because of the translate feature, it's even bothering him on websites in his native language due to all of the region based advertising.

You're telling Bob that he should disable the option to translate Norwegian web pages, even though he reads them daily, and doesn't speak the language.

Now do you see the problem?

To be perfectly clear, this was not a problem when the translate option showed at the top of the page, but is a problem with the new "pop-up" style they are using which steals focus from the user.

It would also be nice if this were a standard option and not just one that appears randomly when the auto-detect succeeds.

Although the change from a top bar to a full-on pop-up box likely had to do with visibility, the biggest problem is that it now steals focus from the user.

I don't care where the option is on the screen as long as it's not randomly taking my cursor away from the webpage I'm trying to use.

To those people who don't browse the internet in multiple languages, allow me to elaborate.

With the new translate popup, you have to acknowledge it before you can continue typing. This means always having to press escape or cancel randomly when browsing the majority of webpages you visit.

Worse, the popup only shows after the page is fully loaded, so if you are browsing a page that is slow to load for whatever reason, you're sure to get interrupted in the middle of whatever you are doing, and if you were typing something, you aren't anymore because you just lost focus.

Now imagine this behavior on nearly every webpage.

My options are to disable the translate feature, which I use quite a bit, or to just put up with a crappy user experience, which is what I've been doing.

If you live in an English speaking country and only visit the occasional foreign website, you're likely never to notice this problem.

The request to stop advertising and stop using IKEA's name are exactly what happened.

The only things you are adding are:

(1) Suggesting a multibillion dollar coroporation license its trademark to a stranger on the internet for free.

(2) Suggesting a company that is being infringed on host the infringing website.

(3) Suggesting a company give away insider information and free product as some sort of reward for using their company name to make money for themselves.

I'm just trying to be playful when I say that you have the negotiating skills of a 12-year-old, but seriously, nobody on Earth would agree to those terms or suggest them outright.

Do this. Make a website called McDonald's burgers, use the McDonald's logo everywhere, and then put up a bunch of burger recipes and google ads.

Let me know when you get a bunch of free stuff from McDonalds and they start hosting your website. ;)

Redirecting the domain is probably a grey area, that as long as it doesn't draw too much attention, can probably go under the radar.

The big difference from the current situation is that he/she will need to redo the website to stop using IKEA logos and the IKEA name. I mean if you look at the site, it would be very difficult for someone to determine whether or not this was actually a branch, offshoot, or official project of IKEA, of which it is none.

They are making money by using someone else's name, and that's the problem.

I'm sure IKEA loves the idea of people experimenting with their furniture, but every company on the planet knows you can't give your trademark away, or you lose it.

IKEA handled this admirably, if you think otherwise, you should attempt to qualify your opinion, otherwise it's meaningless and adds nothing to the conversation.

If you understand even the basics of trademark law, you know that if IKEA were to do nothing at all in this case, that they would risk losing their IKEA trademark.

That's a fairly big price to pay, just to allow someone else to make money using the brand name the company spent decades building.

The fact that they were even willing to negotiate shows the company actually cared about the individual and wanted to try to come to a compromise that would suit both parties without involving a lawsuit.

In the end the author of the website shows everyone that money is what's most important to them, and that's their decision.

That's a silly analogy.

The government has already stated that bitcoin is property, and they are treating it like any other legal property, selling it just like they would sell seized cars or houses.

You really want bitcoin to be on the same level as illegal narcotics? Why?

It appears that there has likely been some sort of data breach, however it's worth noting that the phishing e-mails do not attempt to identify users by name, and the simple fact that they are asking for passwords likely indicates that the attackers do not have them.

Best guess is that the database of some bulk e-mail service was somehow compromised.

You might be interested to know that there was an Amendment to the Constitution that was only one state short of being approved that attempted to address this problem early.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_State...

War has gone on for as long as civilization has been around, it is not an extraordinary concept.

The mole hunt is a great thought.

It simultaneously gets rid of people that leak to the press as well as anyone working for the company that hears something like that and not only believes it, but doesn't speak out against it.

Security theater. Providing an illusion of security while acclimatizing the public to encroachments on their personal freedoms.

I'm more angry that hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars are spent to train a workforce to identify tubes of toothpaste on a screen, but anyone at an airport that wants a knife can just order a steak from an airport restaurant.

It makes me sad that the public can tolerate such ignorance and waste.

Google already had a solid youtube competitor. The primary reason for the acquisition was not for the userbase, but rather because youtube was being sued by the entertainment industry, and by google stepping in to take over and fight the legal battle, they managed to preserve the future of online video.

It was definitely the right move, but this situation can't be compared to the WhatsApp acquisition.

I use double spaces. Maybe I invented bitcoin?

Facebook was caught red handed profiling literally everyone on the internet.

Every website that you ever visited with a "like" button, even porn sites. They compiled all of that information about "you" via cookies they put on your computer.