Social Media Links
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Archives
- October 2014
- September 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- January 2012
- April 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- August 2010
- June 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- January 2009
- August 2008
- May 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
Categories
Meta
Blogroll
Legal Techonology Magazines
Resources for Small Firms and Solo Practioners
Pages
Monthly Archives: May 2008
Wed, May 28th, 2008 by
Protect your confidential data.
For those of you that have not yet heard this, your data can no longer travel securely across the United States’ national borders in your physical possession. Â The United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled in April 2008 that a computer was like luggage and border guards can search it to determine its content and the propriety of allowing it to cross the national borders. Â Â United States v. Arnold
. Â The Arnold Court’s ruling held that the Fourth Amendment does not require even a showing of reasonable cause to justify such a search under the border crossing exception to the Fourth Amendment protections.
The Arnold court held that â… reasonable suspicion is not needed for customs officials to search a laptop or other personal electronic storage devices at the borderâ.  That language, appearing at the end of the opinion has particular importance as it makes it clear that the opinion does not limit itself to laptop computers.  It includes all forms of âpersonal electronic storage devicesâ.  Accordingly, external hard disks, DVD and CD ROM disks,  flash drives, media cards, digital cameras, cell phones and PDA’s (without limitation) would all come under this exception.  Accordingly, you may find it uncomfortable to travel carrying private or confidential information with you in any of those forms or formats.
So, what do you do? Â Fortunately, you can still travel and use your data on the trip, you just cannot safely carry it with you when crossing any US international border. Â How do you do this? Â Simple, first thing, you back up your data and leave a copy safely stored in a secure location. Â Second, encrypt your data using a competent encryption program. Â Be sure to set a strong password to access the encrypted data. Â A âstrongâ password contains at least six characters and uses both numbers and letters. An example of a strong password: Â ‘j104m234a756â. Â After you encrypt the data, upload it to an on line storage location, erase the data from your computer, pack it up and off you go. Â You can access your data anywhere in the world that you have Internet access. Â Enjoy your trip!
When you want to access the data, download it, unencrypt it and use it. Â Before you travel again, re-encrypt it, upload it to your on line storage and erase it from your computer.
Copyright 2008, Jeffrey Allen. Â All rights reserved.
Tue, May 27th, 2008 by
IS THERE A BLESSING FOR THE SAR?
In a scene from the musical “Fiddler on the Roofâ, the Jews of Anatefka understanding that Judaism has a blessing for everything ask the Rabbi âIs there a proper blessing for the Czar?â He pauses and then chants: âMay God bless and keep the Czar… far away from us!â Although the spelling and the meaning may differ, the principal is the same. âKeep the SAR far away from usâ.
âSARâ, an acronym for Specific Absorption Rate, relates to the bodyâs absorption of radiation emanating from a mobile phone. Intermittently, we hear frenzied concerns that cell phones cause brain cancer. Studies to date have proven largely inconclusive. Accordingly, I have not found them convincing one way or the other. Remember, however, that the cell phone has only recently become a part of the daily routine of such a large portion of humanity. We will know a lot more in 30 years, but by then, many of us may already have suffered irreparable damage. Donât forget that people did not consider cigarettes dangerous to health for a very long time. While I intend to monitor the results of future studies, prudence suggests implementing some precautions in how we use our cell phones. bronchitis cipro
In the US, the FCC imposes a SAR limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram (âW/kgâ) over a volume of 1 gram of tissue. Europe uses a standard of 2W/kg averaged over 10 grams of tissue. Many phones have come out first in Europe and then later in the US.
For some time, people have purchased unlocked GSM phones in Europe and brought them back to the US. If you wish to reduce exposure to SAR, you may want to wait until new models come out here.
The theoretical danger comes from the fact that basically, the RF waves âcookâ tissue by heating it. While use of the cell phone held up to your ear for short periods of time may pose a minor risk, logic dictates that, if the risk exists, the longer you hold the phone by your ear, the more likely that brain tissue near the ear will suffer heat damage. Does this mean that we should all dump our cell phones or that the Surgeon General should require a warning printed on the back of the phone? Probably not, but, common sense suggests that we should exercise some caution. RF waves dissipate over distance. The farther that we keep the phone from our body, the less likely that it will cause any problem for us. Using the phoneâs speakerphone and keeping the phone on a desk or table when you talk offers one way of reducing exposure. As Bluetooth uses a lower power, it poses a smaller risk and, therefore, using a Bluetooth headset and keeping the phone in a brief case seems prudent. A wired headset does not generate radiation, but generally results in keeping the phone closer to our bodies.
taking permanent after problems tricor
Selecting a phone with a lower SAR also should reduce the risk of exposure. CNET has a nifty chart showing the 10 highest and l0 lowest SAR rated cell phones in the US and also providing information about other phones on a lookup basis. You can access the CNET chart at http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phone-radiation-levels/?tag=lnav. I found it somewhat surprising that there appears little consistency within manufacturers and that some of the highest SAR phones had siblings in the lowest category. depakote numbness
Battle for Haditha movies According to CNET, the representatives in the highest category include several Motorola phones, one from Samsung and two versions of the Blackberry Curve.
The 10 lowest included phones from Motorola (two iterations of the Motorola Razr the Razr V3x and Razr2 V8), five phones from Samsung and two from Nokia. The Palm Centro models ranged from 0.74 to 1.35 W/kg, while the Treo models ranged from 1.26 to 1.5 W/kg. The original Apple iPhone came in at 0.974 W/kg and the iPhone 3G rates a 1.38 W/kg. Memory size appears to have no impact on the ratings. The Blackberry Pearl models lists at 1.22 to 1.48 W/kg.
Copyright 2008, Jeffrey Allen. Â All rights reserved.
Posted in Websites
Tagged Apple, Blackberry, Blackberry Curve, Blackberry Pearl, cancer, cell phone, Centro, iPhone, iPhone 3G, mobile phone, Motorola, Palm, radiation, Razer2 V8, Razr, RazrV3x, Rim, SAR, Specific Absorption Rate, Treo
Leave a comment
Fri, May 23rd, 2008 by
The major obstacle to effective regulation
Nanotechnology, the use and manipulation of particles on the nano-scale, represents an exploding field of science and a corresponding challenge to the FDAâs regulatory framework. The major obstacle to effective regulation is the currently unknown variables that contribute to the toxicology of nano-particles. Until further safety research sheds light on this problem, the FDA cannot approve products.
The Thin Red Line buy Nanotechnology, the use and manipulation of particles on the nano-scale, represents an exploding field of science and a corresponding challenge to the FDAâs regulatory framework. The major obstacle to effective regulation is the currently unknown variables that contribute to the toxicology of nano-particles. Until further safety research sheds light on this problem, the FDA cannot approve products.Nanotechnology, the use and manipulation of particles on the nano-scale, represents an exploding field of science and a corresponding challenge to the FDAâs regulatory framework. The major obstacle to effective regulation is the currently unknown variables that contribute to the toxicology of nano-particles. Until further safety research sheds light on this problem, the FDA cannot approve products.Nanotechnology, the use and manipulation of particles on the nano-scale, represents an exploding field of science and a corresponding challenge to the FDAâs regulatory framework. The major obstacle to effective regulation is the currently unknown variables that contribute to the toxicology of nano-particles. Until further safety research sheds light on this problem, the FDA cannot approve products.
Nanotechnology, the use and manipulation of particles on the nano-scale, represents an exploding field of science and a corresponding challenge to the FDAâs regulatory framework. The major obstacle to effective regulation is the currently unknown variables that contribute to the toxicology of nano-particles. Until further safety research sheds light on this problem, the FDA cannot approve products. gives you hell by all american rejects atlanta accutane injuries