So if some one with sufficient real or moral authority and/or [influence] made the same sort of comments about a President, it could be taken as a serious threat.
Yea, OK, I'll buy that maybe if someone like, say, Pat Robertson, told his followers he'd like to see the President murdered, how he could be considered guilty of conspiracy.
The difference, of course, is the amount of influence wielded by evangelist leaders and the like, versus that of random morons on Twitter. Considering that we're discussing the latter, the Thomas Becket anecdote is non sequitur.
Yes, and every thread will be investigated by the Secret Service.
I don't think that this guy's blog will have any impact on Secret Service investigations. If they felt there was a sufficient threat to merit investigation in any particular case, then they are more than able to discover the information this guy has uncovered (and more!) without his help. If they felt that some other particular case was not worthy of investigation, then this guy's blog will not convince them to investigate.
The blog is a complete non-factor as regards the Secret Service.
I was speaking in general terms, not specific to the blog. One of the duties of Secret Service agents is to investigate all 'actionable threats' against the President.
The criteria they use to establish what qualifies as 'actionable' is not information I am privy to.
Of course, we must all keep in mind that saying "I hope someone kills that guy" is not the same thing as saying "I'm gonna kill that guy." Only the latter can be construed as an actionable threat.
I'm sure that Thomas Becket feels hugely relieved by your observation.
... Okay...
What, praytell, warranted the mention of a man 800 years dead? This ain't 12th century England, you know.
Pointing out that someone said something in public is most certainly NOT putting someone's life in danger. These people uttered words into the public space, there is nothing wrong with repeating thier message and attaching names to those utterances.
in most states juvenile court proceedings and records can be closed to the public. Some states also allow judges to close down the portions of adult trials that require juvenile testimony or evidence. In such cases, the decision of whether to allow access is often left to the discretion of a judge.
As a result, judges have occasionally placed conditions on reporters' access to otherwise closed juvenile proceedings by allowing reporters in — but only after they have promised not to disclose certain information about minor participants that might be revealed during the proceeding. Such conditions are probably valid.
As I said, legal gray area.
On another note, I personally hope someone finds out who wrote this blog, and posts their name and address online for all the world, just to see how he reacts.
To wager a guess, I'm betting he won't take it well.
I would think the first amendment would protect the poster.
Normally, yes, but in the case that the speaker is knowingly putting the life of others in danger, not so much.
Okay but, doesn't calling for an assassination constitute a threat to the POTUS' life?
Yes, and every threat will be investigated by the Secret Service.
Of course, we must all keep in mind that saying "I hope someone kills that guy" is not the same thing as saying "I'm gonna kill that guy." Only the latter can be construed as an actionable threat.
The person running the blog in question is, apparently, incapable making that distinction, based on his inclusion of the post from Doug Jarrett
Make no mistake, this (ironically, still anonymous) individual has absolutely zero interest in outing actual racists; rather, his intent is, IMO, inciting violence against his perceived political opposition, which is definitely not a protected form of speech.
What jurisdictions have these laws?
Please name one.
I don't see how he put anyone in danger. These were copies of posts people made online. These folks were already telling the world this about themselves. He did not secretly record their bed time conversations.
Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against quality printings - the top 2 shelves of every bookshelf in my library is stacked with mostly antique first editions (I have a first-English-edition of Bambi with the cover art printed slightly off-center that's my personal favorite - according to all my research, it doesn't exist!).
My issue is with uppity hipsters who get all snobbish when someone mentions that everything they buy isn't some uber-pricey collectors edition.
Update Friday, Nov. 16. 2:31 p.m.: “Hello There, Racists!” was deleted early Friday afternoon. Earlier in the day, the creator discouraged retaliation after people outraged by the offensive posts threatened violence.
Before the website went dark, a third Marylander had been added to its archive. The site disappeared without explanation.
You only need to do a Google search for "new civility" (include the quotes) to see the hypocrisy behind HelloThereRacists.
Hell, just RFTA:
The website “Hello There, Racists!” which has only existed since Nov. 11, had “outed” 77 subjects by Thursday afternoon. Its creator, who has not been identified, did not respond to an electronic request for comment
Anonymous pussy thinks he's big hero by outing other anonymous pussies, all the time hiding his own identity?
I can't think of a better definition of hypocrisy than that.
Why not?
What law prevents this if they are minors?
Depends on the jurisdiction; some states it's illegal, others it's not, still others, a grey area. Personally, I wouldn't recommend going on a global "naming names" campaign unless I was intimately familiar with all federal, state, and local regulations... otherwise, the probability that my actions would run afoul of the law would inevitably reach 1.
I would think the first amendment would protect the poster.
Normally, yes, but in the case that the speaker is knowingly putting the life of others in danger, not so much.
Remember, your rights extend to the exact point at which they interfere with someone else's, and not a micron further.
Like how GM and Ford have locked-out the ability to replace the factory-approved air filter with a K&N, because they don't want to "warranty and support" the aftermarket parts!
That doesn't mean what you think it means. the Magnuson-Moss Warranty act basically states that an automotive warranty cannot be voided in full merely by installing aftermarket parts; however, it does allow the warranty of related systems to be voided if it is apparent that an aftermarket part caused the malfunction. In other words, putting aftermarket rims on your car won't void your engine warranty, but if the aftermarket wheels somehow damage the braking system, then the braking system is not covered under warranty.
FYI, this law came about as a result of shady dealerships screwing customers, not the manufacturers.
Amusingly, I've the opposite experience.
USPS carriers, ridiculously incompetent.
I'm routinely carrying letters over to neighbours, sometimes several streets over, despite clearly marked, usually typed, addresses.
Then there's stuff that just never arrives, like Netflix.
Must be a regional thing - around here, the only apparent requirement to get a job as a UPS driver is a complete and utter lack of respect for other people and their stuff.
By contrast, if I want something absolutely positively to arrive, such as a document that needs a signature, I'm going to use UPS.
Yet another apparent regional difference - every time I've ever had delivered by UPS that required a signature, I come home to find the package sitting, unsecured, on my front porch.
Conversely, the packages that don't require signatures end up sitting on the UPS docks until I take time off work to go pick them up. It's mind-numbingly stupid, but good to hear that the practice is apparently local, and not a case of company-wide idiocy.
For a mortgage payment... that should all be done online nowdays. Providing remote communities with some public terminals should be way cheaper than maintaining USPS.
Easier said then done when your mortgage holder doesn't do online payments, as is with mine.
Archaic and kinda dumb? You bet your ass, but it's not my call to make, so I do what must be done.
I don't think it would be too damaging (if at all) for the USPS to stop delivering packages (although I do find their 'If it fits, it ships' program damn useful), and focus their efforts on letter delivery.
I've had entirely too much trouble with incompetence at UPS and FEDEX the last few years to be willing to entrust them with time-and-privacy sensitive materials like bill payments. The driver "forgetting" to put the new HDD I ordered on his truck 5 days in a row is no big deal, but imagine if that was, say, my mortgage payment sitting on their dock for a week...
Those are hardly the same. Replacement air filters pose zero liability to GM and Ford.
If you have a problem with your car, you are going to take it somewhere to get fixed. If the car is under warranty and the problem is NOT with your replacement filter, you pay nothing and the manufacturer pays the cost of repairs. If the problem turns out to be your replacement filter YOU must pay the cost of diagnosing and repairing that problem (and are not getting your car back until you do), and the manufacturer hos zero cost because of that problem.
This makes it different how? If it's not a warrantied part, you get charged for the replacement. That's a pretty standard term for all warrantied items.
On the other hand, if you buy a cheap computer (which these are) and replace a component and subsequently have a problem, you are going to call their support center (a direct cost to them). If the support center thinks it may be a warranty problem, they will pay for you to ship the computer for repair (another cost for them). Now they must diagnose the problem (more cost to them). If it turns out to be your replacement part that was the problem, now what? They could require you to pay for the original shipping cost, the original phone call, the cost of diagnostics, and the return shipping cost before they ship your PC back, but how many people are going to do that (remember, this was a cheap computer to start with)? Now they are stuck with a broken computer, in a configuration they don't support, that they can spend still more money on to get it back into a supported, working configuration, in hopes that MAYBE they can recoup their loses by selling it as a refurb.
I see, so basically, your position is, "it's different because call center employees are dumb."
Yea, that dog don't hunt, monseigneur.
Just like with auto warranties, it doesn't take a legal expert to realize that a clause stating "any costs associated with repairs or damage resulting from the use of unapproved aftermarket parts will be charged to the customer" in the warranty would immediately solve the non-issue you've blown totally out of proportion. In fact, were I a betting man I'd wager that such a clause already exists, thus completely negating your entire premise.
The idea that a manufacturer damaging a customer's ability to modify their own property as they see fit could be construed as acceptable behavior is counter-productive to well-established consumer rights, as well as being downright idiotic nonsense.
Bottom line: if you buy cheap, expect that ALL available measures have been taken to remove cost from that product.
Nobody ever said anything about the HP/Lenovo laptops in question being "cheap." You've ascribed that attribute of your own volition, and it is non sequitur to the topic at hand.
If you're in a remote area, maybe you'd just have to accept mail service that only came by once a week, and maybe only to centralised postal locations.
And maybe you'd also have to accept that anyone who wanted to send you mail might have to pay a bit more for it.
For other areas, why are they proposing dropping Saturday delivery. That means 2 days without mail. Why not drop Wednesday?
Perhaps you could subscribe to a service where a completely automated system could open the original mail, scan it, and allow you to accept an electronic copy instead, for a credit. If you still wanted/needed it delivered, it could reseal it.
That might admittedly be complex to implement in a private fashion, but, I suspect people even in non-rural areas might be excited to have scans instead, so it might pay for itself.
Dunno. Maybe some areas will never be profitable for non-electronic delivery of cheap (say, $1) mail. People living in those areas might just have to accept that paying more for physical delivery of mail is a side effect of living there.
Hence the reason for a nationalized mail service - of course some places won't be profitable to deliver to, but they still need their mail.
In this case though, the main reason the Postal Service is running out of money is their retirement plan.
... whatever reason, Lenovo/HP doesn't want you to use a storebought card.
Warranty and support. There isn't any real mystery there..unless you are a dimwit. Are you a dimwit?
YEA! Like how GM and Ford have locked-out the ability to replace the factory-approved air filter with a K&N, because they don't want to "warranty and support" the aftermarket parts!
Slashdot Mirror
So if some one with sufficient real or moral authority and/or [influence] made the same sort of comments about a President, it could be taken as a serious threat.
Yea, OK, I'll buy that maybe if someone like, say, Pat Robertson, told his followers he'd like to see the President murdered, how he could be considered guilty of conspiracy.
The difference, of course, is the amount of influence wielded by evangelist leaders and the like, versus that of random morons on Twitter. Considering that we're discussing the latter, the Thomas Becket anecdote is non sequitur.
Games and video editing are the only reasons I keep a Windows PC around. And a lot of my Steam games already run under Wine.
Audio stuff too.
My kingdom for a good Linux ASIO driver...
Yes, and every thread will be investigated by the Secret Service.
I don't think that this guy's blog will have any impact on Secret Service investigations. If they felt there was a sufficient threat to merit investigation in any particular case, then they are more than able to discover the information this guy has uncovered (and more!) without his help. If they felt that some other particular case was not worthy of investigation, then this guy's blog will not convince them to investigate. The blog is a complete non-factor as regards the Secret Service.
I was speaking in general terms, not specific to the blog. One of the duties of Secret Service agents is to investigate all 'actionable threats' against the President.
The criteria they use to establish what qualifies as 'actionable' is not information I am privy to.
Sometimes. I am human.
Of course, we must all keep in mind that saying "I hope someone kills that guy" is not the same thing as saying "I'm gonna kill that guy." Only the latter can be construed as an actionable threat.
I'm sure that Thomas Becket feels hugely relieved by your observation.
... Okay...
What, praytell, warranted the mention of a man 800 years dead? This ain't 12th century England, you know.
Pointing out that someone said something in public is most certainly NOT putting someone's life in danger. These people uttered words into the public space, there is nothing wrong with repeating thier message and attaching names to those utterances.
Names are fine.
Posting addresses, however, is crossing the line.
Don't worry, it's all part of Apple Innovation. You must be using the phone wrong or something. You'll be able to buy a patch soon.
... and by "patch," we of course mean the iPhone 6.
As I said, legal gray area.
On another note, I personally hope someone finds out who wrote this blog, and posts their name and address online for all the world, just to see how he reacts.
To wager a guess, I'm betting he won't take it well.
I would think the first amendment would protect the poster.
Normally, yes, but in the case that the speaker is knowingly putting the life of others in danger, not so much.
Okay but, doesn't calling for an assassination constitute a threat to the POTUS' life?
Yes, and every threat will be investigated by the Secret Service.
Of course, we must all keep in mind that saying "I hope someone kills that guy" is not the same thing as saying "I'm gonna kill that guy." Only the latter can be construed as an actionable threat.
The person running the blog in question is, apparently, incapable making that distinction, based on his inclusion of the post from Doug Jarrett
Make no mistake, this (ironically, still anonymous) individual has absolutely zero interest in outing actual racists; rather, his intent is, IMO, inciting violence against his perceived political opposition, which is definitely not a protected form of speech.
What jurisdictions have these laws? Please name one.
I don't see how he put anyone in danger. These were copies of posts people made online. These folks were already telling the world this about themselves. He did not secretly record their bed time conversations.
http://www.splc.org/knowyourrights/legalresearch.asp?id=107
As I said, it is a legal gray area.
Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against quality printings - the top 2 shelves of every bookshelf in my library is stacked with mostly antique first editions (I have a first-English-edition of Bambi with the cover art printed slightly off-center that's my personal favorite - according to all my research, it doesn't exist!).
My issue is with uppity hipsters who get all snobbish when someone mentions that everything they buy isn't some uber-pricey collectors edition.
Google cache is your friend -- cache:hellothereracists.tumblr.com
You == Awesome.
+5 Internets
... does not guarantee freedom from responsibility.
... and all streets are 2-way, if you know how the lines are painted.
You only need to do a Google search for "new civility" (include the quotes) to see the hypocrisy behind HelloThereRacists.
Hell, just RFTA:
Anonymous pussy thinks he's big hero by outing other anonymous pussies, all the time hiding his own identity?
I can't think of a better definition of hypocrisy than that.
Tumblr should out his ass for principle sake.
Why not? What law prevents this if they are minors?
Depends on the jurisdiction; some states it's illegal, others it's not, still others, a grey area. Personally, I wouldn't recommend going on a global "naming names" campaign unless I was intimately familiar with all federal, state, and local regulations... otherwise, the probability that my actions would run afoul of the law would inevitably reach 1.
I would think the first amendment would protect the poster.
Normally, yes, but in the case that the speaker is knowingly putting the life of others in danger, not so much.
Remember, your rights extend to the exact point at which they interfere with someone else's, and not a micron further.
Like how GM and Ford have locked-out the ability to replace the factory-approved air filter with a K&N, because they don't want to "warranty and support" the aftermarket parts!
*cough* And we know they never tried anything like that because if they had, then there would be something like a Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which would clearly state that companies like GM and Ford could not prevent customers from using aftermarket parts.
That doesn't mean what you think it means. the Magnuson-Moss Warranty act basically states that an automotive warranty cannot be voided in full merely by installing aftermarket parts; however, it does allow the warranty of related systems to be voided if it is apparent that an aftermarket part caused the malfunction. In other words, putting aftermarket rims on your car won't void your engine warranty, but if the aftermarket wheels somehow damage the braking system, then the braking system is not covered under warranty.
FYI, this law came about as a result of shady dealerships screwing customers, not the manufacturers.
Amusingly, I've the opposite experience. USPS carriers, ridiculously incompetent. I'm routinely carrying letters over to neighbours, sometimes several streets over, despite clearly marked, usually typed, addresses.
Then there's stuff that just never arrives, like Netflix.
Must be a regional thing - around here, the only apparent requirement to get a job as a UPS driver is a complete and utter lack of respect for other people and their stuff.
By contrast, if I want something absolutely positively to arrive, such as a document that needs a signature, I'm going to use UPS.
Yet another apparent regional difference - every time I've ever had delivered by UPS that required a signature, I come home to find the package sitting, unsecured, on my front porch.
Conversely, the packages that don't require signatures end up sitting on the UPS docks until I take time off work to go pick them up. It's mind-numbingly stupid, but good to hear that the practice is apparently local, and not a case of company-wide idiocy.
For a mortgage payment... that should all be done online nowdays. Providing remote communities with some public terminals should be way cheaper than maintaining USPS.
Easier said then done when your mortgage holder doesn't do online payments, as is with mine.
Archaic and kinda dumb? You bet your ass, but it's not my call to make, so I do what must be done.
Really. What is next? Legislation for locked doors?
Hate to break it to ya, AC, but...
http://www.allbusiness.com/glossaries/attractive-nuisance/4949344-1.html
Yea, some places are that fucked up.
I don't think it would be too damaging (if at all) for the USPS to stop delivering packages (although I do find their 'If it fits, it ships' program damn useful), and focus their efforts on letter delivery.
I've had entirely too much trouble with incompetence at UPS and FEDEX the last few years to be willing to entrust them with time-and-privacy sensitive materials like bill payments. The driver "forgetting" to put the new HDD I ordered on his truck 5 days in a row is no big deal, but imagine if that was, say, my mortgage payment sitting on their dock for a week...
Those are hardly the same. Replacement air filters pose zero liability to GM and Ford.
If you have a problem with your car, you are going to take it somewhere to get fixed. If the car is under warranty and the problem is NOT with your replacement filter, you pay nothing and the manufacturer pays the cost of repairs. If the problem turns out to be your replacement filter YOU must pay the cost of diagnosing and repairing that problem (and are not getting your car back until you do), and the manufacturer hos zero cost because of that problem.
This makes it different how? If it's not a warrantied part, you get charged for the replacement. That's a pretty standard term for all warrantied items.
On the other hand, if you buy a cheap computer (which these are) and replace a component and subsequently have a problem, you are going to call their support center (a direct cost to them). If the support center thinks it may be a warranty problem, they will pay for you to ship the computer for repair (another cost for them). Now they must diagnose the problem (more cost to them). If it turns out to be your replacement part that was the problem, now what? They could require you to pay for the original shipping cost, the original phone call, the cost of diagnostics, and the return shipping cost before they ship your PC back, but how many people are going to do that (remember, this was a cheap computer to start with)? Now they are stuck with a broken computer, in a configuration they don't support, that they can spend still more money on to get it back into a supported, working configuration, in hopes that MAYBE they can recoup their loses by selling it as a refurb.
I see, so basically, your position is, "it's different because call center employees are dumb."
Yea, that dog don't hunt, monseigneur.
Just like with auto warranties, it doesn't take a legal expert to realize that a clause stating "any costs associated with repairs or damage resulting from the use of unapproved aftermarket parts will be charged to the customer" in the warranty would immediately solve the non-issue you've blown totally out of proportion. In fact, were I a betting man I'd wager that such a clause already exists, thus completely negating your entire premise.
The idea that a manufacturer damaging a customer's ability to modify their own property as they see fit could be construed as acceptable behavior is counter-productive to well-established consumer rights, as well as being downright idiotic nonsense.
Bottom line: if you buy cheap, expect that ALL available measures have been taken to remove cost from that product.
Nobody ever said anything about the HP/Lenovo laptops in question being "cheap." You've ascribed that attribute of your own volition, and it is non sequitur to the topic at hand.
Please don't move goalposts.
This won't even make it out of committee unfortunately.
Which committee? If any of my congress-critters are members, I'll crawl up their asses and set up camp until these bills get to the floor.
If you're in a remote area, maybe you'd just have to accept mail service that only came by once a week, and maybe only to centralised postal locations. And maybe you'd also have to accept that anyone who wanted to send you mail might have to pay a bit more for it.
For other areas, why are they proposing dropping Saturday delivery. That means 2 days without mail. Why not drop Wednesday?
Perhaps you could subscribe to a service where a completely automated system could open the original mail, scan it, and allow you to accept an electronic copy instead, for a credit. If you still wanted/needed it delivered, it could reseal it. That might admittedly be complex to implement in a private fashion, but, I suspect people even in non-rural areas might be excited to have scans instead, so it might pay for itself.
Dunno. Maybe some areas will never be profitable for non-electronic delivery of cheap (say, $1) mail. People living in those areas might just have to accept that paying more for physical delivery of mail is a side effect of living there.
Hence the reason for a nationalized mail service - of course some places won't be profitable to deliver to, but they still need their mail.
In this case though, the main reason the Postal Service is running out of money is their retirement plan.
Indeed. American bureaucracy at it's finest.
And what about the people who live in places that are too expensive for privatized couriers to make a profit serving?
Move somewhere else?
But then, who would run the oil derricks?
Macco's Razor - sometimes the simplest answer is stupid and counter-productive.
... whatever reason, Lenovo/HP doesn't want you to use a storebought card.
Warranty and support. There isn't any real mystery there..unless you are a dimwit. Are you a dimwit?
YEA! Like how GM and Ford have locked-out the ability to replace the factory-approved air filter with a K&N, because they don't want to "warranty and support" the aftermarket parts!
Stupid prick.