The iPhone firmware can be downloaded here.
If you want to check how much of OS X is in there…
Some tourists, amateur photographers, even would-be filmmakers hoping to make it big on YouTube could soon be forced to obtain a city permit and $1 million in liability insurance before taking pictures or filming on city property, including sidewalks.
New rules being considered by the Mayor’s Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting would require any group of two or more people who want to use a camera in a single public location for more than a half hour to get a city permit and insurance.
The same requirements would apply to any group of five or more people who plan to use a tripod in a public location for more than 10 minutes, including the time it takes to set up the equipment.
This is simply meant to give the police more latitude in harassing photographers who are operating from open, public spaces. From the text:
Mr. Dunn suggested that the city deliberately kept the language vague, and that as a result police would have broad discretion in enforcing the rules.
The motivation for this proposal is the recent cases of people being arrested for filming the police. There is a serious danger that abusive officers of the Law will be caught on camera, and the best way of stopping this, is to have an excuse to confiscate the media for being potentially “unlicensed”.
This was implemented very successfully in Soviet times. The excuse was “National Security”, but, of course, no secrets will be revealed by taking a photograph of a random government building (and anyone with enough skill to cause trouble there will conceal his camera anyway). In fact, what was important was to hide the truth about what goes on, and you do that by only licensing people who reveal your version of the truth.
Let Freedom reign!
Banks in New Zealand are seeking access to customer PCs used for online banking transactions to verify whether they have enough security protection.
Under the terms of a new banking Code of Practice, banks may request access in the event of a disputed transaction to see if security protection in is place and up to date.
The code, issued by the Bankers’ Association last week after lengthy drafting and consultation, now has a new section dealing with Internet banking.
Liability for any loss resulting from unauthorized Internet banking transactions rests with the customer if they have “used a computer or device that does not have appropriate protective software and operating system installed and up-to-date, [or] failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the protective systems, such as virus scanning, firewall, antispyware, operating system and antispam software on [the] computer, are up-to-date.”
The code also adds: “We reserve the right to request access to your computer or device in order to verify that you have taken all reasonable steps to protect your computer or device and safeguard your secure information in accordance with this code.
“If you refuse our request for access then we may refuse your claim.”
Whatever happened to the word “subpoena”? The banks can already get access, if they manage to convince a judge they need it. These new rules are only there to make it easier to deny any claim and force the customer to sue instead.
So, if they’re allowed to inspect my computer, may I inspect their server? No? I probably know better how to secure such a server than they know how to secure my Mac.
I’m picking a few quotes from news articles about the car bombs yesterday:
British intelligence sources say the police did not have any advanced warnings about the threat of car bombs.
So how did they find the cars?
The first car:
Events yesterday unfolded when police were called to Haymarket, south of Piccadilly Circus, after a man fell at the nightclub Tiger Tiger, injuring his head, prompting a call for an ambulance about 1:30 a.m. yesterday.
When crews arrived, they noticed smoke coming from a green Mercedes parked in front of a club, Clarke said.
The second car:
Police announced tonight they had found similar explosives in a second car. The blue Mercedes 280E model “was issued with a parking ticket about 2:30 this morning” in the Haymarket area, British anti-terror police chief Peter Clarke said, then impounded and taken to a garage near Hyde Park an hour later.
So old-fashioned solid police footwork did the job. None of the crap that took away all our liberties for the last few years made any difference. In fact, if you look at all the arrests made with the new laws, they were all pretty much bullshit, arresting people who weren’t actually doing anything. So, to the police officers who found the car bombs I say “Good work, guys! You set an excellent example!” and I hope they get a big commendation from their superiors for it.
And all those camera’s? Do they make you “safer”? Well, they’re going to be used to find the drivers:
They also had the benefit of footage from closed-circuit TV cameras, and hoped the surveillance network that covers much of central London will help them track down the driver of the Mercedes.
But if the bombs had gone off, you’d be just as dead as without them, so their benefit is limited.