Which doesn't mean what you think it does. Congress can remove justices. It's their Constitutional authority. Did you not bother to read either the second or third sentences of that section?
Look... SCOTUS is a branch of the Federal government, just like the other two. It is not immune from image problems (especially in recent years, when it has demonstrably failed to do its job again and again and again).
How cute and naive. The Supreme Court is immune to "image problems". Unless any of the justices have done something that Congress has decided they should be impeached for then they will face no consequences.
And who is going to stop them exactly? That's before you get to the fact that the Supreme Court is in no way forced to hear the case even if there is standing.
But don't worry, there'll be plenty more opportunities in the future.
Yeah that has been the party line that you shills have been saying for a while. You'd think by now you'd have way more and better examples, no? Let me guess, when we don't hear anything about these extra opportunities it will simply be because it's being keeping it secret instead of you simply being full of shit, right?
Nowhere in that article does it say he was caught via the NSA snooping programs. Seems he was simply some idiot that got himself caught by corresponding with FBI agents posing as fellow terrorist. Did you have some actual point or did you simply need to try to justify your constant bed wetting?
All of those things would be good qualities for someone working at the NSA had he simply kept his mouth shut. But since he publicly embarrassed the agency they now need to assassinate his character. Once they start poisoning the well, their good little parrots will simply carry the meme on until Snowden becomes tantamount to the Devil.
The LOVEINT scandal is one of the perfect examples of how that statement is patently bullshit. Unless they're going to claim that the FISA court is giving out LOVEINT warrants now.
There are tons of stateless actors (and not an insignificant number of nation-states) whom are clearly enemies of the United States that benefit from his disclosures of our SIGINT sources and methods.
And yet the Boston bomber was able to succeed without every needing to know them at all. Why would anyone need to believe that these boogeymen "stateless actors" would either?
I'm sure there are apps that might. I've yet to see any that has though. I even just denied Waze location services and it still created a route and everything for me. It simply just didn't have a GPS lock.
Settings -> Cellular and then toggle off the apps you don't want using it. For apps you don't want using your location data, you simply deny them when the app runs the first time. If after the fact you want to deny them this permission you go to Settings -> Privacy -> Location Service and again toggle off the apps you don't want to have that permission. And guess what? None of the apps will crash due to these things being turned off.
The saddest part of your post is you probably thought you were going to completely baffle people with the question when these toggles have been part of iOS for years now (if not since the beginning).
Linux was already established as an enterprise server platform in 2004, but free software was not a part of everyday life for most computer users. That's why Mark Shuttleworth gathered a small team of developers from one of the most established Linux projects – Debian – and set out to create an easy-to-use Linux desktop: Ubuntu.
Riiight. Because after spending billions in marketing and billions to buy Nokia they're going to release a phone with a competitor's OS. How delusional are you?
Stupid editorializing like that is what you get when people put nationalism before human rights. The other side is always needing to be painted as worse than the home team to to keep the plebes in check.
But if these companies didn't have such huge troves of private user data there would be no need to worry about NSLs, etc. They'd have nothing to give over. He's not against bulk collection of data, etc. He's simply against the government competing against him in the data collection realm.
Slashdot Mirror
So what? His judgement still only applies to his jurisdiction. Since he's a district court judge it is quite a limited one.
Which doesn't mean what you think it does. Congress can remove justices. It's their Constitutional authority. Did you not bother to read either the second or third sentences of that section?
Everybody
Look... SCOTUS is a branch of the Federal government, just like the other two. It is not immune from image problems (especially in recent years, when it has demonstrably failed to do its job again and again and again).
How cute and naive. The Supreme Court is immune to "image problems". Unless any of the justices have done something that Congress has decided they should be impeached for then they will face no consequences.
And who is going to stop them exactly? That's before you get to the fact that the Supreme Court is in no way forced to hear the case even if there is standing.
Just had to respond to one more part.
But don't worry, there'll be plenty more opportunities in the future.
Yeah that has been the party line that you shills have been saying for a while. You'd think by now you'd have way more and better examples, no? Let me guess, when we don't hear anything about these extra opportunities it will simply be because it's being keeping it secret instead of you simply being full of shit, right?
Nowhere in that article does it say he was caught via the NSA snooping programs. Seems he was simply some idiot that got himself caught by corresponding with FBI agents posing as fellow terrorist. Did you have some actual point or did you simply need to try to justify your constant bed wetting?
All of those things would be good qualities for someone working at the NSA had he simply kept his mouth shut. But since he publicly embarrassed the agency they now need to assassinate his character. Once they start poisoning the well, their good little parrots will simply carry the meme on until Snowden becomes tantamount to the Devil.
For a liar to be caught in a lie, he has to speak first.
Oh so someone other than James "Least Untruthful Answer" Clapper or the Jean-Luc Picard wannabe Keith Alexander? I'm pretty sure both of them having been saying lots of things.
The LOVEINT scandal is one of the perfect examples of how that statement is patently bullshit. Unless they're going to claim that the FISA court is giving out LOVEINT warrants now.
Hey guys! Look over there!!! *NSA goosesteppers run the other way*
There are tons of stateless actors (and not an insignificant number of nation-states) whom are clearly enemies of the United States that benefit from his disclosures of our SIGINT sources and methods.
And yet the Boston bomber was able to succeed without every needing to know them at all. Why would anyone need to believe that these boogeymen "stateless actors" would either?
No kidding. Ghostery has a field day with that page.
Because there are numerous cases of people being wrongfully convicted and/or executed despite everything thinking their guilt was obvious?
I'm sure there are apps that might. I've yet to see any that has though. I even just denied Waze location services and it still created a route and everything for me. It simply just didn't have a GPS lock.
Settings -> Cellular and then toggle off the apps you don't want using it. For apps you don't want using your location data, you simply deny them when the app runs the first time. If after the fact you want to deny them this permission you go to Settings -> Privacy -> Location Service and again toggle off the apps you don't want to have that permission. And guess what? None of the apps will crash due to these things being turned off.
The saddest part of your post is you probably thought you were going to completely baffle people with the question when these toggles have been part of iOS for years now (if not since the beginning).
A Slashdot article with a misleading title? You must be kidding!
Why would Blizzard give Slashdot money? Especially when the editor's post is itself filled with inaccurate statements.
But Blizzard is video game company; managing cardboard print runs and scheduling tournaments isn't exactly in their wheelhouse.
Just as one example, Blizzard has run tournaments at BlizzCon for years now. You could have found this out with 10 seconds of Googling.
Ok
Where did it all begin?
Linux was already established as an enterprise server platform in 2004, but free software was not a part of everyday life for most computer users. That's why Mark Shuttleworth gathered a small team of developers from one of the most established Linux projects – Debian – and set out to create an easy-to-use Linux desktop: Ubuntu.
You're welcome.
Because they still have the pay the judgement of the case.
Yes, Google and Android are direct competitors to Microsoft and Windows Phone. In what universe are you living in that they are not?
Riiight. Because after spending billions in marketing and billions to buy Nokia they're going to release a phone with a competitor's OS. How delusional are you?
Don't you dare bring facts into this!!
Seriously, only a delusional idiot would believe the scenario that Nervall's Lobster has concocted.
Stupid editorializing like that is what you get when people put nationalism before human rights. The other side is always needing to be painted as worse than the home team to to keep the plebes in check.
But if these companies didn't have such huge troves of private user data there would be no need to worry about NSLs, etc. They'd have nothing to give over. He's not against bulk collection of data, etc. He's simply against the government competing against him in the data collection realm.