In theory, they are supposed to be acting in the interests of justice by building and presenting a solid case based on the evidence against the accused.
You are describing the reality: The prosecutor's job depends upon getting a guilty plea or conviction by whatever legal means they can, even if that means surpressing evidence that proves innocence, using details of the accused's persona life to turn a jury against them or siezing assets on a pretext to the accused cannot afford competent legal representation. That isn't how the system is supposed to work, but how it does work.
The worst role in law is public defence. Your job is to make your boss's boss look bad - so he'll deliberately overwork you to the point you can't give more than an hour to each case, and if by some miracle you manage to get too many non-guilty verdicts you just get fired or 'promoted sideways' to a position you can't do so much damage in.
The effective role of the public defender isn't to help the clients, it's to convince them to accept a plea bargin and save the state all the expense of having to go to trial.
Things were different back in the days of the Morris worm. It was expected that future computer experts would get up to no good and play around a bit, and there was a sort of understanding in the field that you didn't want to ruin someone's life for a little curiosity - if you got hacked, good on them, just fix the hole and make repairs. It was seen as a crime akin to graffiti vandalism - not something to lock someone in jail for years over.
Computers are just so much more important to society, infrastructure and economy these days that there is no room left for this blind-eye approach. Ignoring curious hackers was very well when they were stealing a few documents and wasting an administrator's weekend restoring backups, but now they can potentially cause millions of dollars in damage.
The 'IRS targeting conservatives' story is a bit inaccurate. The IRS wasn't targeting conservative groups specifically, it was targeting anti-taxation groups - there's an obvious motive there. It just happens that most anti-taxation groups have conservative affiliation.
The IRS wasn't trying to shut them down, it was just being stricter in ensuring compliance with the very vague restrictions on the political activities permitted to 501(c) organisations. It's a very fuzzy area of the law, and one that is very frequently and openly violated by organisations on both side of the political divide. The accusation is one of selective enforcement: While most organisations applying for tax-exempt status got a quick glance over their records by an accountant, anti-tax pressure groups were subjected to months-long intensive auditing and investigation.
The IRS is in a real political mess right now - with Republicans and Democrats still fighting over healthcare reform, the IRS has the unenviable job of having to enforce the tax-credit/subsidy aspect, which means not just lots more work but becoming a political target of those opposed to the reform too. Republicans have been able to use the political bias scandal as a means to 'punish' the IRS by cutting their budget, with the aim of reducing their ability to handle the new workload and so render the healthcare reform unworkable. Now is not a good time to work at the IRS.
Perchlorates are very easy to turn into rocket fuel or oxygen. Two things potentially of much use on mars. I expect the processing would need too much bulky equipment, time and manual labor to be practical on a plant-flag-and-leave mission, but a long-term sustainable base could certainly put it to good use.
The logic tells why youcan't, though: To supply you with a bag, the store must make them available. If the store makes them available, they are breaking the law. If they blatantly break the law, someone in government is going to charge them and a fine will be leveled. If they don't pay the fine, someone gets held in contempt of court and police officers will guns arrive to forcibly drag them off to jail.
Sometimes the chain between annoying local ordinance and the threat of violence is a long one, but it is always there. Otherwise, what reason would the store have to obey the law at all?
Accessibility. There are some people who pirate for a hobby, who would love any excuse to go cloak-and-dagger. There are also many, many more casual pirates who are just thrifty or lazy. If accessing a torrent site requires spending an hour researching and configuring new technology, they'll just find a different site - or go buy what they want legitimately.
What risk? You just lock him up in solitary for a year or two without any contact with the outside world (You don't want him becoming a celebrity) then hold a secret hearing and declare him guilty. Easy. No risk at all.
Everyone recognises a kangaroo court, but that's even better as a deterrant - make it clear to leakers that no matter how good their reasons and how much they consider their actions justified, the judge isn't going to listen.
There is ultimately only one form of authority: Might makes right.
It was on that authority that the United States was created: By winning a war of independance.
It is on that authority that all governments stand: For if they cannot grant their laws power by the threat of violence, the laws have no effective existance.
Try protesting in any oppressive regime and telling the police they have no legal authority to arrest you. You may well be right - even North Korea has a constitution that protects freedom of speech. That won't stop them from throwing you in the gulag to rot, and your closest family for good measure.
But if he isn't given a suitable brutal treatment, it could inspire future leakers. National security demands he not only be caught wherever he may run, but then be given the most blatantly unfair trial possible and subjected to the harshest public punishment to serve as an example to others: Don't screw with the US government, for they don't play by their own rules.
The THC itsself probably isn't harmful, but the smoke inhalation will ruin your lungs. Fortunately there are other ways to get at the THC than burning.
He patented it too. For once patents are actually acting as they should, so you get to see exact instructions on how to build your own: http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US6169924
No. The example given is for a public hotspot (one of those things with a captive portal to enter your credentials), and those run on open wifi. No WPA, not even WEP.
Of course they can be spoofed and MITM used - that's been known for years. I don't know why the iPhone is any more vulnerable than any other phone. Does it hide the s in https perhaps, so the user won't notice they aren't on SSL?
Slashdot Mirror
In theory, they are supposed to be acting in the interests of justice by building and presenting a solid case based on the evidence against the accused.
You are describing the reality: The prosecutor's job depends upon getting a guilty plea or conviction by whatever legal means they can, even if that means surpressing evidence that proves innocence, using details of the accused's persona life to turn a jury against them or siezing assets on a pretext to the accused cannot afford competent legal representation. That isn't how the system is supposed to work, but how it does work.
The worst role in law is public defence. Your job is to make your boss's boss look bad - so he'll deliberately overwork you to the point you can't give more than an hour to each case, and if by some miracle you manage to get too many non-guilty verdicts you just get fired or 'promoted sideways' to a position you can't do so much damage in.
The effective role of the public defender isn't to help the clients, it's to convince them to accept a plea bargin and save the state all the expense of having to go to trial.
Things were different back in the days of the Morris worm. It was expected that future computer experts would get up to no good and play around a bit, and there was a sort of understanding in the field that you didn't want to ruin someone's life for a little curiosity - if you got hacked, good on them, just fix the hole and make repairs. It was seen as a crime akin to graffiti vandalism - not something to lock someone in jail for years over.
Computers are just so much more important to society, infrastructure and economy these days that there is no room left for this blind-eye approach. Ignoring curious hackers was very well when they were stealing a few documents and wasting an administrator's weekend restoring backups, but now they can potentially cause millions of dollars in damage.
The 'IRS targeting conservatives' story is a bit inaccurate. The IRS wasn't targeting conservative groups specifically, it was targeting anti-taxation groups - there's an obvious motive there. It just happens that most anti-taxation groups have conservative affiliation.
The IRS wasn't trying to shut them down, it was just being stricter in ensuring compliance with the very vague restrictions on the political activities permitted to 501(c) organisations. It's a very fuzzy area of the law, and one that is very frequently and openly violated by organisations on both side of the political divide. The accusation is one of selective enforcement: While most organisations applying for tax-exempt status got a quick glance over their records by an accountant, anti-tax pressure groups were subjected to months-long intensive auditing and investigation.
The IRS is in a real political mess right now - with Republicans and Democrats still fighting over healthcare reform, the IRS has the unenviable job of having to enforce the tax-credit/subsidy aspect, which means not just lots more work but becoming a political target of those opposed to the reform too. Republicans have been able to use the political bias scandal as a means to 'punish' the IRS by cutting their budget, with the aim of reducing their ability to handle the new workload and so render the healthcare reform unworkable. Now is not a good time to work at the IRS.
Perchlorate at 1% concentrations?
Perchlorates are very easy to turn into rocket fuel or oxygen. Two things potentially of much use on mars. I expect the processing would need too much bulky equipment, time and manual labor to be practical on a plant-flag-and-leave mission, but a long-term sustainable base could certainly put it to good use.
The logic tells why youcan't, though:
To supply you with a bag, the store must make them available.
If the store makes them available, they are breaking the law.
If they blatantly break the law, someone in government is going to charge them and a fine will be leveled.
If they don't pay the fine, someone gets held in contempt of court and police officers will guns arrive to forcibly drag them off to jail.
Sometimes the chain between annoying local ordinance and the threat of violence is a long one, but it is always there. Otherwise, what reason would the store have to obey the law at all?
I see no mention of lasers. They sound impractical - how will you get precise alignment with a moving target over such distance?
Accessibility. There are some people who pirate for a hobby, who would love any excuse to go cloak-and-dagger. There are also many, many more casual pirates who are just thrifty or lazy. If accessing a torrent site requires spending an hour researching and configuring new technology, they'll just find a different site - or go buy what they want legitimately.
What risk? You just lock him up in solitary for a year or two without any contact with the outside world (You don't want him becoming a celebrity) then hold a secret hearing and declare him guilty. Easy. No risk at all.
Everyone recognises a kangaroo court, but that's even better as a deterrant - make it clear to leakers that no matter how good their reasons and how much they consider their actions justified, the judge isn't going to listen.
If he wanted another war, he'd have one by now.
"If people fall for that, they are stupid."
Welcome to Earth. I see you're new here.
There is ultimately only one form of authority: Might makes right.
It was on that authority that the United States was created: By winning a war of independance.
It is on that authority that all governments stand: For if they cannot grant their laws power by the threat of violence, the laws have no effective existance.
Try protesting in any oppressive regime and telling the police they have no legal authority to arrest you. You may well be right - even North Korea has a constitution that protects freedom of speech. That won't stop them from throwing you in the gulag to rot, and your closest family for good measure.
But if he isn't given a suitable brutal treatment, it could inspire future leakers. National security demands he not only be caught wherever he may run, but then be given the most blatantly unfair trial possible and subjected to the harshest public punishment to serve as an example to others: Don't screw with the US government, for they don't play by their own rules.
An fMRI is basically a voxel video. That's a lot of voxels.
One study, when common sense and very through testing of a very similar smoke say otherwise.
Why take the chance? Just use a vaporiser, or make some brownies.
There are the Log Cabin Republicans, but the actual republican party seems to completely ignore them.
All politicians lie.
No exceptions.
If they weren't willing to lie, they'd never get elected.
The THC itsself probably isn't harmful, but the smoke inhalation will ruin your lungs. Fortunately there are other ways to get at the THC than burning.
http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US6169924
0.4v, 250ms pulses.
Not the brain. That was figured out years ago - the optimal place to zap isn't the brain, but a certain branch off the spinal cord.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=235788&page=1#.Ubq0U5wavRg
He patented it too. For once patents are actually acting as they should, so you get to see exact instructions on how to build your own:
http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US6169924
Don't forget their irrational loathing of homosexuality.
Could you do any worse than the current management?
No. The example given is for a public hotspot (one of those things with a captive portal to enter your credentials), and those run on open wifi. No WPA, not even WEP.
Of course they can be spoofed and MITM used - that's been known for years. I don't know why the iPhone is any more vulnerable than any other phone. Does it hide the s in https perhaps, so the user won't notice they aren't on SSL?
But then both sides accuse you of indoctrinating for the other.
That requires explaining the poisson distribution to a pointy-haired boss.