Kim Dotcom’s Extradition Battle Suffers High Court Setback

In 2012, file-hosting site Megaupload was shut down by the United States government and founder Kim Dotcom and his associates were arrested in New Zealand.

Ever since, the US government has sought to extradite Dotcom on several counts including copyright infringement, racketeering, and money laundering. Dotcom has fought them every single step of the way.

One of the key areas of conflict has been the validity of the search warrants used to raid his Coatesville home on January 20, 2012. The fight has been meticulous and lengthy but in 2014, following appeals to lower courts, the Supreme Court finally dismissed Dotcom’s appeals that the search warrants weren’t valid.

Following a three-month hearing, the District Court later found that Dotcom was eligible for extradition. Dotcom appealed again but in February 2017 the High Court ruled that the entrepreneur could indeed be transferred to the United States.

Dotcom subsequently appealed the High Court decision to the Court of Appeal, a hearing that will go ahead in February 2018. Last summer, the Megaupload founder also “attacked the underpinnings of the extradition process” by filing an eight-point statement of claim for judicial review. This morning the High Court handed down its decision and it looks like bad news for Dotcom

The causes of action presented by the Megaupload founder were varied but began by targeting the validity of the arrest warrants used in January 2012 and by extension every subsequent process, including the extradition effort itself.

“Accordingly, the relief sought includes orders that the extradition proceeding be quashed or set aside and that Mr Dotcom be discharged,” the ruling reads.

However, the Court describes this argument as an abuse of process, noting that the Supreme Court has already upheld the validity of the search warrants and a High Court ruling confirmed the District Court’s finding that Dotcom is eligible for extradition, a process that will soon head to the Court of Appeal.

But Dotcom’s arguments continued, with attacks on the validity of search warrants and a request to quash them and return all property seized under their authority. Another point asserted that a US request to seize Dotcom’s assets in New Zealand was invalid because no extraditable offense had been committed.

Unfortunately for Dotcom, none of his detailed arguments gained traction with the Hight Court. In his decision, Justice Timothy Brewer sides with the US government which previously described the efforts as “collateral attacks on previous decisions of the Courts and an attempt to pre-empt Mr Dotcom’s appeal.”

The Judge eventually rejected seven out of the eight causes of action in a 22-page ruling (pdf) published this morning.

“I have granted the USA’s application to strike out causes of action 1 to 7 of the statement of claim for judicial review dated 21 July 2017. The proceeding is now ‘live’ only in relation to the eighth cause of action,” Justice Brewer writes.

“I direct that the proceeding be listed for mention in relation to the eighth cause of action in the duty list at 10:00 am on 7 February 2018.”

The eighth point, which wasn’t challenged by the US, concerns the “decision by the Deputy Solicitor-General in June 2017 to direct that clones be made of the electronic devices seized from Mr Dotcom’s homes and that they be sent to the USA.”

A few minutes ago, Dotcom took to Twitter with an apparent upbeat reference to the ruling.

Like all things Dotcom, the show won’t be over until every last stone has been unturned. Next stop, Court of Appeal in February.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

from TorrentFreak Click Here for full article

Retractable Console Allows Wheelchair User to Get up Close and Personal

[Rhonda] has multiple sclerosis (MS), a disease that limits her ability to walk and use her arms. She and the other residents of The Boston Home, an extended care facility for people with MS and other neuromuscular diseases, rely on their wheelchairs for mobility. [Rhonda]’s chair comes with a control console that swings out of the way to allow her to come up close to tables and counters, but she has problems applying enough force to manually position it.

Sadly, [Rhonda]’s insurance doesn’t cover a commercial solution to her problem. But The Boston Home has a fully equipped shop to extend and enhance residents’ wheelchairs, and they got together with students from MIT’s Principles and Practices of Assistive Technology (PPAT) course to hack a solution that’s not only useful for [Rhonda] but should be generally applicable to other chairs. The students analyzed the problem, measured the forces needed and the clearances required, and built a prototype pantograph mount for the control console. They’ve made the device simple to replicate and kept the BOM as inexpensive as possible since patients are often out-of-pocket for enhancements like these. The video below shows a little about the problem and the solution.

Wheelchair hacks are pretty common, like the 2015 Hackaday Prize-winning Eyedrivomatic. We’ve also covered totally open-source wheelchairs, both manual and electric.

Filed under: Medical Hacks

from Hackaday Click Here for full article

The Difference Between iPhone X VS. iPhone 8

The latest iPhone release is iPhone X. It is one of the most interesting Apple’s mobiles phones. It was released at the beginning of November but is still making popular noise on the internet. Everyone is talking about its cool features, it’s amazing power and the most important, its dual camera. The new camera of iPhone X is just amazing. It comes with a 12 megapixels dual camera system which provides high-resolution images in different formats. While everyone is talking about iPhone X, there is a bit noise about iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus. Although the latest release is iPhone X, yet the value of iPhone 8 is still solid. There is a bit difference between iPhone 8 and iPhone X.

When iPhone X was launched, there were some many similarities between iPhone X and iPhone 8. That’s why people started searching for the internet similarities and differences between iPhone X and iPhone 8. Today, we will help you to find out what are the main differences between iPhone 8 and iPhone X. we will briefly compare every feature and function between these two devices.

Performance: Chipset and RAM

The first thing to consider is the performance of both of these devices. iPhone 8 and iPhone X both have Apple A11 Bionic chipset with six cores of CPU and six cores of GPU. This CPU architecture allows the iPhone users to experience extremely fast and smooth processes running on the iPhone. You can enjoy multitasking in a smooth process which will give you the best of the mobile experience. On the other hand, iPhone 8 has 2GB of RAM, and iPhone X has 3GB of RAM. iPhone X has a little benefit of 3GB RAM, but it has more resources that are used by RAM. It means it has a more powerful screen and a dual camera which will take more memory as compared to a small screen and a single lens camera. So the performance of these devices is almost same.

Display: Screen size

The second feature is the screen size of both of the devices. The iPhone 8 has 4.7 inches True Tone LCD screen with 1334×750 pixels while iPhone X has 5.8 inches True Tone OLED screen with 2436×1125 pixels. The iPhone 8 has a smaller screen and is more comfortable for indoor and outdoor uses. On the other hand, iPhone X is designed to have an enhanced mobile experience with a larger screen with more pixels.

Camera

The most important feature of iPhone 8 and iPhone X is the camera. The iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone X have a 12 megapixels camera. However, iPhone 8 comes with single lens camera while iPhone X comes with dual lens camera. The performance of both of the devices is identical, but iPhone X has some benefits for the dual camera. It allows getting better photos with more light and picture enhancements.

Battery life

Another great feature of iPhone X and iPhone 8 is the battery life. iPhone X has more battery power and performance as compared to iPhone 8. Both of the devices are fast charge capable of charging speed up to 50% charge in just 30 minutes. The only contrast between these two devices is iPhone X has 21 hours of talk time while iPhone 8 has 14 hours of talk time.

Both of these devices are identical. There are some minor upgrades in the new iPhone X, but there is a large difference between the prices of these two devices.

The post The Difference Between iPhone X VS. iPhone 8 appeared first on TechWorm.

from TechWorm Click Here for full article

Dumb Coffee Grinder Gets Smarter with Time

[Forklift] has a Rancilio Rocky, a prosumer-level coffee grinder that’s been a popular mainstay for the last few decades. It’s a simple machine with a direct-drive motor. Rocky has one job, and it will do that job in one of 55 slightly different ways as long as someone is pushing the grind button. What Rocky doesn’t have is any kind of metering technology. There’s no way to govern the grind length, so repeatable results rely on visual estimates and/or an external clock. Well, there wasn’t until [Forklift] designed a programmable timer from the ground up.

The timer interface is simple—there’s a D-pad of buttons for navigation through the OLED screen, and one button to start the grind. The left and right buttons move through four programmable presets that get stored in the EEPROM of the timer’s bare ATMega328P brain. Grind duration can be adjusted with the up/down buttons.

We like that [Forklift] chose to power it by piggybacking on the 240VAC going to the grinder. The cord through the existing grommet and connects with spade terminals, so there are no permanent modifications to the grinder. Everything about this project is open source, including the files for the 7-segment font [Forklift] designed.

Tea aficionados may argue that creating their potion is the more time sensitive endeavor. We’ve got you covered there. Only question is, one button or two?

Filed under: Microcontrollers

from Hackaday Click Here for full article

Putting Wind in VR by Watching the Audio Signal

A simple way to integrate physical feedback into a virtual experience is to use a fan to blow air at the user. This idea has been done before, and the fans are usually the easy part. [Paige Pruitt] and [Sean Spielberg] put a twist on things in their (now-canceled) Kickstarter campaign called ZephVR, which featured two small fans mounted onto a VR headset. The bulk of their work was in the software, which watches the audio signal for recognizable “wind” sounds, and uses those to turn on one or both fans in response.

The benefit of using software to trigger fans based on audio cues is that the whole system works independently of everything else, with no need for developers and software to build in support for your project, or to use other middleware. Unfortunately the downside is that the results are only as good as the ability of software to pick the right sounds and act on them. Embedded below is a short video showing a test in action.

On the left is a debug console, on which red indicates low or no wind and green is a lot of wind. Fans are mounted to the top of the monitor so the responses are visible. It’s not much of a demo, but it’s enough to see the idea in action with fans responding individually to objects passing nearby on the left or right.

[Sean] and [Paige] canceled their campaign despite hitting the funding goal, it seems they decided to change direction and focus on creating a robust software API instead of delving into hardware production. In the meantime, they shared the design files for their prototype hardware. Hopefully some software for people to experiment with will follow suit.

Augmenting virtual experiences with fans is nothing new, but interfacing to the application doesn’t always have to be a challenge. The Superfan project for example discovered that many racing and simulator games already have motion and feedback data that can be accessed and used by custom hardware — as long as one has the right software tools, anyway.

Filed under: Virtual Reality

from Hackaday Click Here for full article

Reverse Engineering the Nintendo Wavebird

Readers who were firmly on Team Nintendo in the early 2000’s or so can tell you that there was no accessory cooler for the Nintendo GameCube than the WaveBird. Previous attempts at wireless game controllers had generally either been sketchy third-party accessories or based around IR, and in both cases the end result was that the thing barely worked. The WaveBird on the other hand was not only an official product by Nintendo, but used 2.4 GHz to communicate with the system. Some concessions had to be made with the WaveBird; it lacked rumble, was a bit heavier than the stock controllers, and required a receiver “dongle”, but on the whole the WaveBird represented the shape of things to come for game controllers.


Finding the center frequency for the WaveBird

Given the immense popularity of the WaveBird, [Sam Edwards] was somewhat surprised to find very little information on how the controller actually worked. Looking for a project he could use his HackRF on, [Sam] decided to see if he could figure out how his beloved WaveBird communicated with the GameCube. This moment of curiosity on his part spawned an awesome 8 part series of guides that show the step by step process he used to unlock the wireless protocol of this venerable controller.

Even if you’ve never seen a GameCube or its somewhat pudgy wireless controller, you’re going to want to read though the incredible amount of information [Sam] has compiled in his GitHub repository for this project.

Starting with defining what a signal is to begin with, [Sam] walks the reader though Fourier transforms, the different types of modulations, decoding packets, and making sense of error correction. In the end, [Sam] presents a final summation of the wireless protocol, as well as a simple Python tool that let’s the HackRF impersonate a WaveBird and send button presses and stick inputs to an unmodified GameCube.

This amount of work is usually reserved for those looking to create their own controllers from the ground up, so we appreciate the effort [Sam] has gone through to come up with something that can be used on stock hardware. His research could have very interesting applications in the world of “tool-assisted speedruns” or even automating mindless stat-grinding.

Filed under: classic hacks, Nintendo Hacks, Wireless Hacks

from Hackaday Click Here for full article

Hacking an AUX Port for a Google Home Mini

Even if you don’t want to add an AUX audio output port to your Google Home Mini, you’ll still want to see a pair of videos from [SnekTek]. After all, you’ll eventually want to open it up, and putting it over some boiling water might not have been your first idea. You can see both videos, below.

However, he did want to add an AUX port. The biggest challenge was finding a place to put the connector. Even after identifying a likely spot, a bolt interfered with the case closing and so he removed it. The one bolt didn’t seem to bother the final result.

Electrically, he found that to keep the AUX out to about 1V, he needed a reduction in voltage. Two small resistors put right in the speaker line took care of that. Although, be sure to watch the second video if you plan to recreate this hack since the value of the resistors changed.

Truthfully, the AUX jack part isn’t nearly as interesting as opening the thing up, although we have to admit, we wouldn’t mind putting a BlueTooth adapter in that plug to stream to a big speaker that isn’t cast-enabled. However, we have noticed it is getting harder and harder to break into consumer electronics, and you never know when you’ll need to get into one of these to hack, repair, or cannibalize.

With the cheaper mini version of the Google smart device, we expect to see more hacks for it. We’ve seen some creative mash ups and, of course, you can always roll your own hardware.

Filed under: google hacks

from Hackaday Click Here for full article

This Coin Cell Can Move That Train!

[Mike Rigsby] has moved a train with a coin cell. A CR2477 cell to be exact, which is to say one of the slightly more chunky examples, and the train in question isn’t the full size variety but a model railroad surrounding a Christmas tree, but nevertheless, the train moved.

A coin cell on its own will not move a model locomotive designed to run on twelve volts. So [Mark] used a boost converter to turn three volts into twelve. The coin cell has a high internal resistance, though, so first the coin cell was discharged into a couple of supercapacitors which would feed the boost converter. As his supercaps were charging, he meticulously logged the voltage over time, and found that the first one took 18 hours to charge while the second required 51 hours.

This is important and useful data for entrants to our Coin Cell Challenge, several of whom are also going for a supercap approach to provide a one-off power boost. We suspect though that he might have drawn a little more from the cell, had he selected a dedicated supercap charger circuit.

 

Filed under: Toy Hacks

from Hackaday Click Here for full article

1 2 3 65