The last paragraph notes that email warrants are typically treated like subpoenas.
Given that the U.S. have coordinated with local law enforcement before (Kim Dotcom), why would the increased overhead significantly hinder investigations? At a minimum, fishing expeditions would be minimized, so I see no reason for the distinction to continue.
This would make for an interesting SCOTUS decision if it gets to that point.
That would be awesome...Yeah, I was planning on rooting whichever phone I got. I was under the impression G2 would be vanilla, though. I'm looking forward to seeing whether the "slower" processor still matches or beats out the newer 1GHz phones.
The volume issue is on my brand-spanking new BT headset, too. I'll have to check out DSP, though. I never use terminal but I like having the keyboard, anyway. Options are always nice.
FWIW, with 2.22.23.02, have you noticed volume problems? I'm using the same one and calls are MUCH quieter. I found some older radios that were having this issue on the G1, but nothing recent. I'm guessing it's not widespread, but eh.
I'm torn between getting Galaxy-S and the G2...:(
That's great; I wish my team had done that. We had two people who tried it, but we'd never figure anything meaningful until halfway through the 2nd half, so the "knowledge" didn't do much until we got some subs in.
Nobody should be carrying around a gun safety-off. Most businesses do restrict the carrying of weapons onto the property (concerts?) already. As FCad said, banning them can open themselves up to spree killings. It's a matter of risk.
And he, like most normal people, doesn't flash his gun. Laws are typically geared toward the circumstances. If you ask someone to do something, and flash the gun to say "I have a gun", you'll be hit a lot more severely than if you're on a bench showing somebody your gun. This would still be a terrible idea, as somebody will still call the cops and you'd have to deal with them, regardless of whether or not you get charged with anything.
They don't have to play the game. Why does the existence of media that "hits home" necessitate a ban on such things? 20 years from now, most of the parents of people killed will still be alive. If it upsets you, don't watch/play it...Or criticize the company making the product, as is happening here.
Freedom of expression means being able to freely protest said expression. It doesn't mean any laws are necessary. If enough people are pissed about it and refuse to play the game, it's a self-resolving issue. If enough people want to, then deal with it. Nobody has a right to simply be free from offense of any sort.
Depends on the jurisdiction. Many cities (in the US, anyway) provide right-of-way only at marked crossings. If you dart out into the middle of a street and get hit, you typically can't hold the driver liable unless you can prove that they were speeding (skid marks?)
Check out Soldat. It's not at all SSB, but I think it captures the (very, very) basic playstyle. We used to play it on LAN in high-school back in the early 00s, but it's pretty fun for a while.
It won't satisfy your itch for SSB, but it's pretty good.
Agreed. I bought a 640GB ext a year and a half ago for a bit over $100, and it requires an external power source. I typically don't mind the slowness of them, but you're right. Once you get close to GBs of data, it's a massive pain to transfer data.
Imagine USB to USB! That took half the night to move all my stuff off a 250 to that 640...granted I had an X41 Tablet at the time..-_-
Given the form factor, it probably requires an external power supply. Typically the ones that don't are tiny. Many of the 1TB drives I've seen without power supplies are about the size of laptop hard drives.
The law differs state-by-state as to whether you're assumed to be right in your own home. Texas has a very strong history of castle-law, but certain states (I believe Massachusetts and up until recently, Florida) can still hold you liable if you kill someone invading your house while armed.
As to whether any sane jury would actually convict, that's another story...
That limits you to basically Wenham (or/Hamilton?), Danvers, or Salem....of those, Salem is not ritzy outside of the touristy area...Most of Beverly I'd say is kinda up there outside the downtown, though....(Nick's ftw). Peabody is most definitely not ritzy unless you're in certain parts of West Peabody.
I'm from the north shore as well and given what a lot of people in the area blow money on, I don't see this being an issue for 95% of Beverly. Of course, this may mean less spinny hub-caps (not rims) on an '83 Mustang...
fwiw the two best things about the whole area are Nick's and Supreme's.
IMHO, it tastes terrible too. the 90 minute ale is the sweet-spot for me. Chimay sort of reminds me of the 120-minute ale, but has a lighter taste to it (it's still only 9% but eh). I recently found out about Chimay the other day and love it almost as much of Belhaven and Boddington's.
If you wanted to be incredibly pedantic, you could try to make the case that up there has negligible atmosphere, traveling 1m/s = Mach 9001 or something...I'm not sure if the molecules are still too far apart to even bounce into one another, though.
I would think that the gambler still has to pay it back. Wages could probably be garnished. In the cases of buying stolen stuff, in most places I know of in the US, you must return that item. The person who stole the item would be responsible for paying you back whatever you spent on it (again, if they can't pay right then, wages would be garnished and you'd be paid back somehow over time). If they're homeless vagrants, you may be SOL.
Suicide's illegal because if you try and fail enough times, people get annoyed at having to shell out thousands in emergency care after each attempt. So you can't do it right, you get charged with *attempted* suicide and put in an institution so you don't keep failing to kill yourself and wasting your family's money.
It doesn't actually get used unless you're a masochistic version of Eugene from "Hey Arnold!".
I don't think he's saying anything like that, though. Ben Franklin's quote was in reference to the government, and to begin with, GP is talking about a company who SHOULD be able to control their experiences, as customers do have many other options to purchase from ([stable] countries only have one government).
He is willing, however, to give up some freedom for a better user experience, which if you wanted to equate to government would be the fact that you're giving a bit of freedom to enjoy the experience of living a social life, consisting of certain social expectations.
If you don't like those expectations, you can leave (to a new community, city, state, country, jail cell, etc.) as you see fit. I'm just not seeing the parallel between "freedom for security" and "freedom for a sterilized, approved experience"
Generally, I agree with you. But as other commenters stated, it's a matter of actually looking at your balances, which I've thankfully learned to do. I limit my cash pool to Gas and Food, so in that sense it's easier. I know I'm spending so much on gas / food each week and I'm usually left with extra cash anyway in case either or both of those increases substantially for a particular week.
I guess it just comes to what level of commitment a person has to tracking purchases. Cards allow you see stuff after the fact, but you still need to fight the impulse to use the card since you know you have "extra money".
Slashdot Mirror
The last paragraph notes that email warrants are typically treated like subpoenas. Given that the U.S. have coordinated with local law enforcement before (Kim Dotcom), why would the increased overhead significantly hinder investigations? At a minimum, fishing expeditions would be minimized, so I see no reason for the distinction to continue. This would make for an interesting SCOTUS decision if it gets to that point.
That would be awesome...Yeah, I was planning on rooting whichever phone I got. I was under the impression G2 would be vanilla, though. I'm looking forward to seeing whether the "slower" processor still matches or beats out the newer 1GHz phones. The volume issue is on my brand-spanking new BT headset, too. I'll have to check out DSP, though. I never use terminal but I like having the keyboard, anyway. Options are always nice.
I just read this book for the first time recently. Hooray for getting references.
FWIW, with 2.22.23.02, have you noticed volume problems? I'm using the same one and calls are MUCH quieter. I found some older radios that were having this issue on the G1, but nothing recent. I'm guessing it's not widespread, but eh. I'm torn between getting Galaxy-S and the G2...:(
Thank you for returning me to 2001. I completely forgot how awesome that was.
That's great; I wish my team had done that. We had two people who tried it, but we'd never figure anything meaningful until halfway through the 2nd half, so the "knowledge" didn't do much until we got some subs in.
Nobody should be carrying around a gun safety-off. Most businesses do restrict the carrying of weapons onto the property (concerts?) already. As FCad said, banning them can open themselves up to spree killings. It's a matter of risk.
And he, like most normal people, doesn't flash his gun. Laws are typically geared toward the circumstances. If you ask someone to do something, and flash the gun to say "I have a gun", you'll be hit a lot more severely than if you're on a bench showing somebody your gun. This would still be a terrible idea, as somebody will still call the cops and you'd have to deal with them, regardless of whether or not you get charged with anything.
They don't have to play the game. Why does the existence of media that "hits home" necessitate a ban on such things? 20 years from now, most of the parents of people killed will still be alive. If it upsets you, don't watch/play it...Or criticize the company making the product, as is happening here. Freedom of expression means being able to freely protest said expression. It doesn't mean any laws are necessary. If enough people are pissed about it and refuse to play the game, it's a self-resolving issue. If enough people want to, then deal with it. Nobody has a right to simply be free from offense of any sort.
Now back to hellfire.
Depends on the jurisdiction. Many cities (in the US, anyway) provide right-of-way only at marked crossings. If you dart out into the middle of a street and get hit, you typically can't hold the driver liable unless you can prove that they were speeding (skid marks?)
Where he at?
There he go.
Check out Soldat. It's not at all SSB, but I think it captures the (very, very) basic playstyle. We used to play it on LAN in high-school back in the early 00s, but it's pretty fun for a while.
It won't satisfy your itch for SSB, but it's pretty good.
Agreed. I bought a 640GB ext a year and a half ago for a bit over $100, and it requires an external power source. I typically don't mind the slowness of them, but you're right. Once you get close to GBs of data, it's a massive pain to transfer data.
Imagine USB to USB! That took half the night to move all my stuff off a 250 to that 640...granted I had an X41 Tablet at the time..-_-
Given the form factor, it probably requires an external power supply. Typically the ones that don't are tiny. Many of the 1TB drives I've seen without power supplies are about the size of laptop hard drives.
I wouldn't worry, the Type-S can't reach anywhere near 155 anyway. =P Maybe 130, possibly 140mph given 10 miles to accelerate.
The law differs state-by-state as to whether you're assumed to be right in your own home. Texas has a very strong history of castle-law, but certain states (I believe Massachusetts and up until recently, Florida) can still hold you liable if you kill someone invading your house while armed.
As to whether any sane jury would actually convict, that's another story...
That limits you to basically Wenham (or /Hamilton?), Danvers, or Salem....of those, Salem is not ritzy outside of the touristy area...Most of Beverly I'd say is kinda up there outside the downtown, though....(Nick's ftw). Peabody is most definitely not ritzy unless you're in certain parts of West Peabody.
I'm from the north shore as well and given what a lot of people in the area blow money on, I don't see this being an issue for 95% of Beverly. Of course, this may mean less spinny hub-caps (not rims) on an '83 Mustang...
fwiw the two best things about the whole area are Nick's and Supreme's.
IMHO, it tastes terrible too. the 90 minute ale is the sweet-spot for me. Chimay sort of reminds me of the 120-minute ale, but has a lighter taste to it (it's still only 9% but eh). I recently found out about Chimay the other day and love it almost as much of Belhaven and Boddington's.
If you wanted to be incredibly pedantic, you could try to make the case that up there has negligible atmosphere, traveling 1m/s = Mach 9001 or something...I'm not sure if the molecules are still too far apart to even bounce into one another, though.
I would think that the gambler still has to pay it back. Wages could probably be garnished. In the cases of buying stolen stuff, in most places I know of in the US, you must return that item. The person who stole the item would be responsible for paying you back whatever you spent on it (again, if they can't pay right then, wages would be garnished and you'd be paid back somehow over time). If they're homeless vagrants, you may be SOL.
Suicide's illegal because if you try and fail enough times, people get annoyed at having to shell out thousands in emergency care after each attempt. So you can't do it right, you get charged with *attempted* suicide and put in an institution so you don't keep failing to kill yourself and wasting your family's money.
It doesn't actually get used unless you're a masochistic version of Eugene from "Hey Arnold!".
I don't think he's saying anything like that, though. Ben Franklin's quote was in reference to the government, and to begin with, GP is talking about a company who SHOULD be able to control their experiences, as customers do have many other options to purchase from ([stable] countries only have one government).
He is willing, however, to give up some freedom for a better user experience, which if you wanted to equate to government would be the fact that you're giving a bit of freedom to enjoy the experience of living a social life, consisting of certain social expectations.
If you don't like those expectations, you can leave (to a new community, city, state, country, jail cell, etc.) as you see fit. I'm just not seeing the parallel between "freedom for security" and "freedom for a sterilized, approved experience"
I think it could be sarcasm, personally.
Didn't Greece just get bailed out of bankruptcy?
Generally, I agree with you. But as other commenters stated, it's a matter of actually looking at your balances, which I've thankfully learned to do. I limit my cash pool to Gas and Food, so in that sense it's easier. I know I'm spending so much on gas / food each week and I'm usually left with extra cash anyway in case either or both of those increases substantially for a particular week. I guess it just comes to what level of commitment a person has to tracking purchases. Cards allow you see stuff after the fact, but you still need to fight the impulse to use the card since you know you have "extra money".