There may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience. So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hellâ" I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise. It wonâ(TM)t be so much â(TM)cause the courts agree with us too. -- Donald Trump
Firstly, you're not under oath when you enter a plea. You're not testifying. If you were, nobody would ever enter a plea; they'd invoke the Fifth.
You're simply stating if you are invoking your right to a judicial proceeding (i.e. a trial) or if you want to accept guilt and move straight to sentencing.
No, the main problem I have with plea bargaining is from the prosecutorial side; if you charge, then bargain down to a lesser crime, you're either a) making a knowingly false charge, b) charging where there is insufficient evidence to convict, which is tantamount to (a), or c) knowingly letting a criminal get away with something.
Pleading 'not guilty' isn't a statement of 'I didn't do it,' it's a statement of 'I claim my rights, and you now have the burden of proving me guilty.'
Pleading 'guilty', on the other hand, *is* a statement of 'I did it.' Which is why pleading 'no contest' or 'nolo contendre' is sometimes a thing; "I'm going to be found guilty, so I'm not going to bother fighting it." If you plead guilty, however, that can be used against you civilly. If they accept NC, it isn't.
Some other countries also have a third determination beyond 'guilty' and 'not guilty' which is 'not proven.' I.e. 'We know you did it, but good for you, not enough evidence.' You can also get, in some cases, a declaration of factual innocence.
So Drumpf is allowed to, while making political speeches, direct his followers to 'beat the crap' out of dissenters, but Anonymous isn't allowed to attack in other ways. Gotcha.
Sure, with a modem. Ethernet was a paid addon. And it was still not nearly as integrated into the platform as the Xbox did, and as every other device since does.
It also had a unified memory architecture, and more importantly, it was a rock-solid, stable platform with a console mindset. You never had to worry about drivers, hardware revisions, and so on. The NVAPU was pretty cool too.
It also introduced a lot of things to the console world that are now considered standard; persistent onboard storage, built-in networking, an external ecosystem.
It's interesting how the ball keeps getting handed off between the companies. Sony ate Nintendo's lunch with the simple, easy to use PS1 compared to the harsh certification requirements and high costs of Nintendo. Microsoft ate Sony's lunch with the xbox vs the PS2. The Xbox360 carried on that trend vs the PS3. Then Sony did it right back to Microsoft with the PS4 vs the Xbone. With Nintendo quietly sitting in the corner and making a killing with the Wii and DS series.
So a guy who has noticed that easy border transits make his job easier than difficult border transits isn't qualified to say that changing from easy transit to difficult transit will make his job harder?
Twenty years ago, we got CKVR, CHCO, and TVO over the air. Channels 3, 11 and 2, as I recall. The antenna was connected to a dial that physically rotated it.
At some point, we got Global TV on channel 7.
Ah, growing up watching Robotech, Thundersub, Star Trek and Captain Power....
Nope. At worst, the electronic device should be used to produce a paper ballot, which the voter then physically walks out to a ballot box, hopefully after double-checking that all of their votes were correct, and drops in. The 'ballot-marker 3000' itself should never keep any sort of record.
Much like the one parent in the room who says that maybe the other parent's little angels need to learn some manners gets ostracized. God help the first parent if they actually address the other parent's child.
The FDA regulates "medical devices" in the same way it regulates drugs...you have to demonstrate efficacy, safety, do human trials...then there is liability insurance...it's ungodly expensive.
But to be fair, the alternative is being able to buy thorium toothpaste over-the-counter.
So answer the question. Who pays for public works, such as courts? Who pays for the common defense? How is it resolved when person A says 'that's my land, get your cows off of it' and person B says 'that's not your land, my cows can graze there all they want?'
"Any company which sells a device which is capable of storing digital files encrypted or otherwise secured, must be able to provide to law enforcement on demand a method to access and decode all files on a device."
Well, in the case of a general back door that lets the government easily access things on a whim, that doesn't exactly meet the 'but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
Also, all this amendment says is that things 'can' be seized in the right circumstances, not that anybody can be forced to help the government understand what they've seized.
It's still like saying that if the Japanese had occupied the Mariana Islands in WW2 and set up death camps, which the US then immediately burned down upon reconquering the islands, they could be legitimatedly referred to as 'American Death Camps.'
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, you're not under oath when you enter a plea. You're not testifying. If you were, nobody would ever enter a plea; they'd invoke the Fifth.
You're simply stating if you are invoking your right to a judicial proceeding (i.e. a trial) or if you want to accept guilt and move straight to sentencing.
No, the main problem I have with plea bargaining is from the prosecutorial side; if you charge, then bargain down to a lesser crime, you're either a) making a knowingly false charge, b) charging where there is insufficient evidence to convict, which is tantamount to (a), or c) knowingly letting a criminal get away with something.
Pleading 'not guilty' isn't a statement of 'I didn't do it,' it's a statement of 'I claim my rights, and you now have the burden of proving me guilty.'
Pleading 'guilty', on the other hand, *is* a statement of 'I did it.' Which is why pleading 'no contest' or 'nolo contendre' is sometimes a thing; "I'm going to be found guilty, so I'm not going to bother fighting it." If you plead guilty, however, that can be used against you civilly. If they accept NC, it isn't.
Some other countries also have a third determination beyond 'guilty' and 'not guilty' which is 'not proven.' I.e. 'We know you did it, but good for you, not enough evidence.' You can also get, in some cases, a declaration of factual innocence.
It's all very complicated.
So Drumpf is allowed to, while making political speeches, direct his followers to 'beat the crap' out of dissenters, but Anonymous isn't allowed to attack in other ways. Gotcha.
Sure, with a modem. Ethernet was a paid addon. And it was still not nearly as integrated into the platform as the Xbox did, and as every other device since does.
It also had a unified memory architecture, and more importantly, it was a rock-solid, stable platform with a console mindset. You never had to worry about drivers, hardware revisions, and so on. The NVAPU was pretty cool too.
It also introduced a lot of things to the console world that are now considered standard; persistent onboard storage, built-in networking, an external ecosystem.
It's interesting how the ball keeps getting handed off between the companies. Sony ate Nintendo's lunch with the simple, easy to use PS1 compared to the harsh certification requirements and high costs of Nintendo. Microsoft ate Sony's lunch with the xbox vs the PS2. The Xbox360 carried on that trend vs the PS3. Then Sony did it right back to Microsoft with the PS4 vs the Xbone. With Nintendo quietly sitting in the corner and making a killing with the Wii and DS series.
So democracy is Drumpf gets to speak, Anonymous doesn't?'
Right, so, you personally make sure to lock yourself in an individual cubicle in order to eat?
Well, the googles say he's worth about twenty to fifty million, and that lots of that was earned professionally.
So a guy who has noticed that easy border transits make his job easier than difficult border transits isn't qualified to say that changing from easy transit to difficult transit will make his job harder?
Twenty years ago, we got CKVR, CHCO, and TVO over the air. Channels 3, 11 and 2, as I recall. The antenna was connected to a dial that physically rotated it.
At some point, we got Global TV on channel 7.
Ah, growing up watching Robotech, Thundersub, Star Trek and Captain Power....
Nope. At worst, the electronic device should be used to produce a paper ballot, which the voter then physically walks out to a ballot box, hopefully after double-checking that all of their votes were correct, and drops in. The 'ballot-marker 3000' itself should never keep any sort of record.
Much like the one parent in the room who says that maybe the other parent's little angels need to learn some manners gets ostracized. God help the first parent if they actually address the other parent's child.
But to be fair, the alternative is being able to buy thorium toothpaste over-the-counter.
Yup. Number three is 'makes a left turn into a two-lane road, and winds up in the right-most lane.' Shit doesn't work that way.
Follow the damn rules of the road. Yes, we all have to be attentive. But it would be so much easier if we were all following the same damn playbook.
Driving in Canada, I find it aggravating when people who have the right of way try to do the 'polite' thing and wave somebody else through.
This, of course, is far more dangerous than simply taking your turn.
Why is that? The instinctive (and therefore probably wrong) first thought that pops into my head is 'two displays, two GPUs, seems perfect.'
So, anarchy. Might makes right.
So answer the question. Who pays for public works, such as courts? Who pays for the common defense? How is it resolved when person A says 'that's my land, get your cows off of it' and person B says 'that's not your land, my cows can graze there all they want?'
Regulations apply across the board, equally.
"Any company which sells a device which is capable of storing digital files encrypted or otherwise secured, must be able to provide to law enforcement on demand a method to access and decode all files on a device."
That's a regulation.
Well, in the case of a general back door that lets the government easily access things on a whim, that doesn't exactly meet the 'but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
Also, all this amendment says is that things 'can' be seized in the right circumstances, not that anybody can be forced to help the government understand what they've seized.
Ok, so if the Nazis had set up death camps in conquered France, you could legitimately refer to them as 'French Death Camps?'
They were Nazi Death Camps. Where they were was irrelevant. Much like Guantanamo Bay is an American Naval Base, despite being in Cuba.
Yes, with it being an iPhone 5c, all of this discussion is academic; it's probably fairly straightforward to crack.
Apple should still not be required to provide any form of technical assistance or tools for this.
It's still like saying that if the Japanese had occupied the Mariana Islands in WW2 and set up death camps, which the US then immediately burned down upon reconquering the islands, they could be legitimatedly referred to as 'American Death Camps.'
This assumes that the failed count isn't stored in the Secured Enclave somewhere. Which it presumably is.