It didn't say 100 Americans. It said 100 people living in this country. They are most probably not citizens and they are not entitled to the same rights as citizens.
Generally, I find fellow citizens are less likely to try to kill us. Cut me off in traffic, sure, destroy the local water plant, no.
Funny... I don't remembering anything in the constitution that says that "civil rights are only for citizens" my understanding was that the laws applied equally to everybody in the country, Citizen, visitor, illegal alien.
I find the concept that "They are not entitled to the same rights as citizens" a very common, and disturbing concept.
That being said, there are some very specific rights, that are explicitly awarded to citizens (see the 26th amendment), for example the right to vote. the fact that other rights don't explicitly state that they are for citizens, would very strongly imply that they are for all people in the country
Fsck that. Someone comes to me from law enforcement or from anywhere in the federal government asking me for copies of e-mails, my first response is going to be "Warrant?".
What are they going to do? Put me in jail for exercising our Constitutional rights? Bring it on! Hope you have fun with the media circus and the ACLU breathing down your necks. No... Gitmo isn't a jail. It's a detention center for "terrists" and they'd probably say that you were "supporting terrists" and have you made an unperson
No company should surrender private communications to the government without a warrant. And if they do, the public can sued them.
So if the Japanese had discussed the attack on Pearl Harbor amongst themselves but over AT&T phone lines, you're arguing that AT&T should have conspired with the Japanese to keep the attack secret? There's no kind of warrant that applies to foreign enemy powers. Warrants are for criminal prosecutions. Also warrants are issued by judges, and judges are constitutionally excluded from issues involving the waging of war. no, that's not what the GP is saying. There would be no conspiring involved, because until the warrant was issued (and served) AT&T would have no way of knowing what was being said over their lines.
suggests that companies like AT&T and Verizon that "cooperate" with the Administration should be granted immunity from the lawsuits they currently face regarding the issue." If a company illegally gives information (hypothetically about me) to the government, as part of an illegal plan. Not only should I be able to sue their pants off (to the point where I can pay not only for my kids' college education through to 5 PHDs, but also afford to pay to have an OC-3 line run right to my house) but they should be brought up on criminal charges.
Enough already with this "You so something bad for us and you're safe" bit.
Try to get a loan entirely over the Internet, without some sort of old-fashioned paperwork with signatures and date. I'm pretty sure there are Federal and State laws requiring written contracts whenever the contract matter exceeds a certain amount of money or is property (like land or a structure). Not quite... Clinton signed S.761 into effect, which specifically allows digital signatures to be used for signing check, loan applications, etc. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c106:5:./tem p/~c106jtC2b2::
Reading all the posts here, it made me wonder something.
If I could devise some system where I could connect to the kazaa/limewire/etc. network, and appear to have 10,000 songs available for downloading all of high-quality, but my client would not permit the files to be uploaded. What would happen?
I don't have the money to try this out, but I imagine that if somebody did, and was willing to bait the RIAA like this, that we could a) force a change in the way they run their "Investigations" and b) Potentially get some previous verdicts or settlements vacated.
1) Display list of songs alledgedly available for download 2) Make it impossible to actually download the songs 3) wait to be sued for distribution 4) ??? 5) Counter-sue for something (Is being terminally stupid a crime?) 6) profit
User interfaces confuse people about the difference between code and data, and the spread of trojans is the unfortunate result. BZZZZzzzz... Wrong... Code is data!
I think what maybe you meant to say is that User interfaces confuse people about the difference between executable code and non-executable data" I know... nit-picking to a certain degree, but here's the kicker buffer overflows are exploited by using that non-difference. find a way to inject extra "data" that also happens to be executable code fragments, and presto, you're in
This is also how SQL-injection attacks happen... input code as the data, and presto, the computer listens to the new code.
They can't do that any more (Though of course grandfather provisions still exist)
For a new position, the person teaching it must be "Highly qualified", this means that they must have at least a bachelor's degree, pass the state teaching test to be certified by the state DoE, and have at least 24 credits in the field that they will be teaching in.
For High School, this would mean that the position would have to be filled by someone with 24 credit-hours in Computer saftey/ethics/etc. this "etc." would probably also include your regular computer classes, but that would be a decission for the State DoE
for elementary school, if they can get it added to the state standards, they're all set, because all you need to be Highly Qualified for a classroom teacher elementary position is the 24 credit-hours in "Elementary Education" because it's such a wide area... that being said, some elementary school teachers have trouble finding the power switch....
Anyone who has chosen College (or University) programs based on "what will be in demand" when you're finished will have chosen wrong. The world changes so fast that choosing what you are going to work with in 5-10 years based on what is in demand now will almost invariably mean that things have changed and you will find yourself in tough competition. It is generally better just to choose what to do based on what you want to do and hope for the best. At least then you'll be competing with others in a field you love. How true... I forget where I heard it but Teaching today is all about teaching students what we don't know, what they will need to know, for a job that doesn't exist yet.
I don't want to even try to guess what technologies will be available to my son when he graduates from High School
I am an educator. I am not a teacher, but I work at a public school to further the education of the students. (I'm the tech geek). My wife is a teacher. I am also a parent, My son isn't old enough yet to go to school, but when he is, I agree with you, If I can afford it, he will not go to public school.
I think there needs to be a distinction between "educator", "Teacher", "Administrator", and "F'n state department of Ed".
The vast majority of teachers really do care about the students, and about teaching the students what they really need to know, and making them well-rounded individuals. As a whole, so do educators... however, as a general rule these days, teachers don't get to teach.
No Child Left Behind (or NCLB as it's known) has forced massive numbers of assessments on the students. There are literally over 5 different assessments that have to be done on the students at the school here, at least twice a year. These assessments sometimes take over a week to do with each child in the class individually. During this time, the teacher is often out of the room, assessing a student, and so can't be teaching the class.
Then there's the "Warm fuzzy shit" that has to be taken care of, because kids just aren't getting it at home.
Then there's the attitude (often "enforced" by administration) that homework is a burden on students, and it takes them away from their social life/basketball/etc. So you can't keep kids after for academic reasons.
Then there are the parents that threaten to sue the school any time their kid gets kept in for recess for slugging another kid (and the school has it on camera)
Please, do me, the rest of the country's educators, and the kids a favor... Be active in education. Find out when your local school board meets. Go to the meetings, inform yourself about the issues, talk with the board members. volunteer at the school.
Don't just worry about taxes, because that's what pays for the schools. Worry about how the school district is using the money. Work with the educators to make the schools better, Please.
Seriously! Verizon: There was no fire FireFighter: Yes there was a fire, I saw it Verizon: And who are you to determine if there was a fire or not FireFighter:... You're kidding, right? Verizon: No, because there was no fire. FireFighter:... Hello McFly.... I'm a professional FIRE Fighter... You'd think I'm qualified to tell if there's a fire or not.
This is where I think there's a crisis of communication with the American people. What percentage of everyday Americans of voting age really have their head around what's going on? Once the gov't has this kind of control with no oversight or audit trail, how can anyone reasonably expect it *won't* be used improperly? It seems by the time people figure out what's going on in numbers enough to do anything about it, the opportunity for bringing about change will have come and gone. Which is a familiar refrain, sadly.
and yep, read your post, thought it was great. slide me one a them bonus points.:) You've hit the nail on the head. The state of education in the U.S. these days is very sad. Students aren't being taught critical thinking. Rather they are being taught to regurgitate stuff they are being told.
Tie this in with what passes for news these days... There is very little actual reporting going on, much of what you see is commentary, and listening to talking heads argue the same points until the horse has died, been buried, decomposed, and reincarnated. Add in a bias presented in the "News" and you have a recipe for disaster.
Conspiracy theories aside, There are just a few too many coincidences, but that's another rant for another time
The ??? (Insert 3 letter agency here) wants to be able to sit in their "cushy" cubicle and monitor phone calls at the push of a button. I can understand that they don't want to have to travel to the ends of the country to sit in a cramped switching station to monitor phone calls. (oh yeah, add internet connections to the list too) But I can see a few problems:
1) Any sort of remote access tool is vulnerable. Period. This is a simple mathematical fact. All authentication schemes can be broken, some more easily than others. If it's a password, it can be guessed, if it's a strong private key based auth, the key could leak, or be brute forced (Over time) If the system locks out remote access after a certain number of failed attempts... it's vulnerable to DoS. I won't get into quantum encryption, because I don't think that's viable *yet*, and I don't know enough about it.
2) Somehow the data from the remote site must get back to the cushy cubicle. with targeted "Surveillance" that's not an issue, but if they start "tapping EVERYTHING" they could be in for some fun times. Unless these remote access ports have dedicated copper/fibre/etc/ run to the central location, at some point the data needs to run over the same wires. Ever done a tcpdump when connected to a machine over ssh? try it some time, and you'll see what I mean s/n rapidly approches 0, becuase you start monitoring the monitoring feed. 2-a) This could mean that they have a way to avoid tapping their own connections (EVIL bit anybody:-p ) If it's an ib-band method of flagging a call/connection not to be tapped, it can be reproduced. 2-b) If they don't, and they decide to tap everything, they'll be responsible for the largest DoS attack on the phone system EVER. 3) If the FBI/NSA/CIA/DoJ/etc. needs to tap a phone in a remote place (let's use Podunk'sville Alaska, as an example) a) Each state has FBI offices, so an agent is never too far away, all states have state police that are spread throughout the state, and on top of that local sheriff/town police could also be used to start the tap before an agent gets there. This would allow for greater monitoring of how this gets used. Before a law enforcement agent gets access to tap a line, they must present a valid warrent at the physical point where the tap is to take place.
I don't care if the contents of the tap are sent back to some "cushy cubicle" somewhere to be monitored, analysed, or whatnot. as long as any setup/changes to the tap must be made in person at the local switching station.
------ Those were the technical arguments, now for the privacy arguments
<rant style="flaming lunatic" strength="100%">god-damn it, get a freaking warrent before you decide to tap any phones/internet connections/tin-cans with string. don't we have this thing called a constitution? </rant> This whole idea very much so makes it sound like a) they want to be able to tap without *anyone* knowing b) they want the phone companies/ISPs to have plausible deniability
a) someone pushes a button and is listening to my conversations without anybody knowing, or there being any proof. Something about a 4th amendment comes to mind. but what if I'm running for office? *cough*watergate*cough* If I'm running against someone with no moral fiber (such as 99.99% of politicians) what's to prevent them from tapping my lines? b) There was a big hoopla in Maine a while ago with the State PUC asking verizon to state under oath that they did not participate in any warrentless wiretapping. the Federal Government steped in and sued the state of maine to prevent them from suing verizon to get that statement under oath. (even though the statement that they made not-under-oath that they were being asked to repeat under oath was that they didn't) If they can just press a button, and start monitoring, the phone companies would't know if any customers' information/conversations are being monitored.
I just hope you never have to fly last-minute, for say... A funeral.
Just this past month, My grandfather passed away, and we (My wife, My 20 month old son, and I) flew to Florida for the funeral. Of course, being that we couldn't really plan this trip ahead, we flew with tickets that we had purchased the day before. We get to the airport, only to be told that we would have to go through extra security because my wife is on the "Watch List"
Here's the kicker, Both my wife and I hold valid Maine State CHRC Certificates, meaning that we have passed state background checks, and that our fingerprints are on file. Both with the Maine State Police and the FBI, and that the state trusts us to work with children in public schools.
Obsenity is defined as something that "lacks artistic merit, depicts certain conduct in a patently offensive manner and violates contemporary community standards"
67000 complaints indicate the prevalence of such material. Could't it be because there is a real demand?
I believe this website succeeds only in reporting material that is offensive to a small subset of the population, that try to force its beliefs on the rest of the country. /me re-reads the parent.
You make a very good point. The internet, and specifically porn sites, are very capitalistic. Someone has to pay for the content. If we're using "Community standard" the community who's standards that we use should be the community where the "Product" is found.
This is where is gets fun. So far the courts have used the physical location of where the material was accessed as the community. I think that that view is fundamentally flawed. The community they should be considering is the "internet at large". The fact that there have been 67,000 complaints would tend to indicate that there is a fair amount of material, and hence a fair amount of demand.
That fair amount of demand, to my eyes, would indicate that the internet community's standards would include the "objectionable material"
I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know if that would hold up in court, but hey... it's worth a try.
I'm also reminded of a Salman Rishdie quote: "It is very, very easy not to be offended by a book. You just have to shut it." The same would hold true of websites, If you don't like it... don't go there. Many porn sites will put "Teaser, erotic" material on the front page to get to you pay, and then have the "Hard Core" stuff be restricted to paying members only.
Pornographic spam is another matter. The big difference is that it is being sent to you, not you going out to get it.
taking the bible at face value... if a raging horde of people comes to my front door trying to kill me I'm allowed to push my "Virgin daughters" at them for them do what they want with, if they'll leave me alone?
Somehow, i don't think that would be acceptable these days.
or for starters, and one of my favorite come-backs against people who believe in "The Genesis Creation story" as holy writ This-is-what-really-happened-and-you're-going-to-h ell-for-doubting-it... "Which Genesis creation story.... Genesis 1 or Genesis 2?" go read them, it's rather amusing... they contradict each other.
Hrm... can anybody find more information about this program, I'm thinking it's write my congress-critter time again, because this is crazy. a funding number, anything?/me goes to find an old American history textbook, photocopies the constitution, laminates it, and places it in a UV-Protected, inert atmosphere environment. Might just be the last copy we see.
Check your driver's license... and the local laws. for example: Florida's Driver's Licenses states right on the front "Operation of a motor vehicle constitutes consent to any sobriety test required by law"
Maine law is that "Under Implied Consent, you automatically agree to a chemical test (blood, breath, or urine) at any time authorities have probable cause to administer it. If you refuse to take such a test for alcohol or drugs, your driver's license will be immediately suspended. The suspension could be for a period of up to six years. Because it is an administrative suspension, no court action is necessary. In addition, testimony from the arresting officer regarding your driving performance can result in an OUI conviction even without the BAC test! f you are found guilty of OUI based on the police officer's testimony, your refusal to take a test will be considered as an aggravating factor by the judge and another suspension, as well as mandatory jail time, will be tacked on. So by refusing, you will have a much harsher penalty than if you'd taken the test.
Remember a test can protect you. If you are not legally intoxicated, the test will show it. " http://www.maine.gov/dps/bhs/moui.htm actual text of the law: http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/29-a/title 29-Asec2411.html but if you "Operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants, AND failed to submit to a test at the request of a law enforcement officer" you are guilty of Criminal OUI.. then "A law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, a person the officer has probable cause to believe has operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants if the arrest occurs within a period following the offense reasonably likely to result in the obtaining of probative evidence of blood-alcohol level or drug concentration"
and then of course the meat-and-potatoes... if you don't take the test, the fine is higher... I'd copy/paste, but you can click the link just as well as I can
Thank You NPR... J&J lisenced the Red cross *from* the ARC, and has a contract to use the red cross symbol. They are alleging that by the ARC lisencing the symbol to other for-profit companies it is watering down their trademark.
I'd really like to see all of the technical arguments, and maybe read the original agreement
The only "web of trust" you can really trust is your own white list. This falls under the problem of the "If I didn't ask for it, it's spam"
Just recently, I got back in touch with a friend from college, I contacted her at work, and she asked me to e-mail her private e-mail address... of course, her private e-mail address didn't know who I was, so filed me under spam.
White-listing is a great concept, but it isn't complete enough to work all-of-the-time. What we need is an "all-of-the-time" non-broken system.
Slashdot Mirror
Generally, I find fellow citizens are less likely to try to kill us. Cut me off in traffic, sure, destroy the local water plant, no.
Funny... I don't remembering anything in the constitution that says that "civil rights are only for citizens" my understanding was that the laws applied equally to everybody in the country, Citizen, visitor, illegal alien.I find the concept that "They are not entitled to the same rights as citizens" a very common, and disturbing concept.
That being said, there are some very specific rights, that are explicitly awarded to citizens (see the 26th amendment), for example the right to vote. the fact that other rights don't explicitly state that they are for citizens, would very strongly imply that they are for all people in the country
What are they going to do? Put me in jail for exercising our Constitutional rights? Bring it on! Hope you have fun with the media circus and the ACLU breathing down your necks. No... Gitmo isn't a jail. It's a detention center for "terrists" and they'd probably say that you were "supporting terrists" and have you made an unperson
So if the Japanese had discussed the attack on Pearl Harbor amongst themselves but over AT&T phone lines, you're arguing that AT&T should have conspired with the Japanese to keep the attack secret? There's no kind of warrant that applies to foreign enemy powers. Warrants are for criminal prosecutions. Also warrants are issued by judges, and judges are constitutionally excluded from issues involving the waging of war. no, that's not what the GP is saying. There would be no conspiring involved, because until the warrant was issued (and served) AT&T would have no way of knowing what was being said over their lines.
Enough already with this "You so something bad for us and you're safe" bit.
Soap (check) -> Ballot (Check) -> Jury (Forbidden by Law) -> Ammo?
I'm not one to advocate for violence, but ya'know... when you have eliminated the impossible (or ineffective in this case) whatever remains...
this makes me mad
but of course the church of the flying spaghetti monster isn't bunk
Don't Jump!!!! There are so many better options... I know a great shrink. ...
Awww Man... now I've got to call the cops, the coroner, and do you know how many forms I have to fill out?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c106:5:./te
Reading all the posts here, it made me wonder something.
If I could devise some system where I could connect to the kazaa/limewire/etc. network, and appear to have 10,000 songs available for downloading all of high-quality, but my client would not permit the files to be uploaded. What would happen?
I don't have the money to try this out, but I imagine that if somebody did, and was willing to bait the RIAA like this, that we could a) force a change in the way they run their "Investigations" and b) Potentially get some previous verdicts or settlements vacated.
1) Display list of songs alledgedly available for download
2) Make it impossible to actually download the songs
3) wait to be sued for distribution
4) ???
5) Counter-sue for something (Is being terminally stupid a crime?)
6) profit
I think what maybe you meant to say is that User interfaces confuse people about the difference between executable code and non-executable data" I know... nit-picking to a certain degree, but here's the kicker buffer overflows are exploited by using that non-difference. find a way to inject extra "data" that also happens to be executable code fragments, and presto, you're in
This is also how SQL-injection attacks happen... input code as the data, and presto, the computer listens to the new code.
They can't do that any more (Though of course grandfather provisions still exist)
For a new position, the person teaching it must be "Highly qualified", this means that they must have at least a bachelor's degree, pass the state teaching test to be certified by the state DoE, and have at least 24 credits in the field that they will be teaching in.
For High School, this would mean that the position would have to be filled by someone with 24 credit-hours in Computer saftey/ethics/etc. this "etc." would probably also include your regular computer classes, but that would be a decission for the State DoE
for elementary school, if they can get it added to the state standards, they're all set, because all you need to be Highly Qualified for a classroom teacher elementary position is the 24 credit-hours in "Elementary Education" because it's such a wide area... that being said, some elementary school teachers have trouble finding the power switch....
I don't want to even try to guess what technologies will be available to my son when he graduates from High School
I am an educator. I am not a teacher, but I work at a public school to further the education of the students. (I'm the tech geek). My wife is a teacher. I am also a parent, My son isn't old enough yet to go to school, but when he is, I agree with you, If I can afford it, he will not go to public school.
I think there needs to be a distinction between "educator", "Teacher", "Administrator", and "F'n state department of Ed".
The vast majority of teachers really do care about the students, and about teaching the students what they really need to know, and making them well-rounded individuals. As a whole, so do educators... however, as a general rule these days, teachers don't get to teach.
No Child Left Behind (or NCLB as it's known) has forced massive numbers of assessments on the students. There are literally over 5 different assessments that have to be done on the students at the school here, at least twice a year. These assessments sometimes take over a week to do with each child in the class individually. During this time, the teacher is often out of the room, assessing a student, and so can't be teaching the class.
Then there's the "Warm fuzzy shit" that has to be taken care of, because kids just aren't getting it at home.
Then there's the attitude (often "enforced" by administration) that homework is a burden on students, and it takes them away from their social life/basketball/etc. So you can't keep kids after for academic reasons.
Then there are the parents that threaten to sue the school any time their kid gets kept in for recess for slugging another kid (and the school has it on camera)
Please, do me, the rest of the country's educators, and the kids a favor... Be active in education. Find out when your local school board meets. Go to the meetings, inform yourself about the issues, talk with the board members. volunteer at the school.
Don't just worry about taxes, because that's what pays for the schools. Worry about how the school district is using the money. Work with the educators to make the schools better, Please.
Seriously! ... You're kidding, right? ... Hello McFly.... I'm a professional FIRE Fighter... You'd think I'm qualified to tell if there's a fire or not.
Verizon: There was no fire
FireFighter: Yes there was a fire, I saw it
Verizon: And who are you to determine if there was a fire or not
FireFighter:
Verizon: No, because there was no fire.
FireFighter:
and yep, read your post, thought it was great. slide me one a them bonus points.
Tie this in with what passes for news these days... There is very little actual reporting going on, much of what you see is commentary, and listening to talking heads argue the same points until the horse has died, been buried, decomposed, and reincarnated. Add in a bias presented in the "News" and you have a recipe for disaster.
Conspiracy theories aside, There are just a few too many coincidences, but that's another rant for another time
so now: Soap (Check) -> Ballot (Check) -> Mail (Check) -> Jury -> Ammo
This whole thing is crazy...
:-p ) If it's an ib-band method of flagging a call/connection not to be tapped, it can be reproduced.
The ??? (Insert 3 letter agency here) wants to be able to sit in their "cushy" cubicle and monitor phone calls at the push of a button. I can understand that they don't want to have to travel to the ends of the country to sit in a cramped switching station to monitor phone calls. (oh yeah, add internet connections to the list too) But I can see a few problems:
1) Any sort of remote access tool is vulnerable. Period. This is a simple mathematical fact. All authentication schemes can be broken, some more easily than others. If it's a password, it can be guessed, if it's a strong private key based auth, the key could leak, or be brute forced (Over time) If the system locks out remote access after a certain number of failed attempts... it's vulnerable to DoS. I won't get into quantum encryption, because I don't think that's viable *yet*, and I don't know enough about it.
2) Somehow the data from the remote site must get back to the cushy cubicle. with targeted "Surveillance" that's not an issue, but if they start "tapping EVERYTHING" they could be in for some fun times. Unless these remote access ports have dedicated copper/fibre/etc/ run to the central location, at some point the data needs to run over the same wires. Ever done a tcpdump when connected to a machine over ssh? try it some time, and you'll see what I mean s/n rapidly approches 0, becuase you start monitoring the monitoring feed.
2-a) This could mean that they have a way to avoid tapping their own connections (EVIL bit anybody
2-b) If they don't, and they decide to tap everything, they'll be responsible for the largest DoS attack on the phone system EVER.
3) If the FBI/NSA/CIA/DoJ/etc. needs to tap a phone in a remote place (let's use Podunk'sville Alaska, as an example) a) Each state has FBI offices, so an agent is never too far away, all states have state police that are spread throughout the state, and on top of that local sheriff/town police could also be used to start the tap before an agent gets there. This would allow for greater monitoring of how this gets used. Before a law enforcement agent gets access to tap a line, they must present a valid warrent at the physical point where the tap is to take place.
I don't care if the contents of the tap are sent back to some "cushy cubicle" somewhere to be monitored, analysed, or whatnot. as long as any setup/changes to the tap must be made in person at the local switching station.
------
Those were the technical arguments, now for the privacy arguments
<rant style="flaming lunatic" strength="100%">god-damn it, get a freaking warrent before you decide to tap any phones/internet connections/tin-cans with string. don't we have this thing called a constitution? </rant>
This whole idea very much so makes it sound like
a) they want to be able to tap without *anyone* knowing
b) they want the phone companies/ISPs to have plausible deniability
a) someone pushes a button and is listening to my conversations without anybody knowing, or there being any proof. Something about a 4th amendment comes to mind. but what if I'm running for office? *cough*watergate*cough* If I'm running against someone with no moral fiber (such as 99.99% of politicians) what's to prevent them from tapping my lines?
b) There was a big hoopla in Maine a while ago with the State PUC asking verizon to state under oath that they did not participate in any warrentless wiretapping. the Federal Government steped in and sued the state of maine to prevent them from suing verizon to get that statement under oath. (even though the statement that they made not-under-oath that they were being asked to repeat under oath was that they didn't) If they can just press a button, and start monitoring, the phone companies would't know if any customers' information/conversations are being monitored.
I'm running out of time,
I just hope you never have to fly last-minute, for say... A funeral.
Just this past month, My grandfather passed away, and we (My wife, My 20 month old son, and I) flew to Florida for the funeral. Of course, being that we couldn't really plan this trip ahead, we flew with tickets that we had purchased the day before. We get to the airport, only to be told that we would have to go through extra security because my wife is on the "Watch List"
Here's the kicker, Both my wife and I hold valid Maine State CHRC Certificates, meaning that we have passed state background checks, and that our fingerprints are on file. Both with the Maine State Police and the FBI, and that the state trusts us to work with children in public schools.
Go figure.
67000 complaints indicate the prevalence of such material. Could't it be because there is a real demand?
I believe this website succeeds only in reporting material that is offensive to a small subset of the population, that try to force its beliefs on the rest of the country. /me re-reads the parent.
You make a very good point. The internet, and specifically porn sites, are very capitalistic. Someone has to pay for the content. If we're using "Community standard" the community who's standards that we use should be the community where the "Product" is found.
This is where is gets fun. So far the courts have used the physical location of where the material was accessed as the community. I think that that view is fundamentally flawed. The community they should be considering is the "internet at large". The fact that there have been 67,000 complaints would tend to indicate that there is a fair amount of material, and hence a fair amount of demand.
That fair amount of demand, to my eyes, would indicate that the internet community's standards would include the "objectionable material"
I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know if that would hold up in court, but hey... it's worth a try.
I'm also reminded of a Salman Rishdie quote: "It is very, very easy not to be offended by a book. You just have to shut it." The same would hold true of websites, If you don't like it... don't go there. Many porn sites will put "Teaser, erotic" material on the front page to get to you pay, and then have the "Hard Core" stuff be restricted to paying members only.
Pornographic spam is another matter. The big difference is that it is being sent to you, not you going out to get it.
taking the bible at face value... if a raging horde of people comes to my front door trying to kill me I'm allowed to push my "Virgin daughters" at them for them do what they want with, if they'll leave me alone?
h ell-for-doubting-it... "Which Genesis creation story.... Genesis 1 or Genesis 2?" go read them, it's rather amusing... they contradict each other.
Somehow, i don't think that would be acceptable these days.
or for starters, and one of my favorite come-backs against people who believe in "The Genesis Creation story" as holy writ This-is-what-really-happened-and-you're-going-to-
Hrm... can anybody find more information about this program, I'm thinking it's write my congress-critter time again, because this is crazy. a funding number, anything? /me goes to find an old American history textbook, photocopies the constitution, laminates it, and places it in a UV-Protected, inert atmosphere environment. Might just be the last copy we see.
Check your driver's license... and the local laws. for example:
e 29-Asec2411.html but if you "Operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants, AND failed to submit to a test at the request of a law enforcement officer" you are guilty of Criminal OUI.. then "A law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, a person the officer has probable cause to believe has operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants if the arrest occurs within a period following the offense reasonably likely to result in the obtaining of probative evidence of blood-alcohol level or drug concentration"
Florida's Driver's Licenses states right on the front "Operation of a motor vehicle constitutes consent to any sobriety test required by law"
Maine law is that "Under Implied Consent, you automatically agree to a chemical test (blood, breath, or urine) at any time authorities have probable cause to administer it. If you refuse to take such a test for alcohol or drugs, your driver's license will be immediately suspended. The suspension could be for a period of up to six years. Because it is an administrative suspension, no court action is necessary. In addition, testimony from the arresting officer regarding your driving performance can result in an OUI conviction even without the BAC test! f you are found guilty of OUI based on the police officer's testimony, your refusal to take a test will be considered as an aggravating factor by the judge and another suspension, as well as mandatory jail time, will be tacked on. So by refusing, you will have a much harsher penalty than if you'd taken the test.
Remember a test can protect you. If you are not legally intoxicated, the test will show it. " http://www.maine.gov/dps/bhs/moui.htm
actual text of the law: http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/29-a/titl
and then of course the meat-and-potatoes... if you don't take the test, the fine is higher... I'd copy/paste, but you can click the link just as well as I can
Thank You NPR... J&J lisenced the Red cross *from* the ARC, and has a contract to use the red cross symbol. They are alleging that by the ARC lisencing the symbol to other for-profit companies it is watering down their trademark.
I'd really like to see all of the technical arguments, and maybe read the original agreement
opps... wrong acronym... CIPA, not COPPA
my bad
But thus also satisfying the requirements under COPPA
Good thing you're not a network administrator for a school
What to filter/what *not* to filter is a big topic of conversation these days among school network administrators
Just recently, I got back in touch with a friend from college, I contacted her at work, and she asked me to e-mail her private e-mail address... of course, her private e-mail address didn't know who I was, so filed me under spam.
White-listing is a great concept, but it isn't complete enough to work all-of-the-time. What we need is an "all-of-the-time" non-broken system.