He didn't remember for a casual question by his *cousin*, and it was an *old* truck, not a relatively new, relatively nice car.
And you weren't a homicide detective asking questions with the intention of getting answers to put your cousin in jail. You have no idea what my cousins relationship with the truck was, sure it was an old truck but it was also his first car. To him it was newer than a car fresh off the lot and very nice to boot. And you're right I wasn't a homicide detective, so he was under a lot less pressure.
Incidentally Hans had a Honda CRX which was no longer produced after 1991. So hans didn't own a relatively new, relatively nice car.
Silly facts, always getting in the way of a good argument.
You're right there is a huge difference, but for the most part it works in favor of my cousin being able to remember easier than Hans.
I don't know the situation in the US, but psychOLOGISTS don't prescribe medication, psychIATRISTS do There are two states in the US where psychologists can prescribe medication. Louisiana and one other which I forget (I think new mexico is the one).
Piece of old junk he didn't care about??? If your passenger car is missing the front seat, it's something that *EVERYBODY* you meet *ever* is going to ask about. We're not talking about some piece of plastic trim off the dash board or a door handle.
We're talking about THE FRONT SEAT, that just happens to have disappeared exactly when the police suspect you were disposing of your wife's dead body. If there is an honest explanation for that, Reiser didn't even TRY to offer it. He HAD no explanation, but, he needed one. I ended up with my cousins old truck that he had torn apart and thrown away unusual things like the door panels and sun visors. I asked him where the sun visors went (mind you everyone asks him this). He knew why he'd taken them off. He even realized he should have saved them. But for the life of him he couldn't remember what he did with them. Same thing with our grandfathers Zippo lighter that he borrowed from me. I'm pretty certain the missing sun visors and lighter aren't some part of a murder cover up on his part. He just has no clue what he did with them. Reiser did not need an explanation. All he needed to do is shut up as his lawyer told him to and he would have gotten away with murder (or not, I am passing no judgment on the man I merely wish to use the cliche.) Unfortunately when I try and get information on where the Zippo lighter went from my cousin he gets real defensive over it. So should I report him to the police? Obviously he committed murder somehow I mean come on he has no explanation he needs one. Someone who is different from you is still just as human as you and should be treated with the same respect and dignity that you expect. Hans got convicted based on his inability to see this and give it to those in the court room with him. Perhaps he didn't provide Nina the same dignity as well. You and I will never know for sure but the jury assumed since he did not provide them that dignity that he did not provide it to his wife.
I can tell you that in 20 years of car ownership and six different cars, I have never once taken the passenger seat out of my car, thrown it away and then hosed down the interior, and I don't know anyone else who has either. His explanation was that he liked to sleep in the car and wanted the extra room. Does this sound plausible to you? I have a cousin who has done this to 3 different times to 3 different cars. I can assure you he has never murdered anyone.
That is the Officer has the POWER to CHOOSE to arrest you or to let you go That is why you ask if you are under arrest. If he has chosen to arrest you, you stop talking. If he has not chosen to arrest you, you leave.
Try volunteering to spend some time in/around psych hospitals, and pull the other leg: it squirts Ovaltine! I've been there. Both sides of it.
You really must learn the difference between con artists and legitimate psychologists. There are con artists in any profession. Do you accuse carpenters of all being con artists just because of all the con artists that came in after katrina?
Does it have to be viable evidence in a court of law?
IANAL but it doesn't matter if they listen in on PGP. No need to encrypt. Client-Attorney communications are not allowed to be used in court. Neither are the results of searches based on such eavesdropping. Fruit of the poisonous tree and whatnot.
psychology is a complete pseudoscience - analysis of someone's behaviour never passes the reasonable doubt threashold. The first part is flat out wrong. Yes there is a lot in psychology that is guessing. But they are guesses that match real world behavior. But to call it a complete pseudoscience is flat out wrong.
The second part is wrong as well. It quite often passes the reasonable doubt thresh hold. It shouldn't but it does.
Certain warranty disclaimers must be in larger text in order to be valid. So that you can not disclaim a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose then bury it in the middle of a eula. Of course I don't think it counts when you make the whole damned eula caps but thats the theory anyway.
Me personally... I'm hoping Firebird gets some of what sun is losing. Firebird is very easy to administrate, supports an embedded mode for windows applications where you don't even have to install a server (the entire process exists within a dll file) and features a very functional multi generational architecture. My Firebird installations tend to be forgotten about after the software is initially set up, because it is so easy to use and administrate.
You all do realize they started programming us with this terrorism bullshit decades ago. They made sure we all hated Cobra and their terrorist organization that was fighting the USA, Um I mean Gi-Joe. and 24 certainly makes it clear to everyone we even get to torture innocent people! And knowing is half the battle...
Like you, and most people, I think child porn is totally wrong. It is true that Freenet allows people to share this kind of thing without government censorship, and that encrypted pieces of these files are potentially held on your computer without your knowledge. And this is a requirement of Freenet. In fact I would not support the Freenet project if it did not function this way. Being free of censorship is as important as the anonymous aspect of Freenet. It gives true patriots (to any country not just the USA) the ability to share whatever it is that they believe without fear of reprisal.
But unlike you, I continue to use Freenet. Just to be clear when I say I support Freenet I do support people operating Freenet nodes as well. Your choice to run Freenet is your choice and it is a good one. Should Freenet get tested in a trial against someone accused of child pornography for running a Freenet node and Freenet pass. I would probably start a Freenet node right away. But until that time I choose not to run a Freenet node.
Now I can also accuse you of being a little illogical and hypocritical because you are using the internet instead of asking the government to ban it since obviously pedophiles use it to share pedo files through p2p, ftp, http, emails,... (Score:-2 , Slippery Slope)
and a poor one at that
I am neither illogical nor hypocritical. If you read what I said you'd know I support freenet. and as for p2p ftp http emails... I'm not storing other peoples files on my computer with those. With freenet you have virtually no control over what content is stored on your computer because you effectively act as the browser cache for other users. This is a necessary feature in order for freenode to provide true anonymity and prevent censorship. If you are trolling then it was a lame troll and you need to learn to put together a cohesive argument so that someone might actually believe what you say. If you are actually serious then you need to learn what is fundamentally different about freenode compared to other services. Pedos can share files on http all the way and the files wont be on my computer, they'll cross through routers and they'll exist on the server that serves them and the client computer that requests them but they wont be on my computer. Sure the fbi or a hacker might be logging all http traffic and then the pictures would be stored on their system similar to freenet but this is a choice they made to store all traffic and they presumably aren't serving it. I also don't make my squid caching proxy setup publicly accessible. Because I do not wish for my system resources to be used to serve this data. With traditional protocols I have a choice in what is stored or served with freenet you do not. Since you seem to have difficulty with reading I'll repeat the core of my previous post in large letters.
I support the freenet project. But I refuse to run a freenet node.
When a pedophile is masturbating in front of his screen, he is not raping a real child in real life The problem lies not in the pedophile masturbating in front of his screen but in the pedophile who posts the porn to freenet for the other to see. While you normally hear about the one in front of his screen being caught thats simply because they are an easier catch. It is the other one that benefits most from freenode as the penalties for the poster are far greater than the penalties for the viewer. It is unfortunate but that guy is the reason most people I know (including myself) have shut down our freenodes for good. Unfortunately there is no satisfactory solution, I want freenet and i understand that it is necessary for freenet to function like this in order for it to function at all. But the price is too hard to justify for most people. It is sad that freenet is abused in such a way and i support the freenet project. But I refuse to run a freenet node.
If it works with google apps its definitely for me. I administrate a veterinary clinic (largish by veterinary clinic standards but 15 workstations 2 servers). A security minded web browser would make me a lot more comfortable with the move we are making to integrate the internet into the clinic.
Just use the census bureau to audit people like the IRS does. There could be steep penalties for claiming more people live in your household than actually do. Or if you say fewer people live in your house than actually do they could take away those extra people like the IRS!
Once again, this is the cable tv providers asset, not yours. You pay to use their asset, in the gps situation you are paying to use your own asset (the 8gb of ram you purchased).
Well, he's only in office for the rest of the year. What can Bush do to stop it when he has no official power, and the new president's constituents have no love for Bush and his corrupt administration? Why would they do anything about it? If the next administration doesn't do anything about it then they can get away with the same thing. No no no, the best thing for all parties involved is to just ignore it once they get in office... all parties except every single citizen of the United States of America.
He did destroy his hard drive and a thumb drive minutes before the FBI raided his home. As much as I can believe that it is possible for others to have highjacked his system or been tricked to clicking the link, etc. What if he destroyed his hard drive because he it contained his doctoral thesis on voting machines and the potential to manipulate elections and was afraid they had come after him because he had struck a nerve?
This sounds like an instance of blatant fraud. The lawyer willfully committed perjury and didn't even go through the proper channels on her end. It sounds like she wanted to try and further her career by taking initiative and bringing down the hammer for her client. Except she did not do it with her clients permission and even went against what the client had previously indicated. At best she should be liable at worse disbarred.
IANAL but I think at that point you have a pretty credible claim in court. "I made this deal. I agreed to this deal. They changed the deal. I dare them to show me paperwork showing otherwise." "Uh, um, err" "Case dismissed." Since the sales representative was acting as an agent on behalf of AT&T and it was in the normal course of business yes he definitely has a very strong claim in court against the company itself, not the agent.
requiring convicted criminals to use a vpn would be a step in the right direction. What? I fail to see how this is a step in the right direction no matter what your position is. Yes require convicted criminals to encrypt their traffic so as to make spying on them harder. This has two problems. A) you're suggesting they encrypt their traffic so its harder to spy on them and B) how do you enforce this? (and why for that matter would you?!)
'spying' on what people do over the net is really the only way to catch the criminals in the act. It's also a great way to dig up dirt on those likely to vote against you so you can ruin their lives. We could probably even convince their own kids to do this through rigorous propaganda programs. Maybe even reward kids for turning in their parents.
if i had another billion dollars, I'd wager that in 10 years banks will process checks the way wal-mart does now, before they hand the user any money, and before they can 'wire' the money to another bank account, the original account is checked for the money, and the check is scanned by the computer for identifying marks, that can verify it as original.
taking 3 days to verify a cashiers check just doesn't cut it when that's what check cashing fraud scams are banking on. My bank does this now. I thought all banks did this actually as of 2003 or so.
Slashdot Mirror
Incidentally Hans had a Honda CRX which was no longer produced after 1991. So hans didn't own a relatively new, relatively nice car.
Silly facts, always getting in the way of a good argument.
You're right there is a huge difference, but for the most part it works in favor of my cousin being able to remember easier than Hans.
You really must learn the difference between con artists and legitimate psychologists. There are con artists in any profession. Do you accuse carpenters of all being con artists just because of all the con artists that came in after katrina?
IANAL but it doesn't matter if they listen in on PGP. No need to encrypt. Client-Attorney communications are not allowed to be used in court. Neither are the results of searches based on such eavesdropping. Fruit of the poisonous tree and whatnot.
The second part is wrong as well. It quite often passes the reasonable doubt thresh hold. It shouldn't but it does.
Certain warranty disclaimers must be in larger text in order to be valid. So that you can not disclaim a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose then bury it in the middle of a eula. Of course I don't think it counts when you make the whole damned eula caps but thats the theory anyway.
Me personally... I'm hoping Firebird gets some of what sun is losing. Firebird is very easy to administrate, supports an embedded mode for windows applications where you don't even have to install a server (the entire process exists within a dll file) and features a very functional multi generational architecture. My Firebird installations tend to be forgotten about after the software is initially set up, because it is so easy to use and administrate.
(The other half is killing people.)
But unlike you, I continue to use Freenet. Just to be clear when I say I support Freenet I do support people operating Freenet nodes as well. Your choice to run Freenet is your choice and it is a good one. Should Freenet get tested in a trial against someone accused of child pornography for running a Freenet node and Freenet pass. I would probably start a Freenet node right away. But until that time I choose not to run a Freenet node.
I support the freenet project. But I refuse to run a freenet node.
If it works with google apps its definitely for me. I administrate a veterinary clinic (largish by veterinary clinic standards but 15 workstations 2 servers). A security minded web browser would make me a lot more comfortable with the move we are making to integrate the internet into the clinic.
Once again, this is the cable tv providers asset, not yours. You pay to use their asset, in the gps situation you are paying to use your own asset (the 8gb of ram you purchased).
Nuke the planet, with only 2 people left alive if one starts spamming the other a pointy stick immediately solves it.
This sounds like an instance of blatant fraud. The lawyer willfully committed perjury and didn't even go through the proper channels on her end. It sounds like she wanted to try and further her career by taking initiative and bringing down the hammer for her client. Except she did not do it with her clients permission and even went against what the client had previously indicated. At best she should be liable at worse disbarred.
Funny you should mention used car salesman... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvbWLfr-Z4s
That's because the scammer aliens sold the researchers a jar of gummy fungus instead of real antidepressants.