Well five minutes ago I thought it was great, I was like "wow slashdot did away with all of their design, it looks just like craigslist." I guess I just happened to log on when there was no stylesheet for a bit.
Your credit card company has your phone number on file, if you call from that number they generally won't ask for the credit card number or the full number, if you call from a different phone then they will ask for more info. That's why the little stickers say to call from your "home phone" or did in the past few years.
Seriously?
Do people really think that quote means that a warrant is necessary for any and all searches and seizures? You have a basic deficiency in understanding the english language. That would mean every time a cop saw someone committing a crime he would have to go to court and get an arrest warrant before telling the person to stop and put their hands up, as that is a seizure of the person. Then after arresting the person, the cop would need another warrant to search the person for fruits/instrumentalities of their crime directly after arresting them “a search" Or say a cop walks up to a house and sees someone stabbing someone else inside, if a warrant is required for every search then the cop would have to go to a judge and swear an oath, obtain a warrant prior to entering the house. " a search"
again, read your quote, no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, it does not say that no searches shall be made without warrants. A search with a warrant is presumed to be reasonable. A search without a warrant (minus other mitigating factors i.e. the search theories I was talking about) is presumed unreasonable, that presumption, however, can be overcome by proving that there was probable cause at the time the search was conducted. It's a right against "unreasonable" searches and seizures, not against warrantless searches and seizures. Just to reiterate, there's no language that requires a warrant for all searches and seizures, it just says that warrants won't be issued without probable cause. The requirement is that all searches and seizures be reasonable.
Ie, is the cell phone just a stupid phone with a list of numbers which is reasonable to search, or is it a portable computer in your pocket which is not reasonable to search without a warrant.
Just note, there are about 10 different "search theories" which have been decided by the courts and the constitution, which Law Enforcement officers use as a gauge as to whether it is reasonable to conduct a certain search or not in a given situation. It's not about whether the phone is a phone or a computer, it is about whether it is covered in the "incident to arrest" search theory or not. It should also be noted that police officers, if not constrained by time, will usually get a warrant even when one is not needed. If you look at the text of the fourth amendment, it requires probable cause, not a warrant, a warrant is only a confirmation by a judge that there is probable cause.
I don't get why people are so quick to make absolute declarations on this subject. Unless you possess some kind of super-compendium of all knowledge... I say there's a quarter on Venus. Unless you search every square inch of Venus, you can't say that it's impossible, just based on your knowledge it seems highly unlikely.
Consent to search is a one time thing, they can come in and search upon your consent and when they leave they must have it again to search again. Also you can withdraw consent at any time, there are times, however, when police don't need a warrant or consent to search based on circumstances. They may still ask for consent at these times but if they have a valid search theory outside of consent it doesn't really matter what you say or sign.
You can, however, revoke consent DURING a search. And you must be provided reasonable opportunity to do so, like if you're home is being searched on consent, you cannot be in the back of a police car with no contact with the searchers etc.
I have to agree. I had serious trouble deciding to pay $12 for an indie game the other day. I was absolutely addicted to the demo and had run out of stuff to do there. But that extra $2.00 made it a much tougher decision. It's a mental game, when something is only $10.00 it's almost like not spending money to me. When it's more, I have to put it in the budget.
He actually had about $800K in the bank from the scammers in checks that cleared before he sent $458k back to them, Then the fraud was discovered by the bank and they attached his assets... oops
Just to clarify, the courts don't find him, the Cops do. Courts don't really care if they find anyone with subpoena's orders or anything else. It's up to flatfoots (feet?) to make it happen.
which is why my poop eating, dirt crawling, ringwormed, 2 year old that I let play in a pile of wood with rusty nails sticking out, will RULE THE WORLD
uh... is that supposed to be a joke?
Sorry but.... you may want to think you vote for the upfront and honest politician but it is the two-faced one who is best at appearing upfront and honest because he has enough money from as many sides of the same coin as possible.
We hire politicians based on thinly veiled marketing campaigns, and then they go and hire their buddies from law school. It has nothing to do with honesty.
Just a quick note: does a jar of del monte fruit actually have opening instructions? If not how can there be a prescribed manner of opening? I would say the prescribed manner in such a case would be any manner used by any non-trivial number of people. Such as running warm water over it and tapping the edge of the lid (which a LOT of people do to open stuck jars).
reading black text on a white background is hard on my eyes, I can't speak for anyone else. I'm much happier with E Ink than to read off a bleached white background. Look at any book that is meant to be read and doesn't have pictures, you're probably not going to find a whole lot of bleached white paper.
But what if those corporate paymasters use all their ROI's to hire people... Like my wife. So we can keep our house? I won't really give a flying rats ass about the rest then. I have two kids and am getting TOO DAMN CLOSE to foreclosure.
That's hilarious, there wouldn't be the ability to add that many jobs unless unemployment was already so high. And the unemployment number doesn't include people like my wife who is looking for a job and can't get one in her field.
On the other other hand, having a growing number of users switching to OS X and integrating with iOS and doing everything Apple does give some incentive. I have no idea what their market share is now but maybe these tactics show that Apple believes it's enough that they don't have to care too much about developers. Just a shot in the dark though
Slashdot Mirror
Well five minutes ago I thought it was great, I was like "wow slashdot did away with all of their design, it looks just like craigslist." I guess I just happened to log on when there was no stylesheet for a bit.
I'm kidding though, I do like the new look
Your credit card company has your phone number on file, if you call from that number they generally won't ask for the credit card number or the full number, if you call from a different phone then they will ask for more info. That's why the little stickers say to call from your "home phone" or did in the past few years.
FTF Constitution:
Really?! Don't refer to my Constitution like that you jackass
Also... the thing that ensures cops don't abuse power is not the judge, it's the exclusionary rule; look it up.
Seriously? Do people really think that quote means that a warrant is necessary for any and all searches and seizures? You have a basic deficiency in understanding the english language. That would mean every time a cop saw someone committing a crime he would have to go to court and get an arrest warrant before telling the person to stop and put their hands up, as that is a seizure of the person. Then after arresting the person, the cop would need another warrant to search the person for fruits/instrumentalities of their crime directly after arresting them “a search" Or say a cop walks up to a house and sees someone stabbing someone else inside, if a warrant is required for every search then the cop would have to go to a judge and swear an oath, obtain a warrant prior to entering the house. " a search"
again, read your quote, no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, it does not say that no searches shall be made without warrants. A search with a warrant is presumed to be reasonable. A search without a warrant (minus other mitigating factors i.e. the search theories I was talking about) is presumed unreasonable, that presumption, however, can be overcome by proving that there was probable cause at the time the search was conducted. It's a right against "unreasonable" searches and seizures, not against warrantless searches and seizures. Just to reiterate, there's no language that requires a warrant for all searches and seizures, it just says that warrants won't be issued without probable cause. The requirement is that all searches and seizures be reasonable.
Ie, is the cell phone just a stupid phone with a list of numbers which is reasonable to search, or is it a portable computer in your pocket which is not reasonable to search without a warrant.
Just note, there are about 10 different "search theories" which have been decided by the courts and the constitution, which Law Enforcement officers use as a gauge as to whether it is reasonable to conduct a certain search or not in a given situation. It's not about whether the phone is a phone or a computer, it is about whether it is covered in the "incident to arrest" search theory or not. It should also be noted that police officers, if not constrained by time, will usually get a warrant even when one is not needed. If you look at the text of the fourth amendment, it requires probable cause, not a warrant, a warrant is only a confirmation by a judge that there is probable cause.
Parent++!
I don't get why people are so quick to make absolute declarations on this subject. Unless you possess some kind of super-compendium of all knowledge... I say there's a quarter on Venus. Unless you search every square inch of Venus, you can't say that it's impossible, just based on your knowledge it seems highly unlikely.
Consent to search is a one time thing, they can come in and search upon your consent and when they leave they must have it again to search again. Also you can withdraw consent at any time, there are times, however, when police don't need a warrant or consent to search based on circumstances. They may still ask for consent at these times but if they have a valid search theory outside of consent it doesn't really matter what you say or sign.
You can, however, revoke consent DURING a search. And you must be provided reasonable opportunity to do so, like if you're home is being searched on consent, you cannot be in the back of a police car with no contact with the searchers etc.
Ethylene Glycol is obviously easier....Hence the method used
I have to agree. I had serious trouble deciding to pay $12 for an indie game the other day. I was absolutely addicted to the demo and had run out of stuff to do there. But that extra $2.00 made it a much tougher decision. It's a mental game, when something is only $10.00 it's almost like not spending money to me. When it's more, I have to put it in the budget.
He actually had about $800K in the bank from the scammers in checks that cleared before he sent $458k back to them, Then the fraud was discovered by the bank and they attached his assets... oops
I'm assuming they are talking about Chrome the browser not ChromeOS
wrong, peace officers are in a totally different branch of government, Judges are considered officers of the courts
Just to clarify, the courts don't find him, the Cops do. Courts don't really care if they find anyone with subpoena's orders or anything else. It's up to flatfoots (feet?) to make it happen.
I'm tired of Facebook, but there really is no good alternative.
There is being social in person...but that's a little strange for us I admit
which is why my poop eating, dirt crawling, ringwormed, 2 year old that I let play in a pile of wood with rusty nails sticking out, will RULE THE WORLD
uh... is that supposed to be a joke?
Sorry but.... you may want to think you vote for the upfront and honest politician but it is the two-faced one who is best at appearing upfront and honest because he has enough money from as many sides of the same coin as possible.
We hire politicians based on thinly veiled marketing campaigns, and then they go and hire their buddies from law school. It has nothing to do with honesty.
Just a quick note: does a jar of del monte fruit actually have opening instructions? If not how can there be a prescribed manner of opening? I would say the prescribed manner in such a case would be any manner used by any non-trivial number of people. Such as running warm water over it and tapping the edge of the lid (which a LOT of people do to open stuck jars).
reading black text on a white background is hard on my eyes, I can't speak for anyone else. I'm much happier with E Ink than to read off a bleached white background. Look at any book that is meant to be read and doesn't have pictures, you're probably not going to find a whole lot of bleached white paper.
How bout a camera?
Seriously phones are crappy cameras.
But what if those corporate paymasters use all their ROI's to hire people... Like my wife. So we can keep our house? I won't really give a flying rats ass about the rest then. I have two kids and am getting TOO DAMN CLOSE to foreclosure.
"more jobs added...."
That's hilarious, there wouldn't be the ability to add that many jobs unless unemployment was already so high. And the unemployment number doesn't include people like my wife who is looking for a job and can't get one in her field.
On the other other hand, having a growing number of users switching to OS X and integrating with iOS and doing everything Apple does give some incentive. I have no idea what their market share is now but maybe these tactics show that Apple believes it's enough that they don't have to care too much about developers. Just a shot in the dark though