Don't worry. Obama has made sure that it was technically impossible for any type of coal plant to exist, enjoy those soaring energy costs, perhaps you guys can follow europe. You know, where people are now cutting down trees to heat their homes because it's too expensive to heat them by any other means.
If your desktop computer is password-protected, the police require a warrant to look through it. If not, it's fair game. The court ruling said that it's like having a lock on your house to show that it's private property. It doesn't necessarily have to be engaged, but it has to be on there. A lock or password shows that you don't want strangers to get in there without your permission.
Not quite. They can only do it if it falls under the plain view doctrine(if you can see it, and it's dealing with, or in the commission of a criminal offence), if they're there conducting a warrant from say kiddie porn or hacking websites based on a tip or have evidence or that you're distributing for example. But they only have the warrant for say your laptop, and they see your desktop then by law the plain view doctrine states that the 'object was within view, and within the scope of the original warrant.'
In law in Canada, property is already divided into public, semi-public, and private. Your house(or dwelling house) is already considered private. Having a lock on it, regardless or not is moot it's not even required to be on there. Entering a dwelling house, or searching it without a warrant is illegal. I'm up to date on the law fairly well, and I've never heard of this. The entire premise though is a charter violation via unreasonable search.
And being realistic, I expect that this case will end up before the SCC and get struck down as unreasonable. It's unjustifiable before S1 and a fishing expedition.
Re:It's not all about power....differentiators are
on
Sony Announces the PS4
·
· Score: 1
You're getting 8GB GDDR5 as main memory for that?
Why would I want it outside of my video card? Considering that at the upper most end 4GB is the highend limit right now for it. Though 2GB of GDDR5 is most common, and DDR3 is a shared cache across the bus for textures in PC games. But hey, it's only on consoles where we have to worry about poor memory optimizations for things like that.
Re:It's not all about power....differentiators are
on
Sony Announces the PS4
·
· Score: 1
Price. It will probably cost $500. A similarly equipped Windows PC would be $1,000+
More like $450 for that PC side, maybe $600. Really, I was in a situation where I was flat broke a few years ago. I didn't upgrade my rig at all, and I could play everything I wanted. In fact if the opportunity to upgrade hadn't come along because a buddy of mine was getting a hell of a deal on new AMD FX Vishera processors by the flat, I wouldn't have upgraded what I was using. I would have stuck with my x4-965 for another year until the 700 series GPU's came out. That's how badly consoles are holding back PC gaming.
And really, right now the only games that make PC's choke are modded skyrim with texture packs out the backside, modded crysis and a few other things. Everything else? 2-3 year old hardware will still do the job as long as it isn't onboard(soundcard not included--but I still like a good PCI/PCI-e card).
And that can't be done by blocking internet access to certain lawyers as well?
Technically it can, legally it can't of course. In Canada we have a standard called Bringing the Justice system into Disrepute. That would be one of those instance, it's actually pretty serious. It's one of the very few charges that when laid will not only see you stripped of service, but can have you disbarred, or removed from the bench with remand to custody.
Never minding that up here it would also be a charter violation(the equivalent to a constitutional violation). There's a lot of case law covering both, needless to say that the SCC take an exceptionally dim view on cases where they see that.
Either way it was pretty obviously 90% or so astroturf pretending to be "grass roots". Once the money for the buses to pick people up and provide the organisers went away it almost completely vanished.
Odd how that people don't claim the same thing about leftwing causes. I just saw the same thing with that there lovely keystone xl protest, but nary a peep.
San Fran has a fairly low incidence of people bathing regularly.
At least that's what my nose told me the last time I was there.
Well joking aside, something that people are forgetting is that California and their wonderful love of all things organic and of course there are plenty of idiots who do organic gardening with unpurified human waste. So cross contamination would be very easy to pick up that way, I seem to remember that there was a huge outbreak of e.coli in europe regarding brussel sprouts a few years back linked to exactly that.
When you get contamination into a plastic bag that's not cleaned, or sterilized, you're cross contaminating everything else you put in there as well. The ministry of health here in Ontario put out a similar warning after a small outbreak. I think it was 15 or 25 ill linked to a reusable bag and a dinner party, I'll have to see if I can find the release on it. It was back 6ish years ago.
You think this violates the "anonymity" of the Internet? The Internet was never anonymous..
Really? Somehow I had this sneaking suspicion that pseudonyms allowed people to make the choice of anonymity or not. Oh wait, you're saying they're not the same thing. But you're wrong. The lack of an actual identity and authentication is the core of being anonymous.
Never mind that people value nicknames more than they value their real names on forums, people have a higher intrinsic value for a unique username.
I'm guessing you're that ignorant of canadian politics that you don't know that Liberals(are the name of the party). But that's okay, let me educate you. Let'sseehere. Well now that's from all three sides of the political spectrum of the news. Going from left wing, to centerist, to right wing. And I haven't even touched the gas power plants that were gutted out, and the $250M+ bill that taxpayers were stuck with or the 50k documents that people are still pouring over, or the reason that it was cut was due to environmentalists and his desire to push "green energy."
Fair enough, but you can have a much longer career as an engineer than as a stripper.
Considering a girl I used to date back in the early 2000's was clearing upwards of $4500 to 6800/week? I don't think that's a problem. She hasn't worked in 3 years now, and it living off the investments she had done when she was younger. Retiring at 32 must have been a poor career move for her.
You get the Idea. Anyway, this Bill, however bad it may be; would have helped put a stop to this. Scammers win.
Sorry no law is worth that. It's a baby out with the bathwater argument. The real problem is that the filipino police are in no shape or state to deal with these crimes either. The other part is that large swaths of the filipino police are corrupt. They're still stuck in 1985 mode still. I've had long running discussions over this with my ex-GF(who was filipino) and her family over this, and generally the only way that this will get fixed is when the country as a whole gets their shit in order. It's difficult enough for the "rich-elites" to get businesses up and running these days and people employed. Her family is very well off, and employs somewhere around 90k people. But it's bribe here, bribe there, grease palms here, watch out for that "inspection" there.
Then we get into the US government and their "placate terrorists" mentality in the Philippines, where businesses then get stuck paying money so things "don't happen."
If it didn't pass for the telephone, why should it exist for Internet?
That's the thing though, it did pass for the telephone. In fact it was on the books for nearly 60 years via cc 184.4 , but required exigent circumstances. The SCC struck it down as over-reaching though.
When was the last time that the Senate actually killed a bill that a majority government wanted?
The first round of the gun registry. Useful tip it was stacked with liberals at the time. Second thing, every PM shoves in new senators. Though the liberals have been in power the majority of the time in Canada in turn they've have a disproportionate number of senators in power. Third thing, Harper has been attempting to get the senate reformed for his last three mandates, and the liberals and quebec have been throwing a hissy fit over the entire thing. Because he wants an elected senate--you know just like MP's.
Oh hey there kid. Apparently you don't understand how the unelected senate works in Canada let alone the government, but takes the face value of pot weekly magazine at face value.
Right now Conservatives have a majority, what that means is they essentially get to shove any legislation they want through with impunity.
If that was true, the free speech bill(C-304) wouldn't be stalled in the senate. And this is a bill that has strong support from all sides of the political spectrum. A majority means squat in politics in Canada being that the senate has it's own whims and can stall and kill something as it wants.
I suspect that by modest changes they mean that they are going to gut our rights. Anyone who works in government quickly learns that control of information is power. It makes them angry that they can't get more information and it makes them scared that we can get so much.
Well, my first question is do you actually live in Canada? If you did you'd already know that the SCC has a history of upholding the charter of rights and freedoms against intrusive laws unless the government can justifiably demonstrate that there is a valid S.1 argument. And there have been very few cases where the SCC has let the S.1 argument give leeway. Probably the best case to show where the government has been given leeway under that is the RIDE Program, where warrentless stopping of a vehicle is considered a small enough violation of public rights vs the protection of society as a whole.
Remember now, that this has already been to court in terms of the warrentless wiretap, and the SCC struck it down as an overeach of power. This bill is to come into compliance to the SCC's ruling, it will end up being challenged again, and if the bill is found to be in breach or an excessive overreach the SCC will strike it down again.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry. Obama has made sure that it was technically impossible for any type of coal plant to exist, enjoy those soaring energy costs, perhaps you guys can follow europe. You know, where people are now cutting down trees to heat their homes because it's too expensive to heat them by any other means.
If your desktop computer is password-protected, the police require a warrant to look through it. If not, it's fair game. The court ruling said that it's like having a lock on your house to show that it's private property. It doesn't necessarily have to be engaged, but it has to be on there. A lock or password shows that you don't want strangers to get in there without your permission.
Not quite. They can only do it if it falls under the plain view doctrine(if you can see it, and it's dealing with, or in the commission of a criminal offence), if they're there conducting a warrant from say kiddie porn or hacking websites based on a tip or have evidence or that you're distributing for example. But they only have the warrant for say your laptop, and they see your desktop then by law the plain view doctrine states that the 'object was within view, and within the scope of the original warrant.'
In law in Canada, property is already divided into public, semi-public, and private. Your house(or dwelling house) is already considered private. Having a lock on it, regardless or not is moot it's not even required to be on there. Entering a dwelling house, or searching it without a warrant is illegal. I'm up to date on the law fairly well, and I've never heard of this. The entire premise though is a charter violation via unreasonable search.
And being realistic, I expect that this case will end up before the SCC and get struck down as unreasonable. It's unjustifiable before S1 and a fishing expedition.
You're getting 8GB GDDR5 as main memory for that?
Why would I want it outside of my video card? Considering that at the upper most end 4GB is the highend limit right now for it. Though 2GB of GDDR5 is most common, and DDR3 is a shared cache across the bus for textures in PC games. But hey, it's only on consoles where we have to worry about poor memory optimizations for things like that.
Price. It will probably cost $500. A similarly equipped Windows PC would be $1,000+
More like $450 for that PC side, maybe $600. Really, I was in a situation where I was flat broke a few years ago. I didn't upgrade my rig at all, and I could play everything I wanted. In fact if the opportunity to upgrade hadn't come along because a buddy of mine was getting a hell of a deal on new AMD FX Vishera processors by the flat, I wouldn't have upgraded what I was using. I would have stuck with my x4-965 for another year until the 700 series GPU's came out. That's how badly consoles are holding back PC gaming.
And really, right now the only games that make PC's choke are modded skyrim with texture packs out the backside, modded crysis and a few other things. Everything else? 2-3 year old hardware will still do the job as long as it isn't onboard(soundcard not included--but I still like a good PCI/PCI-e card).
"This thing that a subsidiary caused happened 10 years ago! NEVER FORGIVE!!!"
Anonymous? Is that you?! I always knew you had a real identity.
So what exactly is gonna differentiate this from a mid-level to high-end gaming rig?
It's not even surpassing a low to mid-level right these days. Welcome to the "lets carry it along" generation, instead of "lets improve it along."
but OSHA does require that bathroom facilities be available for all employees whenever they need to go.
Since when did OSHA have say in 3rd world countries?
And that can't be done by blocking internet access to certain lawyers as well?
Technically it can, legally it can't of course. In Canada we have a standard called Bringing the Justice system into Disrepute. That would be one of those instance, it's actually pretty serious. It's one of the very few charges that when laid will not only see you stripped of service, but can have you disbarred, or removed from the bench with remand to custody.
Never minding that up here it would also be a charter violation(the equivalent to a constitutional violation). There's a lot of case law covering both, needless to say that the SCC take an exceptionally dim view on cases where they see that.
Either way it was pretty obviously 90% or so astroturf pretending to be "grass roots". Once the money for the buses to pick people up and provide the organisers went away it almost completely vanished.
Odd how that people don't claim the same thing about leftwing causes. I just saw the same thing with that there lovely keystone xl protest, but nary a peep.
This tells us more about you than about the Guardian.
That's good. Then you realize that I can actually spot bias when it's being published as 'unbiased' can you?
San Fran has a fairly low incidence of people bathing regularly.
At least that's what my nose told me the last time I was there.
Well joking aside, something that people are forgetting is that California and their wonderful love of all things organic and of course there are plenty of idiots who do organic gardening with unpurified human waste. So cross contamination would be very easy to pick up that way, I seem to remember that there was a huge outbreak of e.coli in europe regarding brussel sprouts a few years back linked to exactly that.
When you get contamination into a plastic bag that's not cleaned, or sterilized, you're cross contaminating everything else you put in there as well. The ministry of health here in Ontario put out a similar warning after a small outbreak. I think it was 15 or 25 ill linked to a reusable bag and a dinner party, I'll have to see if I can find the release on it. It was back 6ish years ago.
That you use the guardian as a reference says a lot. That's a kin to using World Daily News.
No he's just got the loudest mouth. We have CIPPIC, Openmedia and there's also JF Mezei
You think this violates the "anonymity" of the Internet? The Internet was never anonymous..
Really? Somehow I had this sneaking suspicion that pseudonyms allowed people to make the choice of anonymity or not. Oh wait, you're saying they're not the same thing. But you're wrong. The lack of an actual identity and authentication is the core of being anonymous.
Never mind that people value nicknames more than they value their real names on forums, people have a higher intrinsic value for a unique username.
For goodness sakes, just release SP2 already you bastards.
It's called Windows 8, with the damned awful metro UI removed.
I'm guessing you're that ignorant of canadian politics that you don't know that Liberals(are the name of the party). But that's okay, let me educate you. Let's see here. Well now that's from all three sides of the political spectrum of the news. Going from left wing, to centerist, to right wing. And I haven't even touched the gas power plants that were gutted out, and the $250M+ bill that taxpayers were stuck with or the 50k documents that people are still pouring over, or the reason that it was cut was due to environmentalists and his desire to push "green energy."
Hah, "bankrupted"? Citation needed if ever I saw one..
Would you take Ontario, Canada as well? The Liberals here have done the same thing with their "green initiative" programs.
Then she is an exception, most people blow the money on high living as they earn it.
This is true, then again if I had the foresight I would have blown every other pay cheque on gold back in the late 90's and 2000's on gold.
Fair enough, but you can have a much longer career as an engineer than as a stripper.
Considering a girl I used to date back in the early 2000's was clearing upwards of $4500 to 6800/week? I don't think that's a problem. She hasn't worked in 3 years now, and it living off the investments she had done when she was younger. Retiring at 32 must have been a poor career move for her.
You get the Idea. Anyway, this Bill, however bad it may be; would have helped put a stop to this. Scammers win.
Sorry no law is worth that. It's a baby out with the bathwater argument. The real problem is that the filipino police are in no shape or state to deal with these crimes either. The other part is that large swaths of the filipino police are corrupt. They're still stuck in 1985 mode still. I've had long running discussions over this with my ex-GF(who was filipino) and her family over this, and generally the only way that this will get fixed is when the country as a whole gets their shit in order. It's difficult enough for the "rich-elites" to get businesses up and running these days and people employed. Her family is very well off, and employs somewhere around 90k people. But it's bribe here, bribe there, grease palms here, watch out for that "inspection" there.
Then we get into the US government and their "placate terrorists" mentality in the Philippines, where businesses then get stuck paying money so things "don't happen."
It's a mess.
If it didn't pass for the telephone, why should it exist for Internet?
That's the thing though, it did pass for the telephone. In fact it was on the books for nearly 60 years via cc 184.4 , but required exigent circumstances. The SCC struck it down as over-reaching though.
When was the last time that the Senate actually killed a bill that a majority government wanted?
The first round of the gun registry. Useful tip it was stacked with liberals at the time. Second thing, every PM shoves in new senators. Though the liberals have been in power the majority of the time in Canada in turn they've have a disproportionate number of senators in power. Third thing, Harper has been attempting to get the senate reformed for his last three mandates, and the liberals and quebec have been throwing a hissy fit over the entire thing. Because he wants an elected senate--you know just like MP's.
Oh hey there kid. Apparently you don't understand how the unelected senate works in Canada let alone the government, but takes the face value of pot weekly magazine at face value.
Right now Conservatives have a majority, what that means is they essentially get to shove any legislation they want through with impunity.
If that was true, the free speech bill(C-304) wouldn't be stalled in the senate. And this is a bill that has strong support from all sides of the political spectrum. A majority means squat in politics in Canada being that the senate has it's own whims and can stall and kill something as it wants.
I suspect that by modest changes they mean that they are going to gut our rights. Anyone who works in government quickly learns that control of information is power. It makes them angry that they can't get more information and it makes them scared that we can get so much.
Well, my first question is do you actually live in Canada? If you did you'd already know that the SCC has a history of upholding the charter of rights and freedoms against intrusive laws unless the government can justifiably demonstrate that there is a valid S.1 argument. And there have been very few cases where the SCC has let the S.1 argument give leeway. Probably the best case to show where the government has been given leeway under that is the RIDE Program, where warrentless stopping of a vehicle is considered a small enough violation of public rights vs the protection of society as a whole.
Remember now, that this has already been to court in terms of the warrentless wiretap, and the SCC struck it down as an overeach of power. This bill is to come into compliance to the SCC's ruling, it will end up being challenged again, and if the bill is found to be in breach or an excessive overreach the SCC will strike it down again.