--- Log opened Tue Jul 29 00:00:03 2014
00:03 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
00:38 <@Dagmar> The Church of... Batman the Redeemer.
00:39 <@Dagmar> o.O
00:40 <@Dagmar> Oh wow.  I think Idiotocracy has been topped
00:40 <@Dagmar> 'The Zero Theorem'.
00:40 <@Dagmar> I just saw a banner that read 'Arbeit Macht Fun!'
00:45 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has joined #se2600
00:45 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o SuMo_D] by ChanServ
01:00 <@Dagmar> Aha.  Terry Gilliam.
01:00 <@Dagmar> That explains it
02:34 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:45 -!- sync350 [~sync@c-24-98-159-177.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: wtfsleepomg]
03:55 < aestetix_> man
03:55 < aestetix_> you know a problem is annoying when you break out strace
04:38 < aestetix_> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEBT_STUDY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-07-29-00-12-33
04:38 < aestetix_> maybe someone could enlighten me as to why an employer would need to do a credit check on a potential employee
05:09 -!- sasquatc2 [~sasquatc4@73.181.12.16] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
05:10 -!- sasquatc4 [~sasquatc4@73.181.12.16] has joined #se2600
05:10 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o sasquatc4] by ChanServ
06:36 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has joined #se2600
06:36 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o SuMo_D] by ChanServ
06:40 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
07:06 -!- nightcarnage [~nightcarn@c-69-137-118-213.hsd1.tn.comcast.net] has joined #se2600
07:36 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has joined #se2600
07:36 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o SuMo_D] by ChanServ
07:40 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
07:50 -!- ignotus-sdf [~ignotus@66.223.57.251] has joined #se2600
07:50 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o ignotus-sdf] by ChanServ
08:36 -!- aestetix_ was kicked from #se2600 by Bahhumbug [aestetix_> klixa: can 10 year old girls get wet?]
08:36 <@Bahhumbug> Seriously, leave that shit elsewhere.
08:39 <@ignotus-sdf> Much agreed.
08:42 <@opticron> anyone know of a way to easily choose which DHCP response you want to accept?
08:42 <@opticron> if multiple are offered on a network
08:43 <@wilpig_> opticron: track down the rogue dhcp server and kill it
08:43 <@opticron> yep
08:43 <@wilpig_> or get a smart switch that understands the dhcp-relay command
08:43 <@opticron> I don't have the access to track it down
08:44 <@wilpig_> do you have access to yours?
08:44 <@opticron> no
08:44 <@opticron> I'm a lowly developer
08:44 <@wilpig_> you don't have access to the rogue, you don't have access to yours, you don't have access to the switch.  go home, get drunk, try again tomorrow
08:44 <@opticron> I've worked around it for now
08:45 <@opticron> dumping the interface into promiscuous mode via wireshark seems to have put it in a state where it's using both IPs simultaneously without an additional subinterface
08:45 <@opticron> but still only bound to the rouge address
08:47 <@Dolemite> mr0ning, be0tches and h0ez!
08:49 <@Bahhumbug> Smack your network admins for permitting a rogue dhcp server on their network fabric in the first place?
08:49 <@opticron> technically, I have access to the rogue server, but I can't just unplug random things until I stop getting the rogue address
08:50 <@opticron> Bahhumbug, yeah, this has happened enough times that they should be doing something about it at the switch
08:50 <@Bahhumbug> Yep.
08:50 <@Bahhumbug> Says something about your network security :)
08:50 <@opticron> pffff, hardline ethernet is plenty secure!
08:51 <@opticron> you have to go through the trouble to plug something into it!
08:53 <@Bahhumbug> heh
08:53 <@opticron> I'm not sure we have a concept of internal network security
09:32 <@wilpig_> interesting...  https://www.dropbox.com/s/crswwm36gjwxeco/Screen%20Shot%202014-07-29%20at%209.31.44%20AM.png
09:32 <@wilpig_> this is hidden inside the data for my uber account
09:32 <@wilpig_> I went to https://m.uber.com  then inspected this object.  window.Uber.pingData.client
09:32 <@GateKeeper> Title: Uber Mobile (at m.uber.com)
09:51 <@Corydon76-home> Heh, looks like somebody never optimized their JS library
09:53 <@wilpig_> it looks like stuff that their mobile client wants.
10:01 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has joined #se2600
10:02 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o SuMo_D] by ChanServ
10:23 <@Corydon76-home> http://www.wired.com/2014/07/keyme-let-me-break-in/
10:23 <@GateKeeper> Title: The App I Used to Break Into My Neighbors Home | Threat Level | WIRED (at www.wired.com)
10:27 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:35 -!- ignotus-sdf [~ignotus@66.223.57.251] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
14:37 <@Mirage> lol.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc8m9jRmSyo
14:37 <@GateKeeper> Title: Street Fighter Church (version iglesia) - YouTube (at www.youtube.com)
14:44 <@Mirage> Darwin Award.. http://on.fb.me/1rYRTlC
14:44 <@GateKeeper> Title: Comments (at on.fb.me)
15:08 <@wilpig_> Mirage: i'd agree with you, if it weren't staged
15:21 <@wilpig_> oye...  "Based on the size of the new order and return would you consider keeping the order for future projects or agreeing to some sort of concession to avoid the return? Thanks."
15:21 <@wilpig_> when any sales dude says that it's never good
15:29 <@Dolemite> "Sure, I'll concede that you're welcome to shove them up your ass."
15:52 -!- RangerZ [~rangerz@c-69-137-107-2.hsd1.tn.comcast.net] has joined #se2600
16:02 < RangerZ> damn it... I have sources to prove aestetix is wrong about education ;)
16:02 < RangerZ> and he's not here
16:04 <@Bahhumbug> [07:35:09] aestetix_ [~aestetix@173.203.197.247] has been kicked from #se2600 by Bahhumbug [jrd@serentos/admin/jrd]: aestetix_> klixa: can 10 year old girls get wet?
16:04 <@Bahhumbug> [07:35:16] <@Bahhumbug> Seriously, leave that shit elsewhere.
16:05 <@Bahhumbug> And yeah, it sucks.  I've got a link for him that I am not sure he has seen about Aaron Swartz.
16:05 <@shapr> SHAZAM!
16:06  * shapr hugs Shadow404
16:20  * RangerZ hugs Bahhumbug
16:21 < RangerZ> yeah... thats some talk that can get us put on lists we DO NOT want to be
16:21 < RangerZ> on*
16:21 <@Bahhumbug> I assure you that is not a safe act.
16:26 -!- aestetix_ [~aestetix@173.203.197.247] has joined #se2600
16:26 -!- ignotus-sdf [~ignotus@66.223.57.251] has joined #se2600
16:26 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o ignotus-sdf] by ChanServ
16:37 <@Dagmar> aestetix_: This isn't 4chan
16:42 < aestetix_> hi
17:09 <@wilpig_> but I post 4chan links in here regularly...
17:09  * wilpig_ is out
17:11 < aestetix_> so I could use channel advice on a totally unrelated topic about security, if you're all game
17:12 < RangerZ> shoot
17:12 < aestetix_> You're familiar with the Oakland DAc?
17:12 < aestetix_> DAC
17:12 < RangerZ> somewhat
17:12 < RangerZ> the camera system they wanted to setup right?
17:12 < aestetix_> http://oaklandwiki.org/Domain_Awareness_Center
17:12 < aestetix_> yes
17:13 < RangerZ> DAC is fucking orwellian name if one ever existed
17:13 < aestetix_> there is that
17:13 < RangerZ> did they get it out the hunger games?
17:13 < aestetix_> So I'm on the privacy commitee for it
17:13 < aestetix_> One issue we're discussing is... security for entry to the DAC
17:13 < aestetix_> Entry to the area where the systems that consolidate it are
17:14 < RangerZ> role based access control, done
17:14 < aestetix_> It's a bit difficult to discuss security for a system collecting data that I don't think it should be collecting
17:14 < RangerZ> determine what roles need to be filled
17:14 < RangerZ> and then determine what areas those people need access too
17:14 < RangerZ> and give that access to those people
17:14 < RangerZ> if you make it a 'model' like that
17:15 < RangerZ> it is easy to both intuitively but also mathematically determine your threat level
17:16 < aestetix_> so here's the tough part
17:16 < aestetix_> all the feeds coming in apparently have their own access policies
17:16 < aestetix_> and the money for this system comes from the DHS
17:16 < RangerZ> that doesn't make it 'hard'
17:16 < RangerZ> it makes it easier
17:16 < RangerZ> more constraints on the system
17:17 < RangerZ> just view the 'entire' thing as a single 'system'
17:17 < RangerZ> and 'people' as 'actors' within the system
17:17 < RangerZ> I'm not seeing the difficult part
17:19 < aestetix_> why not just make all the data public?
17:19 < RangerZ> hahaha
17:19 < RangerZ> do you really not see the point?
17:19 < aestetix_> and what penalties are there for breaking these access rules
17:19 < RangerZ> are you asking me?
17:19 < RangerZ> or posing hypotheticals"?
17:20 < aestetix_> these are apparently more questions I ask in earnest that are misinterpreted ;)
17:20 < RangerZ> well obviously we don't want the data posted publically for several reasons
17:20 < RangerZ> 1) bandwidth cost
17:20 < aestetix_> does the data not belong to the public?
17:20 < RangerZ> nope
17:21 < RangerZ> IRS filings are the same thing
17:21 < RangerZ> depending on how they 'classify' the information
17:21 < RangerZ> thats what you need to be asking
17:21 < aestetix_> but you can easily access the filings for a nonprofit
17:21 < RangerZ> no, not 'for a non-profit'
17:21 < RangerZ> for a 'corporation'
17:22 < aestetix_> so I'd argue that the difference is that IRS income is money that's personal to someone
17:22 < RangerZ> but... that is because corporations are artificial constructs made by the government to protect private property of business owners
17:22 < aestetix_> whereas all the DAC data is collected from the public sphere
17:22 < RangerZ> thats fine...
17:22 < aestetix_> If I'm sitting at an intersection watching all the license plates
17:22 < RangerZ> but IS THERE a classification for data for "public data"
17:23 < aestetix_> I could take photos of them with a camera
17:23 < aestetix_> and a guy sitting next to me could write all the numbers down
17:23 < RangerZ> thats all nice and fine, stop being cute about it though, we all know all that already
17:23 < aestetix_> wow fuck you
17:23 < RangerZ> the real issue is ... what are the legal classifications
17:25 < RangerZ> i appoligize, that was a little meaner than it should have been... been dealing with asshats all day... but still, you're preaching to the choir, it doesn't matter what we think b/c we aren't judges, the real issue is what are the legal definitions that you are playing with
17:25 < aestetix_> Is there a term for when you take data from the public and make it private?
17:25 < RangerZ> yep, us copyright law
17:26 < aestetix_> I mean it's the same information, but in a different envelope
17:26 < RangerZ> databases are copyrightable in the US, where they are not in the EU
17:26 < RangerZ> b/c of that logic
17:26 < RangerZ> which is why Oracle is based here
17:26 < RangerZ> lol
17:27 < aestetix_> Well here's an example
17:27 < RangerZ> either they... or another big company... were going to move to EU, until that issue came to a head
17:27 < aestetix_> I have a random date: Jan 1, 1970
17:27 < aestetix_> Someone takes that, puts it into a document, and slaps "top secret" on it
17:27 < aestetix_> now that date is classified
17:28 < RangerZ> there is no law for 'over-classifying' something
17:28 < aestetix_> I'm not arguing that
17:28 < aestetix_> What I'm saying is that it's the same data, pulled into a different context
17:28 < RangerZ> but its not "in a different context"
17:29 < aestetix_> Yes it is. One instance is say written on a wall somewhere, the other is written on a secret government document
17:29 < RangerZ> if that date was classified as when JFK finally died from life support... or something silly... that date has a different context
17:29 < aestetix_> I'm arguing that the envelope for the data creates the context for it
17:29 < RangerZ> thats not what the law says
17:29 < aestetix_> what does the law say?
17:29 < RangerZ> the law on databases, is their "relationship" between each other
17:29 < RangerZ> not their 'envelope'
17:30 < RangerZ> and how they are 'arranged'
17:30 < RangerZ> I don't see why any of this is an issue, you need to ask the city lawyer what the data is classified as, and then just go from there
17:31 < RangerZ> b/c you can't argue in vacuum like this, without knowing the current state
17:32 < RangerZ> if its classified(general meaning, not 'CLASSIFIED') as 'public data' then this entire discussion is moot
17:32 < RangerZ> damn it... we are 4chan now
17:32 < RangerZ> and if it isn't, then you should find a lawyer to sue the city to make it so(if they lawyer thinks you can win)
17:32 < RangerZ> but all of this predicates on knowing "how" they are classifying the data now
17:34 < RangerZ> but if the data _IS_ classified as 'personal' in some way, then SOP should be followed for handeling personal data
17:34 < RangerZ> also... the SCOTUS has hinted that they believe that the mass collection of data is a new 'form' of data collection, that hasn't before existed, and is currently outside our legal system
17:35 < RangerZ> b/c taking a picture at a single intersection, and posting them online is a LOT different than posting pictures at EVERY intersection and posting them online
17:35 < RangerZ> first of all... Just imagine how easy it would be to track you if you used facial recognition software and 'big data' techniques
17:36 < RangerZ> Which is what you are conserned about... and that doesn't exist with only 1 camera
17:36 < RangerZ> but 1000s it does
17:37 < RangerZ> so I still think finding a laywer is the only useful step to take to get definitions for what you're dealing with, b/c once you have ALL the definitions, building the access control system is a joke easy
17:37 < RangerZ> like the NSA, the NSA didn't build a system that would stop Snowden, which honeslty would have been easy to do
17:38 < RangerZ> just a daily audit of how many records a single person accessed would have done it
17:38 < RangerZ> they didn't care about the "definitions" of private data or such, so they didn't build in safegauard to protect it
17:39 < RangerZ> and if they did, they could STILL do as much snooping as they want, but be much more secure
18:01 <@rattle> poop
18:05 <@Corydon76-home> RangerZ: actually, they did have such a system in place.  The problem was, it was universally in place.
18:05 <@Corydon76-home> Snowden specifically went to Hawaii to do his mass downloading, because he knew that was the one place where such safeguards were not yet active.
18:05 <@Corydon76-home> err, wasn't universally
18:07 < RangerZ> Corydon76-home: Thats cutting specifics, but yeah, you're right... but in general, it isn't hard to 'design' systems that are "secure" if you accurately describe the components of the system
18:07 < RangerZ> but thats the 'hard' part, lol
18:09 <@Corydon76-home> Assuming that somebody is working within the system, yes.  The problem is, Snowden had privileges sufficient that he could have subverted the system if he wanted to
18:09 < RangerZ> yes/no, just means they designed a system that allowed someone to have too many rights
18:10 <@Corydon76-home> There is no such thing as a technological solution for a policy problem.
18:10 < RangerZ> you can easily divide the maint. of equipment/network from access to the data on the network
18:10 <@Corydon76-home> You can only fix a policy problem with a policy solution
18:11 < RangerZ> the native tribes of australia apparently disagree, lol (They have a complex set of rules on who can see pictures of who, like women can't see pictures of their dead husband's family, and other convoluted rules, so they had a custom DB designed that would store all the family histories/etc... and only allow access to the data the person was 'suppose' to see)
18:11 <@Corydon76-home> If the physical hardware is compromised, you cannot trust the software running on top of it.
18:12 <@Corydon76-home> RangerZ: again, as long as people work within the system, that works.
18:13 < RangerZ> yes/no, you CAN however make it difficult to have enough time WITH the physical hardare , by enacting rules that oversee those with physical access, etc... (But in general you are right)
18:13 <@Corydon76-home> If you have one person who wants to subvert the system, they can.
18:13 < RangerZ> yes/no
18:13 < RangerZ> only if they have access to the physical system
18:13 < RangerZ> and aren't supervised/etc
18:14 < RangerZ> I'm all for pointing live guns at system admins , and shooting if it looks like they are storing the OS in memory only (a la San Fran) ;)
18:14 <@Corydon76-home> When you consider that the NSA has spent over a decade learning how to quickly compromise hardware, do you really think limiting access time to the hardware would really do any good?
18:14 < RangerZ> mainly b/c I don't plan on going into system admining
18:14 < RangerZ> lol
18:15 <@Corydon76-home> They've basically filled the organization with people who make it impossible to ensure the system is secure
18:16 <@Corydon76-home> and then they wonder why the system isn't secure
18:16 < RangerZ> yes/no, the mandate of the NSA is to guarentee US security , just as much as it is to break others
18:16 < RangerZ> its quite easy to provide secure hardware, built-in TPM into the CPU
18:16 < RangerZ> and no ram
18:16 < RangerZ> other than the on-board
18:16 <@Corydon76-home> Uh, yeah.  You didn't see the NSA documents on TPM, did you?
18:17 < RangerZ> I'm not considering our current TPMs either
18:17 < RangerZ> but no, I did not
18:17 <@Corydon76-home> Do you really think the NSA has chip fabrication plants in the US?
18:18 < RangerZ> is that my problem?
18:18 < RangerZ> lol
18:18 < RangerZ> and yes, it does, in up state NY
18:18 <@Corydon76-home> They've spent the past decade ensuring that nobody, anywhere, truly has hardware they can trust
18:18 < RangerZ> it can just take over foundry labs or w/e its called now
18:18 < RangerZ> lol
18:19 <@Corydon76-home> So they're stuck with exactly the same problem that they've consigned the rest of the world to
18:20 <@Corydon76-home> Well, all except for the Chinese government, which has seen fit to have their own chip fabrication design and plants
18:21 <@Corydon76-home> and all the FUD that went on from the US government about Chinese manufacturers turned out to be false for the Chinese and true for American companies
18:22 < RangerZ> because Intel and AMD would never compete for non-public no-bid contracts
18:22 <@Corydon76-home> So we've basically fucked our own technology royally over the past decade
18:22 <@Corydon76-home> RangerZ: and keep all of their employees silent about it?
18:23 < RangerZ> who says anything about 'silent' , who says most of the employees even knew what was going on
18:24 < RangerZ> very few people can read cicuit diagrams , let alone at that scale
18:24 <@Corydon76-home> I suspect part of the Intel team in chip design has foreign nationals
18:25 < RangerZ> yes/no
18:25 < RangerZ> they have ITAR among other restrictions on some stuff
18:26 < RangerZ> the poeople I know there are in driver development, not chip
18:32 < aestetix_> Corydon76-home: how did Snowden specifically go to Hawaii? Did he have a choice in that?
18:38 < RangerZ> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO1kSddygoA we should petition for oakland
18:38 <@GateKeeper> Title: Watch Dogs: New City Teased in Tweet - IGN News - YouTube (at www.youtube.com)
18:39 <@Dagmar> Oh no.
18:40 <@Dagmar> The best part is that now everyone knows to *look* for the backdoors, in order to exploit them.
18:40 <@Dagmar> DESPITE THE FACT THAT THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT HACKERS HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE WILL HAPPEN FOR TWO DECADES
18:41 < aestetix_> RangerZ: re: the classification, it's up in the air because nobody has asked the questions we are asking
18:41 < RangerZ> nah... longer than that, don't under sell yourself Dagmar
18:41 < RangerZ> lol
18:42 < aestetix_> Although it's interesting. If a millionare came to down and gave a bunch of people ten dollars to sit at different intersections for an hour and then combine them, the millionare could easily release that into the public domain
18:42 <@Shadow404> "and where does the newborn go from here, the net is vast and infinite"....damn that movie never gets old
18:43 < RangerZ> Shadow404: FYI, new one coming out soon
18:43 < aestetix_> So maybe envelope and law are not good terms
18:43 < RangerZ> full movie
18:43 < aestetix_> Licensing is though
18:43 <@Shadow404> RangerZ: nice
18:43 < aestetix_> Like if two photographers take my photo, and one of the photos is way better because they have a good filter or something
18:44 < aestetix_> They may choose to release the photos under different licenses. And nobody is going to say they are the same
18:44 < RangerZ> actually each has a different copyright
18:45 < RangerZ> of the photographer
18:45 < aestetix_> right
18:45 < RangerZ> but the US can't have copyrights
18:45 <@Dagmar> s/copyrights/nice things/
18:45 < RangerZ> by definition, anything the US makes has is public domain
18:45 < aestetix_> uh
18:46 < RangerZ> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_work_by_the_U.S._government
18:46 <@GateKeeper> Title: Copyright status of work by the U.S. government - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (at en.wikipedia.org)
18:46 < RangerZ> "such works are not entitled to domestic copyright protection under U.S. law."
18:46 <@Bahhumbug> aestetix_: Seriously.  No more of that bullshit here.  I find it highly offensive and contrary to popular belief it takes a lot to offend me.
18:47 <@Bahhumbug> On another note, have you seen this?  http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/27/technology/aaron-swartz-father/index.html?hpt=ob_articleallcontentsidebar&iid=obnetwork
18:47 <@GateKeeper> Title: Aaron Swartz's father thinks he'd be alive today if he were never arrested - Jun. 27, 2014 (at money.cnn.com)
18:47 <@Bahhumbug> Not sure how I missed that until this morning :/
18:47 < aestetix_> So wait
18:48 < aestetix_> The DAC can't apply copyright to the information it collects?
18:48 < RangerZ> is it a federal agency
18:48 < aestetix_> That gets complicated.
18:48 < RangerZ> or a city one using federal dollar grant
18:48 < aestetix_> Really complicated actually.
18:49 < RangerZ> not really
18:49 < aestetix_> uh
18:49 < aestetix_> RangerZ: I'd like to think I'm reasonably well informed on this as I sit on the committee
18:50 < aestetix_> But I guess you know better than me.
18:50 < RangerZ> ok, then who runs it?
18:50 < aestetix_> Again, we're unsure.
18:50 <@Dagmar> Wait... who runs what?
18:50 < RangerZ> didn't Oakland City council approve it?
18:51 < aestetix_> We're in the process of collecting all the info about sharing agreements as well as clearance processes and who is allowed to work there
18:51 < RangerZ> http://oaklandwiki.org/domain_awareness_center
18:51 <@GateKeeper> Title: Domain Awareness Center - Oakland Wiki (at oaklandwiki.org)
18:51 < aestetix_> RangerZ: actually no
18:51 <@Dagmar> Ah
18:51 < aestetix_> RangerZ: that's where this gets complicated.
18:51 < aestetix_> The port of Oakland approved it.
18:51 < RangerZ> that says "On July 30th, 2013 Oakland’s City Council unanimously approved a $2M grant for Phase 2 of the DAC, which will be funded by grants from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and implemented by the military contractor Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)."
18:51 < aestetix_> And even though they are in Oakland, they have their own jurisdiction and came make their own decisions
18:51 < RangerZ> so the city paid the grant money to the port?
18:52 < aestetix_> No.
18:52 < aestetix_> DHS did.
18:52 < aestetix_> Now whether it went through the city or not is another question
18:52 < RangerZ> no... DHS paid the city, then the city paid the port (it sounds like)
18:54 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has joined #se2600
18:54 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o SuMo_D] by ChanServ
18:55 < RangerZ> but "ehh", it seems like every 'question' just leads to a new legal question, but still... it all just boils down to determining the legal status of everything :/
18:55 < RangerZ> silly Oaklanders... allowing such complicated situations, lol
18:55 <@Dagmar> ...and why is the "legal status" important?
18:56 < RangerZ> b/c 'law'
18:56 < RangerZ> lol
18:56 <@Dagmar> Uh-huh.
18:56 < RangerZ> but seriously, if he need to find out the legal status of who can do what with the video...etc...
18:56 < aestetix_> RangerZ: "ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law" does that apply when the law is classified?
18:56 <@Dagmar> So... you think 'law' is going to be a hindrance to people who ignore/discard/create laws at will?
18:57 < RangerZ> aestetix_: yes, b/c only the important laws are classified
18:57 < RangerZ> duh
18:57 < RangerZ> how un-patriotic are you?
18:57 < RangerZ> lol
18:57 < aestetix_> Dagmar: and make new laws when they need to
18:57 < aestetix_> RangerZ: patriotic enough never to go to law school ;)
18:58 < RangerZ> NAACP or FSF would hire your hippy ass
18:58 < RangerZ> lol
18:58 < aestetix_> I think I don't meet all the requirements to work for NAACP
18:58 < RangerZ> they don't discriminate
18:59 < RangerZ> can't legally actually
18:59 < RangerZ> lol
19:01 < RangerZ> wtf... thats so odd
19:02 < RangerZ> I have "bill me later" incase I ever need it, never used it except first time to set it up, and my credit limit is 895$... no... you can't have 900$
19:02 < RangerZ> lol
19:08 < aestetix_> so print up a $5 bill and take it to the bank
19:08 < aestetix_> then you'll have $900
19:09 -!- klixa [~klixa@unaffiliated/klixa] has joined #se2600
19:09 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o klixa] by ChanServ
19:11 -!- klixa [~klixa@unaffiliated/klixa] has quit [Client Quit]
19:12 < RangerZ> its just that its a really odd credit limit
19:12 <@wilpig_> is steam currently down?
19:12 < RangerZ> I swear I thought I had something on my account I didn't know about, etc
19:13 < RangerZ> wilpig_: looks like it
19:13 < RangerZ> nope, back up
19:35 -!- ignotus-sdf [~ignotus@66.223.57.251] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
20:22 < RangerZ> got got an email w/ header: "Last Chance for Planes"
20:22 < RangerZ> I thought another plane got shot down or crashed ....
20:23 < RangerZ> thankfully it just means the drive in theater is going to have new movie this friday... (Guardians of the Galaxy)
21:00 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:10 -!- SuMo_D [~sumo_d@108-193-45-205.lightspeed.gnvlsc.sbcglobal.net] has joined #se2600
21:10 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o SuMo_D] by ChanServ
21:14 -!- sync350 [~sync@c-24-99-250-250.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has joined #se2600
21:14 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o sync350] by ChanServ
21:32 <@Shadow404> wilpig_: ping
21:32 <@wilpig_> Shadow404: pong
21:33 <@Shadow404> is there a way to default audio to english? i keep getting defaulted to german, which im no horrible at, but still
21:33 <@wilpig_> depends on your client
21:33 <@Shadow404> web
21:33 <@wilpig_> plex native client should follow whatever your default language is set to
21:33 <@Shadow404> weird then
21:33 <@wilpig_> the web client there is a funky setting
21:34 <@Shadow404> ah ok
21:34 <@Shadow404> it did it on phone too today
21:34 <@wilpig_> maybe I only saw that setting in the client and not on web
21:35 <@wilpig_> I know before you play a file you can pick the audio track from the web
21:36 <@Shadow404> i have to start the file first in the web client, then go to its settings
21:36 <@Shadow404> i dont see the option before
21:36 <@Shadow404> the phone client on android you can select before starting
21:36 <@Shadow404> so they are oppisite on that point
21:38 <@wilpig_> it's a drop down on the web.  you can't click the play from the thumbnail though.  you have to bring up all the data on it
21:47 <@Shadow404> ok
22:56 < RangerZ> so I wonder if the President can trick the house GOP into impeaching him
22:56 < RangerZ> lol
23:02 <@Corydon76-home> Be careful what you wish for
23:07 <@wilpig_> sending incremental file list
23:07 <@wilpig_> The Expendables 3 (2014).avi 3.08G  19%   13.10MB/s    0:15:26
23:09 < RangerZ> " Conviction requires a two-thirds majority."
23:09 < RangerZ> so I'm not worried
23:10 < RangerZ> and then the worst thing that happens is that President Obama would just step down, and Biden would take over
23:10 < RangerZ> and we NEED a president Biden
23:10 < RangerZ> his "opps" moments alone would be a jolt to the national economy
23:11 <@Corydon76-home> I can't wait until 2025, when Republicans finally stop carping about Benghazi
23:24 < RangerZ> the thing is 2020, is going to ruin the republicans
23:24 < RangerZ> democrats will will the house, and the state goverments
23:24 < RangerZ> and redistrict , so it'll be the inverse of the current map
23:33 <@Dagmar> Hmm... http://nashville.craigslist.org/mcy/4593580135.html
23:33 <@GateKeeper> Title: 1994 Kawasaki Ninja ex-250 (at nashville.craigslist.org)
23:43 <@Corydon76-home> RangerZ: you really think the Democrats are likely to be just as cruel to the conservatives as the conservatives were to them?
--- Log closed Wed Jul 30 00:00:04 2014