Police have to return material to Dotcom
stuff.co.nz
stuff.co.nz
New Zealand has a strong history of standing up to the big bully, I sincerely hope it continues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand%27s_nuclear-free_zo...
These have all been in the last National Governments term yet you insist on using an example from the 70's that shows how we stuck it to the man...
ahahaha, have fun sifting through 25 petabytes of data!
As I've said before, I really wonder how much of that data really is copyrighted content (of course, just about all data is copyrighted in a manner, legally speaking, what I mean is stuff that the RIAA/MPAA have a copyright claim to, who are behind this international shakedown). Perhaps we'll find out, and if not I'd be very interested in the numbers because I can't seem to find a way to make them add up to something in the ballpark of 25PB.
As far as I understand this ruling is about his personal data, confiscated when they raided his house.
It's like they have a court order that tells them to spend their day watching porn.
This is NOT true, of course. It will be done at tax-payers expense. And Chief of Police is probably happy -- next financial year most people will forget about this raid and he has a good reason to ask for more money, because, you know, capturing criminals gets more expensive...
Obnoxious.
The most appropriate and effective punishment is to find the people who are most responsible and should have shut the whole thing down (eg, the Chief), fire them, and pursue any appropriate civil or criminal charges against them.
If the grunts take a pay cut and the cars go an extra year before being replaced, the Chief may still choose to do the same thing again. If you're the Replacement Chief for the Chief who was sacked and sued, you might reconsider...
The judicial branch may or may not have some responsibility, as its their job to interpret the law and use some degree of judgement.
But ultimately this is the laws created by the legislative branch, and it appears this is the executive branch pushing through some agenda at behest of the US.
I do think the policeman has the responsibility for some level of personal professional conduct, i on the other hand do not want the police to have the full authority to chose to disregard the judicial and executive branches of government because they dont agree with a law
It's the last piece of hardware I would want to connect to my system.
It's because of stories like this that I keep hidden secret offsite offline backups, that only I know about and you would have to torture me to get that info. That way when your entire business is squished from the judicial system of a different country based on the behaviors of a person you don't even know, at least you can salvage what you have and try to pivot and get your stolen income streams back while you enter a 7 year legal battle where you win.
You have to plan for hurricanes knocking out your individual data centers, and you have to plan for legal hurricanes that knock out ALL your data centers. It's part of the new world. You have to be able to replicate, or else the mafia don walks into your shop, and you have to do everything they say.
With prior preparation, you can tell the don you are not interested in his insurance, and then buckle down for the legal/illegal hurricane coming your way.
On a home setting a closet would be a good place to hide it and shield any sound from the hard driver or fans.
A friend of mine is running the same setup plus a Plex Media Server and some small toys.
My Twitter and HN handle are the same and my email is on my profile if you have any specific question.
I think it's important to note that it's not the technology's fault that this is happening, it's built into the way that we execute it. What if cloud storage wasn't just disk or datacenter redundant, but it was provider redundant as well? That way when one provider goes out of business, users aren't affected.
It's still way too early for this to happen (nobody likes turning into a commoditized service), but I think (hope) some day it will.
One itch I would like scratched is a cloud service that protects against the Insanity of the legal system. I have a dream that a program or set of hardware can stay online until a judge has ordered its termination. You can't take the thing offline with an ax first, and then give the broken pieces back to the defendant (without anti-static bags) after the judge clears you of wrong-doing. That's not right.
A service where the judicial system can rape your data centers and get all the information they need to convict you, while your income streams remain intact, UNTIL the judge decides you are illegal.
The notion of having a business destroyed upon accusation, and then giving the broken pieces back to the defendant after the judge says: "No wrong-doing here", makes me sick to my stomach. I don't want to give my kids a world that works like that.
I think the only way around that is to get laws changed, or have provisions in place to illegally host your service after it's been ordered shut down. The latter will probably just cause more legal problems.
I've heard about this tactic on more than one occasion already. It sounds horrible, and I think it should be made illegal.
As a side note, why can't the feds get all the mob bosses this way, for example? Do they only use this tactic against people like Dotcom?
I agree. More accurately I could have said "It's a common and to their belief vital tactic..."
The problem isn't technology, it's the states unwillingness (or inability) to adapt laws to the future or reality. Combined with excessive law enforcement where they seem to be compensating for their failure to actually stop technology.
We're talking about computer systems designed by humans? There is no such thing as a perfect solution, just a solution that hasn't shown any downsides yet.
Encryption is the big missing piece in a lot of cloud computing.
That being said, this is still about the law and not technology. Although I'm confident in technologies ability to provide self-defence.
| "hidden secret offsite offline backups" is a
| big regression in terms of usability.
| Although I'm confident in technologies ability
| to provide self-defence.
Yes, data failures can happen anytime. Also, I'm extremely lazy. I much prefer using Truecrypt and Tarsnap with automated scripts.
| Yes, data failures can happen anytime.
I think there's being a very noisy contingent of people complaining about that one for a while. I count myself among them.
Loss of control sucks >:(
I earnestly believe that society is trying to find boundaries but technology is updating far faster than a democracy can change the rules.
I live in the cloud now for the reasons like many do: price and features. As much as I want to follow the principles that you have set forth, Drobos and quality hard drives are expensive when I can rely on Evernote, iCloud, Everpix and Vimeo for securing my data at a far cheaper price and less problems.
That few players do this is a market opportunity. If I was running a cloud service there's no way I'd want any ability to tell what data was being stored....
Of course, there's an argument where the cloud provider or colo is too willing to hand over your stuff, and if you have your own, in-house datacenter, at least you get to tell them to come back with a warrant. But when they do, you're done. Even though it was found illegal, I'm pretty sure the dotcom raid was done with warrants.
Yes it's the technologies fault. It's not the policies or the ridiculous regulations...
That's a scary thought no? Isn't that why we elect officials to represent us?
So, sure, store data in a convenient, well run, good value, US based cloud, but what do we do if the FBI raid the data centre the cloud lives in and we lose our data or access to it.
Kinda sad that people actually have to consider that.
<sarcasm>aaawwwwww</sarcasm>