Short story: The network adapter on my Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro randomly disappears. It doesn’t even show up in the device manager. Based on what I’ve researched on the net and my own experience it’s not a driver or software issue. My work around which works (so far) is to always turn off your Wifi before you shut down. When you start back up the network adapter seems intact, you just need to turn the Wifi back on.
It’s a pain but it’s less of a hassle than the network adapter disappearing and you not knowing when it will just reappear again.
Long story: I got a Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro last February. So far I really like it. (I even included it in the list of my favorite things of 2015.) The form factor allows you to comfortably surf while you’re lounging in bed or in a chair and its light weight allows you to bring it around without feeling unduly encumbered. The screen is fantastic and displays 720p or 1080p videos without any problems. Battery life could be better but I’m never really that far from a plug so that’s not an issue for me.
As I bum around the apartments a lot waiting for guests, the Yoga 3 Pro allows me to be productive (checking email, spreadsheets, etc.) and entertained (watching episodes, surfing) in equal measure.
What the ACLU is for your rights IRL, the EFF is to your rights online. The EFF attempts to ensure that your rights are not violated simply because the activity you are doing is done online instead of offline.
Developments in American jurisprudence and policy pertaining to the internet matter because these developments affect all users of the net, regardless of their nationality.
My Constitutional law professor was Fr. Joaquin Bernas. He is a noted expert on the Philippine constitution. Heck, he was part of the commission which drafted the thing.
One class Fr. Bernas posed this hypothetical: Let’s say the police have a new long range infrared scanner which can sense heat through walls and via this scanner the police can determine if marijuana is being grown inside a structure. They use the scanner on the house of Mr. X and determine that marijuana is being grown there. They bust into the house of Mr. X and indeed find marijuana being grown there. They cart Mr. X off to jail. Mr. X now contests the use of the scanner as an illegal search.
As I was not a very imaginative student this question had me stumped. In determining the growing of marijuana the police never physically entered the residence of Mr. X. They weren’t even anywhere near his residence. Honestly I was inclined to let the police get away with it and declare the search as valid.
The answer, of course, is that it was an illegal search. As Fr. Bernas pointed out, technology may change but these changes are still subject to the Bill of Rights and other rights under law. (Fr. B was far more eloquent and succinct.) A search need not be a physical search but it could be a remote search through digital (or other) means, not just of your personal items but your data, documents, passwords and files.
Technology may enable other means of acquiring information (tapping a phone line, hacking into a computer, placing a gps tracker on a car) but that doesn’t change the nature of these acts, they are still searches, they are still illegal invasions of privacy.
One has the right to be left alone, to be private and even to be anonymous. Those rights do not change and will never change even though the technology available to pry into them may improve.