This breach has already been confirmed by the big processors, and seems to be larger in scope than prior breaches.
Verizon’s iPhone Commercials Are So Snarky, You’d Think They’ve Been Stuck on AT&T For the Last 4 Years
Once again, Verizon isn't pulling any punches. I caught this commercial during the SuperBowl. Though there are actual differences between the iPhones sold on At&T and Verizon networks -- some favoring Verizon, and at least one, that I know of, favoring AT&T -- Verizon has chosen to make it all about The Network.
Similar Blog & News Articles
- Verizon iPhone 4 Commercial Out! So It's Very Real Indeed :: Startup Meme
- Verizon iPhone Commercial: "Yes, I can hear you now" :: OS X Daily
- Verizon takes aim at AT&T, releases "Yes, I can hear you now" iPhone commercial :: Gadgetell
- New AT&T iPhone Commercial "Talk & Surf" Fires Back at Verizon :: OS X Daily
- 7 Reasons to Stick with the AT&T iPhone :: Livescience.com - Technology
I recently had another occasion to meet with Reporter Martin Kaste from NPR's "All Things Considered". Last time we met to play a game of cat-and-mouse in the streets of San Francisco to demonstrate the current state of cellular telephone and wireless device tracking. This time we discussed an issue closer to my heart.
"Right now, anybody is just one search term and a click on Google away from most of the same files that I have seen as part of my work," he says.
Fischbach believes the easy-to-find images are a kind of public hazard.
He worked for one defendant who went to prison because of one night of ill-advised Web surfing. The easy-to-find images are also tempting weapons in messy custody battles and divorces — he's convinced that in some of the cases he's worked on, one spouse has been framed by another. All of this makes Fischbach wonder why more isn't done to block some of the more obvious sources of these "radioactive" files.
"It's the same thing as any other public nuisance. Part of the government's job is not just to go out there and stop people from doing bad things, but to stop good people from having to fall victim to that," he says.
It's probably not constitutional for the government to block offending Web sites outright, but Fischbach says Internet service providers and search engines could volunteer to filter the images that reach their customers, just as e-mail providers filter out known viruses.
He's been suggesting this idea for years, and now somebody is trying it.
Audio and transcript: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129526579
Similar Wikipedia Articles
One body. One suspect. Two theories. A laptop. A birdcage. A bloody crime scene. Two trials. Two hung juries. No convictions. One unsolved mystery.
From Investigation Discovery:
"When a beloved music professor -- David Stagg -- discovers the dead body of his long-time partner, Bill Jennings, he claims he's walked into the aftermath of a tragic suicide. But as investigators descend on the scene, they immediately realize that this reported suicide is clearly a homicide. Is it possible the professor is behind this vicious crime, or has he been falsely accused? The forensic experts on each side battle it out. Which side will you agree with?" (60 min. - First aired 9/14/2009 on Investigation Discovery / Discovery ID's "Forensics: You Decide)
Friends from the couple's active social group were in total disbelief. Few could imagine David Stagg involved in the murder of his long-time partner. Forensic evidence was inconclusive. Though blood evidence was found throughout the crime scene, no blood or defensive wounds could be found on David Stagg. An unknown set of fingerprints were found at the scene. Computer evidence from Jennings' laptop showed--at least from Jennings' perspective--a tumultuous relationship. But, enough to justify a motive for murder?
There were also a series of suicidal emails and typed letters left by Jennings that charted a history of both love for Stagg, and deep emotional turmoil. And, one final letter--typed on April 24, 2004, the night of the murder--would become one of the most contested pieces of evidence that two juries would have to consider.
On one thing, both sides agreed: Bill Jennings did not take his own life. ... CONTINUE READING »
How German filmmakers hijacked part of California, stole its identity, and used it to scam an entire country.
I think I've finally figured out the origin of the expression, "If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you": Bluewater, California.
The "bridge" to which I refer crosses the Colorado River, and connects Bluewater, California with its sister-city, Bluewater, Arizona. According to the city's web site, downtown Bluewater offers a range of bars and restaurants where you can dine on seafood fished from local waters, get locally-grown produce from the Farmer's Market every Wednesday and Saturday, and enjoy summer poetry in the park.
Similar Blog & News Articles
News Corp.'s (NWS) Rupert Murdoch is mad--perhaps literally and figuratively. Presumably, billions of dollars in losses will have that effect on a person. Not surprisingly, he's looking for ways to stop the bleeding--or, he's just looking for revenge. It's hard to tell.
First, he's ordered an end to the free ride. That means, no more free online news. Yes, FoxNews.com too. (Hey, that's fair and balanced, right?) Then, he negotiated with Amazon.com, a higher revenue share for Wall Street Journal electronic Kindle subscriptions. And, finally, he issued an ultimatum: Give us the names of Kindle subscribers, or we walk.
During his fiscal-year-end earnings call with analysts, Murdoch said, "...we don't get the names of the subscribers. Kindle treats them as their subscribers, not as ours, and I think that will eventually cause a break with us."
Murdoch also made it clear that News Corp had no intention of competing with the Kindle e-reader, but instead stressed the need for News Corp properties to "return to their old margins of profitability... Quality journalism is not cheap, and an industry that gives away its content is simply cannibalizing its ability to produce good reporting."
Still, Kindle subscribers have already been paying for the Wall Street Journal, despite the fact that The Wall Street Journal Online has been giving away the same content for free. But, apparently, Murdoch is willing to give up that revenue for what appears to be a turf-war over the ownership of personal subscriber data.
The whole fight begs the question: Do Kindle owners see themselves as Amazon subscribers or Wall Street Journal Subscribers, and--in the end--does it matter how they see themselves?
As for Murdoch's state of mind: Is he howling mad, or is he crazy like a Fox News Host? That remains to be seen. But, if he messes with Amazon subscribers, I pity the fool.
Similar Blog & News Articles
- News Corp may charge for Web news; blasts Amazon :: Reuters: Technology News
- Rupert Murdoch has it all wrong about fee-based web content :: BloggingStocks
- Murdoch: Bye Bye Free :: Andy Beal's Marketing Pilgrim
- News Corp. Mogul Cries 'Charge!' for Online News :: BusinessWeek.com -- Technology
- Murdoch signals end of free news :: BBC News | Business | World Edition