Thursday, May 03, 2018
By definition, half the world is below average. But not everyone in the top half is above average in all areas.
59% of people use the same password everywhere, poll finds
… 91 percent of people know that password recycling poses huge security risks, yet 59 percent still use the same password everywhere.
… The firm polled 2,000 users across the United States, Australia, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, and found that people are more aware of security best practices, but don’t necessarily apply them.
For example, the number one reason for password reuse is fear of forgetfulness.
Reality: you can’t escape!
You Can’t Opt Out Of Sharing Your Data, Even If You Didn’t Opt In
The Golden State Killer, who terrorized Californians from Sacramento to Orange County over the course of a decade, committed his last known murder in 1986, the same year that DNA profiling was used in a criminal investigation for the first time. In that early case, officers convinced thousands of men to voluntarily turn over blood samples, building a genetic dragnet to search for a killer in their midst. The murderer was eventually identified by his attempts to avoid giving up his DNA. In contrast, suspected Golden State Killer Joseph James DeAngelo, who was apprehended just last week, was found through other people’s DNA — samples taken from the crime scenes were matched to the profiles his distant relatives had uploaded to a publicly accessible genealogy website.
You can see the rise of a modern privacy conundrum in the 32 years between the first DNA case and DeAngelo’s arrest.
… individuals need to worry about another kind of privacy violation. I think of it as a modern tweak on the tragedy of the commons — call it “privacy of the commons.” It’s what happens when one person’s voluntary disclosure of personal information exposes the personal information of others who had no say in the matter. Your choices didn’t cause the breach. Your choices can’t prevent it, either. Welcome to a world where you can’t opt out of sharing, even if you didn’t opt in.
Something to think about?
Text Messages Are Property: Why You Don’t Own Your Text Messages, But It’d Be a Lot Cooler If You Did
Howden, Spence, Text Messages Are Property: Why You Don’t Own Your Text Messages, But It’d Be a Lot Cooler If You Did (March 2, 2018). Washington & Lee Law Review, 2019, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3157359
“Courts have yet to consider whether text messages are property, but they will soon. As our lives become more and more centered around our smartphones, text messages will displace e-mails as the primary means of electronic communication (if that hasn’t already happened). We currently don’t have an effective means of recourse available should our cellular providers purposefully block or delete our text messages. The answer lies in property law. This Note argues that text messages are intangible personal property, which leads to two practical outcomes. First, text message “owners” can successfully sue using property-based causes of action (e.g., trespass to chattels and conversion) when their ownership rights over their text messages are disturbed by the service provider or cell phone manufacturer. Although there have been few legal challenges brought by aggrieved text message owners, they have been universally unsuccessful in causing cellular providers to change their ways. Had these aggrieved text message owners sued under a property-based cause of action, they would have successfully enjoined the cellular providers from continuing to mess with their text messages. Second, a judicial determination that text messages constitute intangible personal property will close the third-party loophole. As it stands, the government is free to search the contents of our text messages because we have voluntarily conveyed the information to our cellular service providers. However, if courts find that text messages constitute a form of property, an encrypted text message starts to look more and more like a sealed letter than public information. The framers designed the Fourth Amendment to prevent unwarranted searches and seizures of the dominant form of communication of their day: sealed letters. Consequently, it only makes sense to extend the Fourth Amendment’s protection to the dominant form of communication today: encrypted text messages.
If Amazon isn’t impressed, it’s likely others won’t be either.
'Hi, it's Amazon calling. Here's what we don't like in your city.'
Amazon.com has made about 200 phone calls to cities the retail giant rejected for its second headquarters. Some of the cities say they are learning from the disappointing phone conversations and making changes.
Cincinnati and Sacramento, Calif., are restructuring workforce development programs to focus on tech talent. Orlando, Fla., is considering starting a community fund to invest in local tech companies and draw more entrepreneurs. In Detroit, elected officials and business leaders are pushing a ballot initiative for a new regional transportation network that would connect outer counties to the city.
Have an idea. Research. Execute.
This College Professor Makes More Money in One Day From Instagram Than in Two Months Teaching. Here Are Her Secrets to Success
So, are movie theaters doomed?