Except that the currently accepted legal definition of affect for purposes of establishing standing to sue is very weak compared to the reality of the affect. For example, plaintiff in the gun rights case in DC was only able to establish standing to sue because he was required to have a gun at his job as a security guard in DC, but couldn't take it home because of the DC ban. That was the "damage". Several cases had been dismissed before his where the damage was the lack of freedom or personal risk of being unarmed in a dangerous city.
Another example is the case against TSA/AG brought Gilmore wherein the case was dismissed because Gilmore "had other travel options available to him" thus he could not establish "damage" and thus had no standing to sue. http://www.papersplease.org/gilmore/facts.html
so when the boomers retire and withdraw that social security, they'll just have to pay it right back in the taxes necessary to pay the government debt to those programs, and more to make up the >$10 Trillion unfunded SS/Medicare obligation? sounds like a circle *&#$ to me. certainly a losing deal. if you or I were to start something like this, we'd be hoisted up next to Madoff and other Ponzi schemers.
actually, with the US debt the way it is, if you're an American someone does own your ass. by simple division every American owes $37,225, making no account for earning power. problem is, no one knows exactly who owns your ass. the government's kinda like the problem securities market that way. there's no way to trace who owns each of us (or rather owns about 1 year of each of our lives.)
given the amount of money DEFCON and Black Hat make from the government and its contractors, i question the notion that he's been a rebel since the commercialization of those conferences.
i don't know about that. Hitler took pretty strong offense at the widely publicized participation and victories of Jesse Owens in their 1936 Olympics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Owens
and if you do, keep your current machine as long as possible. the manufacturing process is the most ecologically unfriendly aspect of computer manufacture, followed by landfill at end of life. and when you do finally replace your machine, try to replace components. your case is still good and there's usually no need to demand a new one be made for you. and when you replace components, try to recycle them. even in bfe rural virginia my county accepts electronics for recycling. chances are good that your municipality does too. if not, then many big box stores are starting to as well.
All this raises the question: Does the training endanger the dogs? Plastic and thin film processing chemicals are usually carcinogenic. Can we get these MAFIAA goons prosecuted for animal cruelty?
except the rule of law is still being eroded under Obama, just as it was under Bush. Obama is the same on state secrets, illegal domestic spying, and other issues the left railed against under Bush. Now they're swept under the rug.
The US will not win the war on terrorism by force or jailing people. The only way we can win is through justice and compassion.
and by rectifying or making amends for past injustices. like our overthrow of Iran's government in the 50s to help out our imperial buddies in the UK. or our current imbroglios. i think a strong dose of non-intervention is in order for the next 50 years. even in cases where the driving public sentiment is to help people, our hands are too dirty and our reputation too stained by our past to be effective at anything more than making things worse.
Personally, I'm willing to have these people in my neighborhood. The biggest threat to my safety I perceive is from vigilantes bent on finding and killing them, not the prisoners themselves.
Stated more articulately, i miss the former priority in the US of becoming more egalitarian. In our country's beginning slavery was legal. In the 50s we experimented on the mentally disabled and ill. In the 60s (and before obviously) we persecuted minorities for trying to exercise their rights. In the 60s-70s we drafted and sent people to their deaths in war without allowing them the right to vote (draft age was 18, voting age was 21). These things aren't done anymore, and certainly not on an institutionalized scale. These things are now not acceptable. This is a good thing. As a nation, we have a history of eventually responding to dissent with corrective action (getting better). We are departing from that history and descending into barbarism in our dealings with a threat that does not merit it.
Okay, but my point is that ad hoc, extralegal "justice" erodes the actual justice system. The entire government justification for Guantanamo undermines confidence in the judiciary and places more unconstitutional power in the hands of the executive. These things have far-reaching, currently under-appreciated consequences.
Hopefully we won't because that's another step on the road we're going down already. The road to government shooting any of us at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
The rule of law is our friend, and our best defense against the capriciousness of government.
(Say what you will about Castro, he dose not let anyone else mistreat Cubans.)
So Castro's like an abusive, jealous spouse? Cool.
Per your question, RTFA or google a bit. If TL;DR, then the take away is that they're from western China and are already members of a persecuted minority. They'll all but certainly be killed if we send them back to China. No one else wants them, or if you read into it a bit, perhaps other countries enjoy leaving us between a rock and a hard place ethically.
So it seems like soon the level of freedom in our illegal prisons and the general populace will converge on some middle ground like this one. We should all be grateful to our fast-food providing overlords. I miss freedom, QQ.
My father in law can trace his American heritage to both the indigenous population and colonial era settlers. In the early 80s he got death threats from people who thought he was Iranian. (around the time of the Iran hostage event)
My wife got yelled at to "go home" by a motorist at speed on the highway after September 11th. At first she thought they just had something against WV.
Probably. If you already knew how to hack, that'd imply you had already done some hacking. What were you hacking and was it illegal for you to hack? Can they trust someone who would break the law to learn the things they want people to come in knowing? Classic chicken-egg that way, so yes, I'd imagine you'd be welcome. Of course, if you've not got the temperament for hacking, how good of a hacker will you make? Will you just end up being another gov hack? (Noting personal, these are all meta-speculative quasi-rhetorical questions about the mindset of the gov and the possible repercussions of such putative mindsets.)
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the currently accepted legal definition of affect for purposes of establishing standing to sue is very weak compared to the reality of the affect. For example, plaintiff in the gun rights case in DC was only able to establish standing to sue because he was required to have a gun at his job as a security guard in DC, but couldn't take it home because of the DC ban. That was the "damage". Several cases had been dismissed before his where the damage was the lack of freedom or personal risk of being unarmed in a dangerous city.
Another example is the case against TSA/AG brought Gilmore wherein the case was dismissed because Gilmore "had other travel options available to him" thus he could not establish "damage" and thus had no standing to sue.
http://www.papersplease.org/gilmore/facts.html
and the one against the urge to joke about Napoleonic justice.
Since when has France moved away from the "guilty until proven innocent" stance?
and then strap rockets to it and ship it to Mars to make that planet habitable. just like megamaid and Druidia.
What, you mean that didn't really happen? There goes our feasibility study. :(
it's the spacenumber bed.
so when the boomers retire and withdraw that social security, they'll just have to pay it right back in the taxes necessary to pay the government debt to those programs, and more to make up the >$10 Trillion unfunded SS/Medicare obligation? sounds like a circle *&#$ to me. certainly a losing deal. if you or I were to start something like this, we'd be hoisted up next to Madoff and other Ponzi schemers.
you post under the name "cashman73". maybe cash motivates you too.
rather, the government does OWE your ass. to someone else.
actually, with the US debt the way it is, if you're an American someone does own your ass. by simple division every American owes $37,225, making no account for earning power. problem is, no one knows exactly who owns your ass. the government's kinda like the problem securities market that way. there's no way to trace who owns each of us (or rather owns about 1 year of each of our lives.)
given the amount of money DEFCON and Black Hat make from the government and its contractors, i question the notion that he's been a rebel since the commercialization of those conferences.
brought to you by the department of redundancy department. thanks, i'm here till wednesday. try the veal.
i don't know about that. Hitler took pretty strong offense at the widely publicized participation and victories of Jesse Owens in their 1936 Olympics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Owens
and if you do, keep your current machine as long as possible. the manufacturing process is the most ecologically unfriendly aspect of computer manufacture, followed by landfill at end of life. and when you do finally replace your machine, try to replace components. your case is still good and there's usually no need to demand a new one be made for you. and when you replace components, try to recycle them. even in bfe rural virginia my county accepts electronics for recycling. chances are good that your municipality does too. if not, then many big box stores are starting to as well.
All this raises the question: Does the training endanger the dogs? Plastic and thin film processing chemicals are usually carcinogenic. Can we get these MAFIAA goons prosecuted for animal cruelty?
"it now includes a Turbo mode which unclogs your connection to get faster browsing"
i miss the turbo button on my PC. reading this made me realize it. i blame you and the topic author and the Opera group for my unhappiness.
[/joke]
except the rule of law is still being eroded under Obama, just as it was under Bush. Obama is the same on state secrets, illegal domestic spying, and other issues the left railed against under Bush. Now they're swept under the rug.
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/obama_and_state_secrets_shhh.php?page=1
Note: When the Columbia journalism school is calling the media as a whole to task for catering to the president, you know something is deeply wrong.
and by rectifying or making amends for past injustices. like our overthrow of Iran's government in the 50s to help out our imperial buddies in the UK. or our current imbroglios. i think a strong dose of non-intervention is in order for the next 50 years. even in cases where the driving public sentiment is to help people, our hands are too dirty and our reputation too stained by our past to be effective at anything more than making things worse.
Personally, I'm willing to have these people in my neighborhood. The biggest threat to my safety I perceive is from vigilantes bent on finding and killing them, not the prisoners themselves.
Stated more articulately, i miss the former priority in the US of becoming more egalitarian. In our country's beginning slavery was legal. In the 50s we experimented on the mentally disabled and ill. In the 60s (and before obviously) we persecuted minorities for trying to exercise their rights. In the 60s-70s we drafted and sent people to their deaths in war without allowing them the right to vote (draft age was 18, voting age was 21). These things aren't done anymore, and certainly not on an institutionalized scale. These things are now not acceptable. This is a good thing. As a nation, we have a history of eventually responding to dissent with corrective action (getting better). We are departing from that history and descending into barbarism in our dealings with a threat that does not merit it.
Okay, but my point is that ad hoc, extralegal "justice" erodes the actual justice system. The entire government justification for Guantanamo undermines confidence in the judiciary and places more unconstitutional power in the hands of the executive. These things have far-reaching, currently under-appreciated consequences.
and people like you make the rest of us question whether our "side" deserves to win sometimes.
By the way, the terrorists have nearly won already. We're less free and have less of the ethical high ground than ever before.
Hopefully we won't because that's another step on the road we're going down already. The road to government shooting any of us at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
The rule of law is our friend, and our best defense against the capriciousness of government.
So Castro's like an abusive, jealous spouse? Cool.
Per your question, RTFA or google a bit. If TL;DR, then the take away is that they're from western China and are already members of a persecuted minority. They'll all but certainly be killed if we send them back to China. No one else wants them, or if you read into it a bit, perhaps other countries enjoy leaving us between a rock and a hard place ethically.
So it seems like soon the level of freedom in our illegal prisons and the general populace will converge on some middle ground like this one. We should all be grateful to our fast-food providing overlords. I miss freedom, QQ.
My father in law can trace his American heritage to both the indigenous population and colonial era settlers. In the early 80s he got death threats from people who thought he was Iranian. (around the time of the Iran hostage event)
My wife got yelled at to "go home" by a motorist at speed on the highway after September 11th. At first she thought they just had something against WV.
Probably. If you already knew how to hack, that'd imply you had already done some hacking. What were you hacking and was it illegal for you to hack? Can they trust someone who would break the law to learn the things they want people to come in knowing? Classic chicken-egg that way, so yes, I'd imagine you'd be welcome. Of course, if you've not got the temperament for hacking, how good of a hacker will you make? Will you just end up being another gov hack? (Noting personal, these are all meta-speculative quasi-rhetorical questions about the mindset of the gov and the possible repercussions of such putative mindsets.)