After reading over other posts, I can sort of see how this ruling doesn't necessarily erode rights, although I still think it stinks.
If he had been a *good* lawyer and said nothing, then the drive would have had a legal status of "random bits, presumed innocent" and they would have no basis to force his hand.
What he did was indicate there was some kind of evidence on the drive. Big Ooopsie because either the drive has nothing pertinent to the case and he is deceiving the court, or he is telling the truth and the drive contains something pertinent to the case which may incriminate him.
So. Maybe no real rights violation at all. Just a stupid lawyer?
Still no sale. See various definitions of "witness" which are not bound to a single, narrow definition of "testimony on the stand".
"The way I see it" is exactly how law works. If enough people see it a particular way, you get new laws. If the person who sees it a particular way is a judge, his ruling is law... until another judge sees it a different way, all the way up to the Justices, who may then be over-ruled by the other branches and/or The People seeing it a different way. Of course the seeing is only part of it. The acting is all important...
...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself...,
That's just the relevant part of the 5th. No part of it makes any distinction between "providing evidence" or "trestifying". The way I see it, these are just two of several ways in which you could "be a witness". No doubt the court created this distinction for some purpose, and is building one mockery of our rights on top of a precedent set by another mockery. It's mockery all the way down... until you get to the turtles.
I don't see how you can do any meaningful engineering in this regard without picking winners and losers. Somebody is going to have less rain on their fields, less wind through their turbines, etc. I have seen in the local news where one suburban property owner sues another because he wants to cut down trees to get better solar power. Now take all those kinds of lawsuits and spread them out over 100s of square miles...
As for "you've got to know what you're doing", just LOL. I think that even if we could get the funding to do this kind of thing there would be all kinds of unintended consequences. New environments invite new fauna. Some of them are nice.... some aren't. Not only that, you have to have acceptable outcomes during all phases of construction because it could take decades to build. So yeah, we "knew what we were doing" until phase B of the project actually results in more tornadoes and a plague of locusts in your particular county which the company assures us is "only temporary" where "temporary" is five years give or take... or it might be permanent because our analysis didn't even predict this.
My big take-away is that the altitude makes all the difference. The "barrier" effect is less apparent.
So. If the guy builds a wall, he'll take away Sunlight nearby. Maybe there could be some effect due to the local average altitude being higher; but a puny little wall or even a small mountain range vs. the entire continental pattern? Even if we could alter the climate of a continent... I thought climate change was bad.
Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake basin are surrounded by much higher natural "walls". Downtown SLC still managed to get a tornado. No, it was not a massive F5, but it was definitely a tornado in a place that doesn't even usually get them. Any meteorologist will tell you that mountains don't prevent tornadoes, so I'm highly skeptical of the whole idea.
He's a physicist of course, so this only works on spherical chickens in a vacuum.
I don't know what to tell you. I also wore cheapo digital watches back in the 80s. My first one just told time and had red LEDs. That was probably elementary school or jr. high. Later I wore an LCD one that I thought was oh so cool. It had more advanced functions such as stopwatch, alarm, etc. That was probably highschool and early college. Around the same time some of my friends even had calculator watches. We were so high-tech we thought.
It was always a plastic band. I tried my father's watch once with the flexible metal band, that pulled. I guess he just grinned and bared it because when you live through a Depression and a war a little pulling now and then is no big deal.
Anyway, unless you don't sweat I don't see how you wouldn't notice the nasty looking (and smelling) whiteness every night you took the thing off. I guess you could have low sweat and fare skin, or something. Of course everybody's different. The watches annoyed me long before the era of cel phones, and I may be somewhat "on the spectrum" so that could have something to do with it.
I observed that time was everywhere, (microwave, radio station ID, computer, etc.). I just learned to do without time on my wrist even before cel phones. There were those rare occasions when I felt the need to ask. I seem to recall very early in the cel phone era, somebody pulling out their phone to tell me. I thought "well, that's one cool thing about these phones everybody carries now".
We didn't get a cel until my parents were aged. The idea was that my father would use it for emergencies. So more oddball stuff I suppose. In our house, the mobile phone was for old people. Dealing with my father's illness, death, and estate pushed me into the cel phone era--people began to expect timely contact from me, and then there was no going back.
"Smart" tech though? Nah, still not on board. There are a few things that are sort of cool about it; but as you gather I have a tendency to move slowly in these areas. You can call me a luddite if you want; but there's a lot to be said for late adoption. A whole class of early bugs and security issues get worked out while I watch from the sidelines. Sometimes entire technologies pass in and out of relevance because my adoption is that late. I see that as win because I didn't waste time on the trendy tech.
That's not to say I haven't been burned though... MFC, Flickr. I wish I never met 'em. I suppose there's something to be learned from those failures. I suppose I may even err too far on the side of trying to prevent failure. It takes all kinds. I think it's wonderful that we have early adopters, and non-adopters. It'd be boring (and way too crowded) if everybody was on the bus.
Built-in A/C and UV light to compensate for the sweatiness and tan-marks that come from wearing a watch. This is the no. 1 reason why I would never consider wearing a watch again. Obviously I'm joking with the subject line. It ain't happenin', "smart" or otherwise. Now that time and a bunch of other things are in my pocket, they ain't goin' back on my wrist.
Oh, and bands that snag the hair on your arms. Ouch. Never again.
I'm guessing that the modification would be to reach around from behind and do compression on the chest instead of below the sternum. In other words, not a Heimlich, but a way to do chest compression in zero-G without the aforementioned difficulty of maintaining stability. That's actually a pretty good idea, although it probably still doesn't solve the EVA problem. I don't think anybody can perform a Heimlich, modified or otherwise, in those bulky suits.
The first chest compression might work a bit, but then you go flying across the room. The shock from hitting the bulkhead might provide another stimulation to the heart, but after that you'd probably just roll up into a ball or something and drift around a bit. Of course none of the other astro/cosmo/($silly_name_for_each_country)nauts would be so foolish as to do it that way, so I don't know why I mentioned it... maybe because it seemed funny at that particular instant.
Of course they'd pin you to the wall first, then do chest compression. It might work.
Then you'd be dead weight for the rest of the mission, even though you're alive.
Of course I'm assuming a lot here. I assumed that you meant "in space, inside a spacecraft or station". If you meant just "in space", then you'd probably just die, and maybe be just a bit happy that the heart attack happened before all the other stuff that happens when you're in space without protection.
Of course you could have meant "in space in a space suit during an EVA" in which case the answer goes back to "just die" since there's probably no practical way for your fellow $silly_name_for_each_country"naut" to perform any kind of CPR.
Of cource it's all pure speculation because space agencies do all kinds of physical tests BEFORE SENDING PEOPLE UP for this very reason. At some point of course, they'll lower their standards for money so some old guy with a weak heart can go up, or space travel might become common enough and then we'll see the first heart attack in space. It will probably end up as described above.
Finally just to be a bit pedantic, I know all heart attacks are not killers that knock you out. Some are just pain and weakness with no loss of consciousness. They'd give you an aspirin for that and treat you when you get down. Duh. The intent here is mostly to be Funny.
In common usage, "incentivize" is somewhat neutral, wheras "incite" has connotations of hatred and/or violence. Just googling around a bit, I even pulled up an example of somebody using the distinction in a title.
I'll take a wild guess and say it's illegal to sublet public property without some kind of special permit. I wager that if there is a free open-air concert in the park you can't set out a dozen blankets in a good spot and charge people for the reserved seating. This seems very similar to that.
free energy claims are 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999% likely BS
Yes, but I've found a way to capture and concentrate the 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000001% that isn't likely BS, and turn it into real useful products. Donate to my kickstarter...
I think the only exception I've seen is the heavily Latino neighborhoods, where, against most odds, the local Mexican grocers and meat markets actually do provide decent and fairly nutritious foods ("fresh" is still a trial to get, but at least it's better than the local Mickey D's.)
Yes, and the best part about the Latino neighborhoods is that even the large grocery discounters there don't use "club cards". You go to the Barrio, you get an honest deal, priced as marked. Very often staples were priced close to my "just for you" Safeway deal, which I had to make sure I logged on to get, and then *hope* that it worked at the register. Unfortunately I lived on the other side of town so it usually wasn't worth the hassle, and now I don't even live near such a place anymore.
Actually according to wiki (yeah, I know, not authoritative) they had: " Grasses, tubers, roots, stems, berries, fireweed and seaweed (kuanniq or edible seaweed) were collected and preserved depending on the season and the location.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]"
Berries sound good. I wonder how they preserved them. They probably just dried them. Root crops definitely hold up well until the next season if you know what you're doing. Arctic raisins and carrots will supplement the meat and blubber enough probably.
These folks were migratory, and the northern Summers support a lot more growth than you might think...
1. The poem is actually be Sara Teasdale but was used in Bradbury's short story of the same name. 2. The subset of people who didn't at least think about Bradbury turns in their cards.
All this machinery making modern music
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted it's really just
A question of your honesty, yeah, your honesty
Rush, The Spirit of Radio. Full lyrics easily found elsewhere. This was the first thing that popped into mind when I saw the summary. That was recorded in 1979 and released in 1980 according to Wiki.
I've been ignoring them for years. I've always suspected that when a co-worker who I haven't corresponded with in years (and wasn't really buddy-buddy, juet a co-worker) tried to get back in touch with me, they wouldn't do so by recommending me for a particular skill. I mean... really? "Hey, I was wondering what he was up to the last few years, so I decided to recommend him for one of the skills he has listed on his profile". Who thinks like that?
Well, JPGs are usually lossy and thus compressed. Flipping one bit in a compressed image file is likely to have severe consequences. OTOH, you could coXrupt a fewYentire byteZ in an uncompressed text file and it would still be readable. I suspect your drives also had a few "typos" that you didn't notice because of that.
Slashdot Mirror
After reading over other posts, I can sort of see how this ruling doesn't necessarily erode rights, although I still think it stinks.
If he had been a *good* lawyer and said nothing, then the drive would have had a legal status of "random bits, presumed innocent" and they would have no basis to force his hand.
What he did was indicate there was some kind of evidence on the drive. Big Ooopsie because either the drive has nothing pertinent to the case and he is deceiving the court, or he is telling the truth and the drive contains something pertinent to the case which may incriminate him.
So. Maybe no real rights violation at all. Just a stupid lawyer?
Still no sale. See various definitions of "witness" which are not bound to a single, narrow definition of "testimony on the stand".
"The way I see it" is exactly how law works. If enough people see it a particular way, you get new laws. If the person who sees it a particular way is a judge, his ruling is law... until another judge sees it a different way, all the way up to the Justices, who may then be over-ruled by the other branches and/or The People seeing it a different way. Of course the seeing is only part of it. The acting is all important...
No sale.
That's just the relevant part of the 5th. No part of it makes any distinction between "providing evidence" or "trestifying". The way I see it, these are just two of several ways in which you could "be a witness". No doubt the court created this distinction for some purpose, and is building one mockery of our rights on top of a precedent set by another mockery. It's mockery all the way down... until you get to the turtles.
Next stop, SCOTUS and get new lawyers if they don't want to take you there.
I don't see how you can do any meaningful engineering in this regard without picking winners and losers. Somebody is going to have less rain on their fields, less wind through their turbines, etc. I have seen in the local news where one suburban property owner sues another because he wants to cut down trees to get better solar power. Now take all those kinds of lawsuits and spread them out over 100s of square miles...
As for "you've got to know what you're doing", just LOL. I think that even if we could get the funding to do this kind of thing there would be all kinds of unintended consequences. New environments invite new fauna. Some of them are nice.... some aren't. Not only that, you have to have acceptable outcomes during all phases of construction because it could take decades to build. So yeah, we "knew what we were doing" until phase B of the project actually results in more tornadoes and a plague of locusts in your particular county which the company assures us is "only temporary" where "temporary" is five years give or take... or it might be permanent because our analysis didn't even predict this.
OK, we should all read this
My big take-away is that the altitude makes all the difference. The "barrier" effect is less apparent.
So. If the guy builds a wall, he'll take away Sunlight nearby. Maybe there could be some effect due to the local average altitude being higher; but a puny little wall or even a small mountain range vs. the entire continental pattern? Even if we could alter the climate of a continent... I thought climate change was bad.
Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake basin are surrounded by much higher natural "walls". Downtown SLC still managed to get a tornado. No, it was not a massive F5, but it was definitely a tornado in a place that doesn't even usually get them. Any meteorologist will tell you that mountains don't prevent tornadoes, so I'm highly skeptical of the whole idea.
He's a physicist of course, so this only works on spherical chickens in a vacuum.
I don't know what to tell you. I also wore cheapo digital watches back in the 80s. My first one just told time and had red LEDs. That was probably elementary school or jr. high. Later I wore an LCD one that I thought was oh so cool. It had more advanced functions such as stopwatch, alarm, etc. That was probably highschool and early college. Around the same time some of my friends even had calculator watches. We were so high-tech we thought.
It was always a plastic band. I tried my father's watch once with the flexible metal band, that pulled. I guess he just grinned and bared it because when you live through a Depression and a war a little pulling now and then is no big deal.
Anyway, unless you don't sweat I don't see how you wouldn't notice the nasty looking (and smelling) whiteness every night you took the thing off. I guess you could have low sweat and fare skin, or something. Of course everybody's different. The watches annoyed me long before the era of cel phones, and I may be somewhat "on the spectrum" so that could have something to do with it.
I observed that time was everywhere, (microwave, radio station ID, computer, etc.). I just learned to do without time on my wrist even before cel phones. There were those rare occasions when I felt the need to ask. I seem to recall very early in the cel phone era, somebody pulling out their phone to tell me. I thought "well, that's one cool thing about these phones everybody carries now".
We didn't get a cel until my parents were aged. The idea was that my father would use it for emergencies. So more oddball stuff I suppose. In our house, the mobile phone was for old people. Dealing with my father's illness, death, and estate pushed me into the cel phone era--people began to expect timely contact from me, and then there was no going back.
"Smart" tech though? Nah, still not on board. There are a few things that are sort of cool about it; but as you gather I have a tendency to move slowly in these areas. You can call me a luddite if you want; but there's a lot to be said for late adoption. A whole class of early bugs and security issues get worked out while I watch from the sidelines. Sometimes entire technologies pass in and out of relevance because my adoption is that late. I see that as win because I didn't waste time on the trendy tech.
That's not to say I haven't been burned though... MFC, Flickr. I wish I never met 'em. I suppose there's something to be learned from those failures. I suppose I may even err too far on the side of trying to prevent failure. It takes all kinds. I think it's wonderful that we have early adopters, and non-adopters. It'd be boring (and way too crowded) if everybody was on the bus.
Built-in A/C and UV light to compensate for the sweatiness and tan-marks that come from wearing a watch. This is the no. 1 reason why I would never consider wearing a watch again. Obviously I'm joking with the subject line. It ain't happenin', "smart" or otherwise. Now that time and a bunch of other things are in my pocket, they ain't goin' back on my wrist.
Oh, and bands that snag the hair on your arms. Ouch. Never again.
To return to a simpler time, just say "XYZZY".
I'm guessing that the modification would be to reach around from behind and do compression on the chest instead of below the sternum. In other words, not a Heimlich, but a way to do chest compression in zero-G without the aforementioned difficulty of maintaining stability. That's actually a pretty good idea, although it probably still doesn't solve the EVA problem. I don't think anybody can perform a Heimlich, modified or otherwise, in those bulky suits.
The first chest compression might work a bit, but then you go flying across the room. The shock from hitting the bulkhead might provide another stimulation to the heart, but after that you'd probably just roll up into a ball or something and drift around a bit. Of course none of the other astro/cosmo/($silly_name_for_each_country)nauts would be so foolish as to do it that way, so I don't know why I mentioned it... maybe because it seemed funny at that particular instant.
Of course they'd pin you to the wall first, then do chest compression. It might work.
Then you'd be dead weight for the rest of the mission, even though you're alive.
Of course I'm assuming a lot here. I assumed that you meant "in space, inside a spacecraft or station". If you meant just "in space", then you'd probably just die, and maybe be just a bit happy that the heart attack happened before all the other stuff that happens when you're in space without protection.
Of course you could have meant "in space in a space suit during an EVA" in which case the answer goes back to "just die" since there's probably no practical way for your fellow $silly_name_for_each_country"naut" to perform any kind of CPR.
Of cource it's all pure speculation because space agencies do all kinds of physical tests BEFORE SENDING PEOPLE UP for this very reason. At some point of course, they'll lower their standards for money so some old guy with a weak heart can go up, or space travel might become common enough and then we'll see the first heart attack in space. It will probably end up as described above.
Finally just to be a bit pedantic, I know all heart attacks are not killers that knock you out. Some are just pain and weakness with no loss of consciousness. They'd give you an aspirin for that and treat you when you get down. Duh. The intent here is mostly to be Funny.
In common usage, "incentivize" is somewhat neutral, wheras "incite" has connotations of hatred and/or violence. Just googling around a bit, I even pulled up an example of somebody using the distinction in a title.
A more general rule is simply to never buy a pig in a poke. The origin of that expression is literally from Medieval times!
And what exact public law is being broken now?
I'll take a wild guess and say it's illegal to sublet public property without some kind of special permit. I wager that if there is a free open-air concert in the park you can't set out a dozen blankets in a good spot and charge people for the reserved seating. This seems very similar to that.
free energy claims are 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999% likely BS
Yes, but I've found a way to capture and concentrate the 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000001% that isn't likely BS, and turn it into real useful products. Donate to my kickstarter...
According to Mail Online
I can picture this now. "Yeah dude, we like... totally surveyed the place. It's all good. You can start digging tomorrow."
Much in the same way that Slashdot isn't entirely responsible for the "503, Service Unavailable" message I got when trying to follow the link.
I think the only exception I've seen is the heavily Latino neighborhoods, where, against most odds, the local Mexican grocers and meat markets actually do provide decent and fairly nutritious foods ("fresh" is still a trial to get, but at least it's better than the local Mickey D's.)
Yes, and the best part about the Latino neighborhoods is that even the large grocery discounters there don't use "club cards". You go to the Barrio, you get an honest deal, priced as marked. Very often staples were priced close to my "just for you" Safeway deal, which I had to make sure I logged on to get, and then *hope* that it worked at the register. Unfortunately I lived on the other side of town so it usually wasn't worth the hassle, and now I don't even live near such a place anymore.
Actually according to wiki (yeah, I know, not authoritative) they had: " Grasses, tubers, roots, stems, berries, fireweed and seaweed (kuanniq or edible seaweed) were collected and preserved depending on the season and the location.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]"
Berries sound good. I wonder how they preserved them. They probably just dried them. Root crops definitely hold up well until the next season if you know what you're doing. Arctic raisins and carrots will supplement the meat and blubber enough probably.
These folks were migratory, and the northern Summers support a lot more growth than you might think...
1. The poem is actually be Sara Teasdale but was used in Bradbury's short story of the same name. 2. The subset of people who didn't at least think about Bradbury turns in their cards.
His is by Ray Bradbury. You were saying? Everybody else on this thread so far, except for the top-level poster, TURN IN YOUR GEEK CARD.
All this machinery making modern music
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted it's really just
A question of your honesty, yeah, your honesty
Rush, The Spirit of Radio. Full lyrics easily found elsewhere. This was the first thing that popped into mind when I saw the summary. That was recorded in 1979 and released in 1980 according to Wiki.
I've been ignoring them for years. I've always suspected that when a co-worker who I haven't corresponded with in years (and wasn't really buddy-buddy, juet a co-worker) tried to get back in touch with me, they wouldn't do so by recommending me for a particular skill. I mean... really? "Hey, I was wondering what he was up to the last few years, so I decided to recommend him for one of the skills he has listed on his profile". Who thinks like that?
coincidentally jpg images as well
Well, JPGs are usually lossy and thus compressed. Flipping one bit in a compressed image file is likely to have severe consequences. OTOH, you could coXrupt a fewYentire byteZ in an uncompressed text file and it would still be readable. I suspect your drives also had a few "typos" that you didn't notice because of that.