Rebooting just seems like a very roundabout, slow and inefficient way to get back to that initial state you describe.
It's exactly what the reboot process is designed to do; return you to that fully encrypted pre-boot state. There would be no purpose to implementing a second method that does the exact same thing.
Much of the data on your phone, including critical information that's required to run the operating system and make the device function, is fully encrypted when the device is off/rebooted.
While in this locked down state, nothing can run. You don't receive notifications, applications can't run in the background, even just accessing the device yourself is slow as you have to wait for the whole system to decrypt and start up.
When you unlock the device for the first time; much of that data is decrypted so that it can be used, and the keys required to unlock the rest of the data get stored in memory where they can be quickly accessed and used. This also makes the device more vulnerable to attacks.
There's always a trade off between convenience and security. The more secure a system, the less convenient it is to use.
Single party consent means one of the people being recorded must give permission to record ... full stop.
This is true.
What you don't understand is that a person does not have to be actively speaking or being directly spoken to in order to be a part of a conversation. Simply being present, with the other participants fully aware of your presence while continuing to converse makes you part of their conversation and thus a party able to consent to it's recording.
The key there is that the other participants are aware of your presence. You're not hiding around a corner, listening in unbeknownst to them; the people conversing are entirely aware that you are present and likely listening.
By your rational a police agent without a warrant could walk by and say "hello", plant a listening device, then record your conversation because he said hello at the start.
No. In that situation a third party inserted themselves into your conversation entirely of their own volition.
This is like you walking up to someone that's streaming/vlogging in public, beginning an unrelated conversation in front of them; then you getting upset that they are recording the conversation that you began in their presence. Even if you weren't aware they were streaming; you were the one that inserted yourself into that situation. They didn't walk up to/join you; you made them a party by bringing the conversation to them.
A really big part of these types of legal situations is 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. The people inside a vehicle are all pretty close together and obviously going to be able to hear the conversions that are happening. It's unreasonable to expect the driver who's head is ~3 feet from you isn't privy to your conversation.
I'm guessing the black parts slide like wax? For 'grinding' without a board?
In a situation like this; you've entered the drivers vehicle and began a conversation in their immediate presence fully aware that they are able to hear and listen to you. That makes the driver a party to your conversation, even without actively participating in it.
I make a ton of stupid spelling mistakes just because of typing on mobile 99% of the time. For some reason I CONSTANTLY miss the keys I'm looking for, or manage to press them in the wrong order somehow; swapping Ns with Ms, T with Y, R>T, B>N, inserting spaces too early, doubling up characters.
If i nevsr look up and jus tkeep typing, I end of with a garbled mess just liek this sentence is.
This can get much worse if I use the next word suggestions. I'll spot the suggestion I want, but continue to press the next letter; this changes what's being suggested, or just moves it to a different position (centered vs the two options to the side) but I still press where I first saw it which is now a totally different suggestion...
Lots and lots and lots of proof-reading. And I STILL fuck it up.
Canada has single-party consent laws when it comes to audio recording.
I hate this use and that I'm arguing devils advocate here, but legally speaking; If the driver opted-in to the program, audio in the vehicle can legally be recorded because the driver is considered a party to the conversion that's happening within their vehicle (even without actively participating in that conversion). They can record and distribute that recording however they like (including to lyft to be transcribed).
Lyft wouldn't be able to record vehicle audio without the consent of the driver at the minimum; but they aren't necessarily required to gain consent or even inform the other passengers. As shitty as that is.
Don't treat your driver like they don't exist and keep private conversations for when your actually in private. Even a regular cab driver could be privately recording you; regardless of 'company policy'.
Another way to think of this is: You can record the audio in your immediate vicinity (ie, anything you can naturally hear) without having to gain consent from or inform everyone around you. Same concept.
NTD is the European version of DMCA essentially.
It's not a good thing; but usenet providers like any other internet service are generally subject to one or the other depending on their location, so it's good to know which one covers the provider you use.
With providers spread across the globe, mirroring each others data, and subject to different copyright notice/takedown laws; the whole system is quite robust against removals. While you can send notices to individual providers, It's extremely difficult to coordinate a global takedown effort and truly remove content from usenet as a whole.
That's why multiple provider's in different regions can be beneficial. Some people will buy 'block' accounts (a fixed amount of data to be used as needed, vs a monthly cap) for a provider in a separate region to fallback on when the data has been taken down from their local provider.
I WANT OFF MR BONES WILD RIDE
Retention refers to how long a particular provider keeps the data users upload. 3-5k days is pretty typical, but there are some lower ones. Data is also mirrored across the backbones of all the different providers; so if it's removed from one (due to retention or a takedown notice) it's still available on others.
I've had little to no issue finding content, with 97% of data I've requested being available (stats from SabNZBD); but in the off chance you want something that is unavailable, most indexers have a requests section.
Similar to setting up torrenting, usenet indexers/clients can be added to the arr stacks for automation. I'm not sure about Kodi/Real Debrid as I don't use those.
X-Forwarded-For
And
X-Real-IP
The application you're proxying also has to listen to these headers. Some don't, some need to be told they're ok to use. (if you enable them, but don't have a proxy in front, users can spoof their ip using them)