Why should I? This would mean to fall for the propaganda of people like you. Marijuana is not healthy when someone is not ill. And misusing it is dangerous. Just like everything else in the world is when someone misuses it. If you drink enough water, you die. If you eat to much the effects are unhealthy.
But the point is that we want to decide for ourselves what we do with our lives. Even if it is not healthy. Nobody forces you or us to smoke weed. When people harm themselves it should not be he governments business. Period.
There is no need to proof that playing computer games for months without much of a break for sleeping and eating is unhealthy in order to demand that playing computer games should not be banned and punishable by long prison terms. The war on drugs was bad in Germany, but in the US you lost any proportions.
A lot of people here try to state that marijuana is harmless because they believe the mainstream propaganda that doing bad things to yourself and thus damaging the economy a tiny bit for being a slightly less productive member of society is a criminal activity.
I do not think so. Especially if smoking weed has similar or much less negative effects as alcohol which is legal I do not think I need to deny the negative effects of heavy abuse of that substance in order to demand the legalisation.
I am not talking about the usage of different drugs. Just marijuana. But beginning at a very young age younger than 18 or even 16, for a reasonable long time, repeatedly and in high quantities.
But again: Alcohol consumption on this level would be much worse. So despite what those puritan extremists tell us: The effects on the brain are no valid reason against the legalisation of drugs.
It just suggests that the other extreme point of view, that it has no negative effect on the brain of a human on any age whatsoever and that there should not be any regulation against the selling to minors for recreational purposes is wrong, nothing more.
Her mental health is decreasing by her illness, marijuhana helps. The negative effects on the brain by the drug are a mild side effect and should be minimalised by controlled quality of the drug and controlled consumption.
This is not "heavy use on a daily basis" to get high and increasing the taken amount to get the same high because the brain quickly gets used to it. It is used as a medicine, not as a mostly recreational activity.
The fact that the positive effects may outweigh the reducable negative effects does not mean that they do not exist.
E.g. chemo is sometimes bad for the brain and the rest of your body. Being dead or growing a brain tumor outweighs those effects many times, but it does not nullify them.
No. I know one in Hamburg. Those effects are real. And what is the big deal with other drugs? You could live longer as a heroin junkie than as an alcohol addict if given pharmacy-grade quality. You get more addicted to heroin than to alcohol. But the actual effects on your body are smaller.
In my opinion, the government should regulate drugs - all of them. And allow many now illegal drugs, except of course for the really bad ones like crystal meth or crocodile. But who would use them if alternatives are available at a reasonable price?
Prohibition is a bad idea. Getting stoned everyday while being 14 on the other hand is just as stupid. In Germany, you get adult at 18, except for some felonies were you may get a discount until 21.
When the government is holding you responsible for our actions, it should not interfere with self inflicted harm. No censoring of media were nobody was actually harmed. No punishments for possessing things that help you inflict harm on yourself.
But I expect the state to prohibit the selling of the really bad stuff and the selling of drugs to minors.
I am a foreigner. I do not believe in "doing adult crime, doing adult time" like it is the case in the US. But at 21, when people are old enough to take responibility for their actions, the state should leave us to our recreational activities of our choice.
I am against the criminalisation of the possession of drugs. But selling drugs to minors is another story.
I've actually red some of those studies, but did not find cc ones. I wrote what I understand of those studies in the hope scientists came up with some citations here. It's easier to get to the sources if you actually bought the scientific papers, you know.
What is so bad in preventing minors from heavy use? It is not challenged that the brain needs some time to recover from a stoned weekend. And by time I do not mean a day.
Hammering the brain every day when you are supposed to get good marks and learn something is a good idea, because?
I am pro legalization, but I would not allow my kids to get stoned on a regular basis before they turned 21 and I suggest/.ers to do the same. I am a terrible person, I know.
And you know: Visiting some of those clinics, were they help those kids is indeed possible. Watch for yourself. And I am not talking about those poor guys that got their psychological illness caused by marihuana. For some, the funny voices you could hear when really stoned do not go away...
This is ridiculous. Alcohol is more dangerous than pot. Abusing pot heavily is still a bad idea because Paracelsus was right. The studies are out there. Find them for yourself. Why do some of us Nerds need to think only in yes and no? Sometimes it is just a bit more complex. I am not denying us the highs. I am just suggesting to be on the safe side with your kids - because I have (!) done my research and it sounds reasonable on more than one level. Let's leave it at that.
Yes. Those findings are not too clear. But on the other side, you could visit very heavy young users in clinics and watch those effects by yourself. Those guys really have problems they wouldn't if they smoked weed responsibly.
Paracelsus was no moron. German: Alle Ding' sind Gift, und nichts ohn' Gift; allein die Dosis macht, daß ein Ding kein Gift ist. All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous. It may be impossible to use as much marijuhana as needed for dying on the poisonous effects of marihuana. But I would prevent minors from taking the risk of heavy marihuana abuse to find out what it REALLY does to the brain. Just like drinking alcohol on a regular basis, it may be a very bad idea for very young people that want to get a job were thinking may be neccessary.
Why modded -1? This study supports other studies that came to similar conclusions:
Yes. Marijuhana-abuse by minors is a big problem. Not if done once, but an abuse, that does not affect grown ups (from 21 or better, 25 years on) very much has a devastating effect on their brains. The reason, as I understood it, is the rearranging of the whole brain structure while being juvenile. This rearrangement, as new scans showed, is much more fundamental than previously known. And smoking grass fucks that up big time. And it messes with the hormon levels. Those rearrangements possibly can not take place after the normal timeframe. If they were haltet or obfuscated by marihuana abuse, those youngsters have a permanent brain damage.
But: Abusing any brain affecting drug in that time will possibly do the same, so drinking alcohol instead of smoking is not an option. If I had children, I would insist on limiting marijuhana use to one time pet year, four times max until they are 21 (you are an adult at 18 here, so a bit of cooperation from the other side would be necessary. Any smoking of marihuana under the age of 16 would be completely out of the question.
Your war on drugs was one big mistake. But inform yourself before letting your kids use it limitless. If those studies are right, they suggest that using marihuana (esp. in a vaporizer) is indeed less dangerous than alcohol for the body. And does not effect grown ups as much as heavy drinking would. Even really heavy abuse does not make you significantly dumber, just a measurable bit and it is possible that the brain could recover, except for some problems with the short time memory, which MAY stay. But for youngsters that use marijuhana heavily, it may be that it really blows their mind away. But they would be DEAD if they drank as much, so demonizing pot is really dumb. Being dead means no brain functions whatsoever, so instead of being less stellar in school, they would rot...
But: It seems like the dangers to young people were underestimated.
1. All the guys here are correct, you'll need to do it yourself to be absolutely shure. 2. Nevertheless, setting up a webmail- and IMAP-server might be a bit excessive just to be a bit more secure.
Look at posteo.de:
1GB for 1 EUR per month, up to 20 GB. They claim that they can not relate your payment to the anonymously set up account. They are allowed to throw away any data not needed for doing the billing by German law, so they do that Your ip in the emails is replaced by the generic ip of posteo, making it harder to trace you They claim that they do not store any access-data You could use calendar and contacts and opt in to encrypt that data on their server The SSL-certificates are created via open source products and signed by a rather paranoid signing-center
As of now, they seem to be trustworthy and the situation in Germany is NOT yet as bad as it is in the US. Personally, I trust them.
As an off topic sidenote: Disadvantage for you US guys: They are using only green energy, the bastards! Actually avoiding the good and beloved fossile and nuclear energy! Impossible! Germany is doomed, our economy is doomed, we are all going to die!
SCNR, but some comments on/. about alternative energies are... amusing, at least in my book as a German...
Q&A with Mr. Snowden himself: ---cut--- Mathius1 17 June 2013 2:54pm Is encrypting my email any good at defeating the NSA survelielance? Id my data protected by standard encryption?
Answer:
Encryption works. Properly implemented strong crypto systems are one of the few things that you can rely on. Unfortunately, endpoint security is so terrifically weak that NSA can frequently find ways around it. ---cut---
Spread the word. FUD does not help if we agree on the fact that we must "remember, remember the 5th of november".
We should not curl down in a fetal position. We should act - as much as we could.
Because Lavabit has been officially contacted they can't destroy any data, they can shutup shop to prevent anyone else falling into the net which is what they have done but for anyone who have already used the service and have any data already on the Lavabit servers, it's just a matter of time before their data is decrypted one way or another..
You are right, except for this one. Strong encryption is - as far as we know from Mr. Snowden who knows a bit more of their abilities than the average person - not compromised. There are attack vectors and they write away encrypted stuff if they later find a way to decrypt it, but they will need more informations before they can do that, provided the encryption and the keys were strong.
But they did state that they may have been forced to provide a way around their protections. Before that happpened, they shut down their servers.
Your bad english is the reason you misinterpreted the article. The article says:
At the moment, nobody could snoop into the emails of the companies that shut down their servive. But one company was ORDERED to change that by the government. The only way to protect THE EMAILS from that "lawful" crime against their customers was to shut down their service. the other company did the same BEFORE they received an order that would FORCE them to let the government in.
You simply misunderstood the reasons why they shut down.
@the english speaking commenters here flaming him: Try to read an article in a foreign language you hardly speak and THEN come back ranting about misunderstood articles.
You should read TFA. One year is OK. He did not get probation because he tried to blame others by faking evidence against innocents. That is reasonable. Generally speaking, you are right about US sentences being out of hand. Their system is fucked up. But not in this case.
if you RTFA, it states that the fake facebook profiles he created AFTER he was caught to blame other students irrated the judge so much that he didn't get probation.
While I agree that the punishments in the U.S. are getting out of hands, one year seems appropriate in this case. What a stupid asshole tries to turn others in for his own crime and hopes for probation? One year is harsh, but not inappropriate - he and his collegues would have gained 8000 or 7000 Dollars.
You may be right. Same here in Germany. "Volksbefragung" (obligatory survey about pretty much everything), stoped by our constitutional court in it's overbroad spilling of data to everyone. There was an outcry by many citizens. Now they will implement a data retention for 6 months containing the most sensitive data. A few people complaining, nothing to worry about.
People are getting used to surveillance because they trade it for connecting to other people by facebook.
They are giving up privacy because there they got "nothing to hide". Except when one day they have.
But at least our country is not yet as much as oceania was in 1884 or the US is now. YET.
Is it my bad english? He said it's just below an effective appeal: more and the appeal would go through. This is not the same:
1. offering to settle for something I am not entitled to by making it a tiny bit cheaper than to go to the court, even though it might be the other guy is innocent 2. giving the guy as much penalties I as a judge am entitled to until the full extend of the legal system, because of what they did. Not the same league, not the same game.
Look at his career. He is good at what he does. And when you are, you could afford jokes - nobody at prenda law is laughing now or not taking him seriously. I am from Germany. But i'll rather be at the north pole than pissing off the IRS and being inside of the USA.
He did a hell of a job. Looked into every f...ing detail. And sent them the IRS to go look up their asses. And made shure those pranks will not sue anyone anymore on every court they are now entitled to represent themselves as a lawyer. He did not only made star trek jokes. He made those and stamped them into the ground, while other judges failed to do so. Read the article and google Google News for his name.
And admire a true lawnerd. As a nerd/geek. The other judged did not look into pradas scheme. He did. And now these fuckers are up to a world of pain. The IRS is not friendly towards avoiding taxes, even Mr. Capone has learned this, IIRC...
It is epic. And I'll grab some popcorn and make some google alert. For the judge and for this firm and those guys.
Yes, from Germany the usual B5-Universe-Question. I know Warner hates b5 and has repeatedly (the lost tales) stated that they are not willing to pay for a decent series or film or whatever.
Is it really and totally out of the question to fundraise a new series in the b5 universe? TLT made some money as we hoped for a new mini-series. Or at least fundraise the upcoming series BEFORE it gets cancelled or it's storyline completely messed up by professionals (that hate SciFi anyways as they never were nerds)?
This is actually one question, despite it having more than one questionmark.
Ah yes. You would delete and recreate all your accounts.
Just because someone tries to break into your accounts by knowing your email address. Even though the email account is not (!) compromised but changed anyway.
Regarding your post: the email account was not compromised, so the emails to destroy your life can not be sent. And the address would be changed even in my point of view because of the ongoing attempts to get in. So the horrorscenario you describe won't become a reality. By ignoring adequate steps to react, you give every tease way too much power by just triggering a few password resets online.
To follow your advice would mean that all I need to do to actually harm someone is to know his email address and try a few password resets using Tor at different companies. And voila: Every account deleted, emailaddress changed, lost hundreds of dollars or much more. We are not only talking about apple but every electronic good bought online by that person. Steam - another 1000 EUR because all the games he bought are gone. And 20 - 40 games is not much.
You would not strengthen your passwords, change the associated email and tighten security, you would delete your digital personality by "destroying the traces that lead them to" your stuff...
You keep your emailaddress secret, correct? Because that information alone is dangerous by that logic.
We can stop here. You do not argue technically, but emotionally. If it makes you feel better to destroy every account you have instead of taking reasonable counter-measures, it is logical for you to do so. But I do not believe that this is a good advice, because it costs a lot of money without a reasonable security gain.
Thank you for using autotranslation, but I am afraid that every German reading this text knows that this is not manually written German from a foreigner but an automatic tranlation. So I am afraid that my claim that my English beats the hell out of your German, is still not falsified;)
Slashdot Mirror
Why should I? This would mean to fall for the propaganda of people like you. Marijuana is not healthy when someone is not ill. And misusing it is dangerous. Just like everything else in the world is when someone misuses it. If you drink enough water, you die. If you eat to much the effects are unhealthy.
But the point is that we want to decide for ourselves what we do with our lives. Even if it is not healthy. Nobody forces you or us to smoke weed. When people harm themselves it should not be he governments business. Period.
There is no need to proof that playing computer games for months without much of a break for sleeping and eating is unhealthy in order to demand that playing computer games should not be banned and punishable by long prison terms. The war on drugs was bad in Germany, but in the US you lost any proportions.
A lot of people here try to state that marijuana is harmless because they believe the mainstream propaganda that doing bad things to yourself and thus damaging the economy a tiny bit for being a slightly less productive member of society is a criminal activity.
I do not think so. Especially if smoking weed has similar or much less negative effects as alcohol which is legal I do not think I need to deny the negative effects of heavy abuse of that substance in order to demand the legalisation.
Simple as that.
I am not talking about the usage of different drugs. Just marijuana. But beginning at a very young age younger than 18 or even 16, for a reasonable long time, repeatedly and in high quantities.
But again: Alcohol consumption on this level would be much worse. So despite what those puritan extremists tell us: The effects on the brain are no valid reason against the legalisation of drugs.
It just suggests that the other extreme point of view, that it has no negative effect on the brain of a human on any age whatsoever and that there should not be any regulation against the selling to minors for recreational purposes is wrong, nothing more.
This does not disprove parent:
Her mental health is decreasing by her illness, marijuhana helps. The negative effects on the brain by the drug are a mild side effect and should be minimalised by controlled quality of the drug and controlled consumption.
This is not "heavy use on a daily basis" to get high and increasing the taken amount to get the same high because the brain quickly gets used to it. It is used as a medicine, not as a mostly recreational activity.
The fact that the positive effects may outweigh the reducable negative effects does not mean that they do not exist.
E.g. chemo is sometimes bad for the brain and the rest of your body. Being dead or growing a brain tumor outweighs those effects many times, but it does not nullify them.
No. I know one in Hamburg. Those effects are real. And what is the big deal with other drugs? You could live longer as a heroin junkie than as an alcohol addict if given pharmacy-grade quality. You get more addicted to heroin than to alcohol. But the actual effects on your body are smaller.
In my opinion, the government should regulate drugs - all of them. And allow many now illegal drugs, except of course for the really bad ones like crystal meth or crocodile. But who would use them if alternatives are available at a reasonable price?
Prohibition is a bad idea. Getting stoned everyday while being 14 on the other hand is just as stupid. In Germany, you get adult at 18, except for some felonies were you may get a discount until 21.
When the government is holding you responsible for our actions, it should not interfere with self inflicted harm. No censoring of media were nobody was actually harmed. No punishments for possessing things that help you inflict harm on yourself.
But I expect the state to prohibit the selling of the really bad stuff and the selling of drugs to minors.
I am a foreigner. I do not believe in "doing adult crime, doing adult time" like it is the case in the US. But at 21, when people are old enough to take responibility for their actions, the state should leave us to our recreational activities of our choice.
I am against the criminalisation of the possession of drugs. But selling drugs to minors is another story.
I've actually red some of those studies, but did not find cc ones. I wrote what I understand of those studies in the hope scientists came up with some citations here. It's easier to get to the sources if you actually bought the scientific papers, you know.
What is so bad in preventing minors from heavy use? It is not challenged that the brain needs some time to recover from a stoned weekend. And by time I do not mean a day.
Hammering the brain every day when you are supposed to get good marks and learn something is a good idea, because?
I am pro legalization, but I would not allow my kids to get stoned on a regular basis before they turned 21 and I suggest /.ers to do the same. I am a terrible person, I know.
And you know: Visiting some of those clinics, were they help those kids is indeed possible. Watch for yourself. And I am not talking about those poor guys that got their psychological illness caused by marihuana. For some, the funny voices you could hear when really stoned do not go away...
This is ridiculous. Alcohol is more dangerous than pot. Abusing pot heavily is still a bad idea because Paracelsus was right. The studies are out there. Find them for yourself. Why do some of us Nerds need to think only in yes and no? Sometimes it is just a bit more complex. I am not denying us the highs. I am just suggesting to be on the safe side with your kids - because I have (!) done my research and it sounds reasonable on more than one level. Let's leave it at that.
Yes. Those findings are not too clear. But on the other side, you could visit very heavy young users in clinics and watch those effects by yourself. Those guys really have problems they wouldn't if they smoked weed responsibly.
Paracelsus was no moron. German: Alle Ding' sind Gift, und nichts ohn' Gift; allein die Dosis macht, daß ein Ding kein Gift ist.
All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous. It may be impossible to use as much marijuhana as needed for dying on the poisonous effects of marihuana. But I would prevent minors from taking the risk of heavy marihuana abuse to find out what it REALLY does to the brain. Just like drinking alcohol on a regular basis, it may be a very bad idea for very young people that want to get a job were thinking may be neccessary.
Outsourced prisons and then removal of citizenship will fix that. Most felons already can't vote.
What, like forever?
Just googled it. This is sick.
Maybe this is why?
Is Marijuana a Safe Drug? Teenage Brain at Risk for Drug Abuse
Why modded -1? This study supports other studies that came to similar conclusions:
Yes. Marijuhana-abuse by minors is a big problem. Not if done once, but an abuse, that does not affect grown ups (from 21 or better, 25 years on) very much has a devastating effect on their brains. The reason, as I understood it, is the rearranging of the whole brain structure while being juvenile. This rearrangement, as new scans showed, is much more fundamental than previously known. And smoking grass fucks that up big time. And it messes with the hormon levels. Those rearrangements possibly can not take place after the normal timeframe. If they were haltet or obfuscated by marihuana abuse, those youngsters have a permanent brain damage.
But: Abusing any brain affecting drug in that time will possibly do the same, so drinking alcohol instead of smoking is not an option. If I had children, I would insist on limiting marijuhana use to one time pet year, four times max until they are 21 (you are an adult at 18 here, so a bit of cooperation from the other side would be necessary. Any smoking of marihuana under the age of 16 would be completely out of the question.
Your war on drugs was one big mistake. But inform yourself before letting your kids use it limitless. If those studies are right, they suggest that using marihuana (esp. in a vaporizer) is indeed less dangerous than alcohol for the body. And does not effect grown ups as much as heavy drinking would. Even really heavy abuse does not make you significantly dumber, just a measurable bit and it is possible that the brain could recover, except for some problems with the short time memory, which MAY stay. But for youngsters that use marijuhana heavily, it may be that it really blows their mind away. But they would be DEAD if they drank as much, so demonizing pot is really dumb. Being dead means no brain functions whatsoever, so instead of being less stellar in school, they would rot...
But: It seems like the dangers to young people were underestimated.
+1 insightful, if I had modpoints
1. All the guys here are correct, you'll need to do it yourself to be absolutely shure.
2. Nevertheless, setting up a webmail- and IMAP-server might be a bit excessive just to be a bit more secure.
Look at posteo.de:
1GB for 1 EUR per month, up to 20 GB.
They claim that they can not relate your payment to the anonymously set up account. They are allowed to throw away any data not needed for doing the billing by German law, so they do that
Your ip in the emails is replaced by the generic ip of posteo, making it harder to trace you
They claim that they do not store any access-data
You could use calendar and contacts and opt in to encrypt that data on their server
The SSL-certificates are created via open source products and signed by a rather paranoid signing-center
As of now, they seem to be trustworthy and the situation in Germany is NOT yet as bad as it is in the US. Personally, I trust them.
As an off topic sidenote:
Disadvantage for you US guys: They are using only green energy, the bastards! Actually avoiding the good and beloved fossile and nuclear energy! Impossible! Germany is doomed, our economy is doomed, we are all going to die!
SCNR, but some comments on /. about alternative energies are... amusing, at least in my book as a German...
12.12pm ET
Question:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower
Q&A with Mr. Snowden himself:
---cut---
Mathius1
17 June 2013 2:54pm
Is encrypting my email any good at defeating the NSA survelielance? Id my data protected by standard encryption?
Answer:
Encryption works. Properly implemented strong crypto systems are one of the few things that you can rely on. Unfortunately, endpoint security is so terrifically weak that NSA can frequently find ways around it.
---cut---
Spread the word. FUD does not help if we agree on the fact that we must "remember, remember the 5th of november".
We should not curl down in a fetal position. We should act - as much as we could.
Because Lavabit has been officially contacted they can't destroy any data, they can shutup shop to prevent anyone else falling into the net which is what they have done but for anyone who have already used the service and have any data already on the Lavabit servers, it's just a matter of time before their data is decrypted one way or another..
You are right, except for this one. Strong encryption is - as far as we know from Mr. Snowden who knows a bit more of their abilities than the average person - not compromised. There are attack vectors and they write away encrypted stuff if they later find a way to decrypt it, but they will need more informations before they can do that, provided the encryption and the keys were strong.
But they did state that they may have been forced to provide a way around their protections. Before that happpened, they shut down their servers.
Your bad english is the reason you misinterpreted the article. The article says:
At the moment, nobody could snoop into the emails of the companies that shut down their servive. But one company was ORDERED to change that by the government. The only way to protect THE EMAILS from that "lawful" crime against their customers was to shut down their service. the other company did the same BEFORE they received an order that would FORCE them to let the government in.
You simply misunderstood the reasons why they shut down.
@the english speaking commenters here flaming him: Try to read an article in a foreign language you hardly speak and THEN come back ranting about misunderstood articles.
You should read TFA. One year is OK. He did not get probation because he tried to blame others by faking evidence against innocents. That is reasonable. Generally speaking, you are right about US sentences being out of hand. Their system is fucked up. But not in this case.
+1. There are many cases where the penalties in the US are getting out of hand. This is not one of those cases.
RTFA. He tried to blame others by creating fake facebookprofiles of real students after he was caught and would have earned 8000 Dollars from it.
if you RTFA, it states that the fake facebook profiles he created AFTER he was caught to blame other students irrated the judge so much that he didn't get probation.
While I agree that the punishments in the U.S. are getting out of hands, one year seems appropriate in this case. What a stupid asshole tries to turn others in for his own crime and hopes for probation? One year is harsh, but not inappropriate - he and his collegues would have gained 8000 or 7000 Dollars.
You may be right. Same here in Germany. "Volksbefragung" (obligatory survey about pretty much everything), stoped by our constitutional court in it's overbroad spilling of data to everyone. There was an outcry by many citizens. Now they will implement a data retention for 6 months containing the most sensitive data. A few people complaining, nothing to worry about.
People are getting used to surveillance because they trade it for connecting to other people by facebook.
They are giving up privacy because there they got "nothing to hide". Except when one day they have.
But at least our country is not yet as much as oceania was in 1884 or the US is now. YET.
Mr Capone did not take the IRS seriously.
Is it my bad english? He said it's just below an effective appeal: more and the appeal would go through. This is not the same:
1. offering to settle for something I am not entitled to by making it a tiny bit cheaper than to go to the court, even though it might be the other guy is innocent 2. giving the guy as much penalties I as a judge am entitled to until the full extend of the legal system, because of what they did. Not the same league, not the same game.
Am I wrong with this interpretation?
I need mod points and a time machine to undo the comment i made. someone else rate this AC up
Look at his career. He is good at what he does. And when you are, you could afford jokes - nobody at prenda law is laughing now or not taking him seriously. I am from Germany. But i'll rather be at the north pole than pissing off the IRS and being inside of the USA.
He did a hell of a job. Looked into every f...ing detail. And sent them the IRS to go look up their asses. And made shure those pranks will not sue anyone anymore on every court they are now entitled to represent themselves as a lawyer. He did not only made star trek jokes. He made those and stamped them into the ground, while other judges failed to do so. Read the article and google Google News for his name.
And admire a true lawnerd. As a nerd/geek. The other judged did not look into pradas scheme. He did. And now these fuckers are up to a world of pain. The IRS is not friendly towards avoiding taxes, even Mr. Capone has learned this, IIRC...
It is epic. And I'll grab some popcorn and make some google alert. For the judge and for this firm and those guys.
Green! The odds of three purples already left me no other chance in the lottery draw.
Yes, from Germany the usual B5-Universe-Question. I know Warner hates b5 and has repeatedly (the lost tales) stated that they are not willing to pay for a decent series or film or whatever.
Is it really and totally out of the question to fundraise a new series in the b5 universe? TLT made some money as we hoped for a new mini-series. Or at least fundraise the upcoming series BEFORE it gets cancelled or it's storyline completely messed up by professionals (that hate SciFi anyways as they never were nerds)?
This is actually one question, despite it having more than one questionmark.
Ah yes. You would delete and recreate all your accounts.
Just because someone tries to break into your accounts by knowing your email address. Even though the email account is not (!) compromised but changed anyway.
Regarding your post: the email account was not compromised, so the emails to destroy your life can not be sent. And the address would be changed even in my point of view because of the ongoing attempts to get in. So the horrorscenario you describe won't become a reality. By ignoring adequate steps to react, you give every tease way too much power by just triggering a few password resets online.
To follow your advice would mean that all I need to do to actually harm someone is to know his email address and try a few password resets using Tor at different companies. And voila: Every account deleted, emailaddress changed, lost hundreds of dollars or much more. We are not only talking about apple but every electronic good bought online by that person. Steam - another 1000 EUR because all the games he bought are gone. And 20 - 40 games is not much.
You would not strengthen your passwords, change the associated email and tighten security, you would delete your digital personality by "destroying the traces that lead them to" your stuff...
You keep your emailaddress secret, correct? Because that information alone is dangerous by that logic.
We can stop here. You do not argue technically, but emotionally. If it makes you feel better to destroy every account you have instead of taking reasonable counter-measures, it is logical for you to do so. But I do not believe that this is a good advice, because it costs a lot of money without a reasonable security gain.
Thank you for using autotranslation, but I am afraid that every German reading this text knows that this is not manually written German from a foreigner but an automatic tranlation. So I am afraid that my claim that my English beats the hell out of your German, is still not falsified ;)