Here's a pro tip from a lawyer: Any lawyer who gives you generic advice in the form of absolutes is full of shit. There are many situations in which a guilty person *not* talking to police will hurt you more than carefully talking to them.
You're absolutely correct. But you're also arguing against a strawman. The point of the linked video isn't "don't talk to the cops" (though that is the shortest way to sum it up). The more accurate description is "don't talk to the cops without a lawyer present". Something tells me you would agree with that addendum.
I was asking whether the defendant's right to remain silent is good for society as a whole
Just the fact that you would ask that question in the first place tells me you are wholly unqualified to take part in this discussion. Either individuals have rights that society must respect or they don't; you obviously think they do not, so why should anyone even enter into a dialogue with you about the appropriate use of those rights?
Oh noes! Not everyone in Congress agrees on something and is using procedural tactics to stall the passage of legislation they don't like! Whatever shall we do???
Relax, creampuff. This kind of thing happens all the time. It's the way our system is designed. A handful of Congressmen are supposed to be able to bring things to a screeching halt to prevent tyranny of the majority. It's one of our more important checks-and-balances. Just because you can't see that for some reason doesn't make this a bedrock principle for our republic.
Um, no, that is exactly how it works. You really ought to read up on the subject sometime, I found it quite fascinating when I first studied it in 8th-grade civics class roughly 30 years ago. That's probably where you should start. Just being helpful!
The LAWS of this nation dictate how much we tell the world we're obligating ourselves to spend indirectly. The funding is supposed to be nothing more than a procedural matter. Think of our laws as a credit card balance. Whether we agree to fund the government or not, the money is already spent. When we DON'T fund the government, then we become a deadbeat nation (as rating organizations will start to reflect).
None of that is true, no matter how much you desire it to be. Simply put, laws do not in any way create future obligations. The one exception to this are specific entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, and salaries for Federal judges). Those funds are required to be allocated and spent; no others are.
Um, neither of the major parties has ever had a candidate for President who was a high-ranking member of the KKK. The closest you can come is that Harry S Truman (D) was a member for about two years in the early 20s.
You're incapable of feeling sympathy for someone who's stuck in a similar shitty situation as you just went through? With that level of empathy you just might be a sociopath.
So what? No Congress is required to fund any law or agency created by a previous one. They can just ignore them and not provide any funds. That's what the phrase "power of the purse" means.
>let's say the salt is, say, a 20 character random phrase using numbers, letters and symbols, what is the weak spot?
The weak spot is in your supposition that they used a salt that strong. That's a huge stretch to make and I think it's highly unlikely they did so. They could've used a two-character salt and still, technically, have used salted and hashed passwords. Doesn't mean it'll take very long to crack them, though.
>The emails are unfortunate, since now these people are prime targets for phishing
Not just phishing. Do you realize how many sites now use your email address as your username? I just had to go and change not just my LivingSocial account, but half a dozen others, too, that used the same email/password combination. This is a serious pain in the ass.
It's been nine hours since I posted my request for your city and state with no response. I think it's safe to say you're full of bullshit.
For the record, I'm in Richardson, TX, and pay 5.6/kwh to my electricity provider, a private company. We've never had blackouts or brownouts, and even at peak usage during the summer have no problems with getting enough power to keep things cool. There is not a state monopoly on this planet that can make those claims at that rate.
If what you're saying tracked closely with reality, one would expect to see presidential campaigns spend four times as much, per person, in Wyoming than in California. But what's really happening is that neither California nor Wyoming get any money spent in them, it all goes to swing states.
The global economy is worth almost $70 trillion dollars; a sudden influx of 0.27% of that amount would have negligible impact on the value of goods and services.
Have you ever been on fucking Twitter? People retweet shit all the time, regardless of what it says. If they retweet something with the product hashtag, and then get something from Amex to confirm there's a good chance they'll retweet that, too, without even reading it.
Mark my words, this won't last because the public is too stupid to use it safely.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a pro tip from a lawyer: Any lawyer who gives you generic advice in the form of absolutes is full of shit. There are many situations in which a guilty person *not* talking to police will hurt you more than carefully talking to them.
You're absolutely correct. But you're also arguing against a strawman. The point of the linked video isn't "don't talk to the cops" (though that is the shortest way to sum it up). The more accurate description is "don't talk to the cops without a lawyer present". Something tells me you would agree with that addendum.
I was asking whether the defendant's right to remain silent is good for society as a whole
Just the fact that you would ask that question in the first place tells me you are wholly unqualified to take part in this discussion. Either individuals have rights that society must respect or they don't; you obviously think they do not, so why should anyone even enter into a dialogue with you about the appropriate use of those rights?
Oh noes! Not everyone in Congress agrees on something and is using procedural tactics to stall the passage of legislation they don't like! Whatever shall we do???
Relax, creampuff. This kind of thing happens all the time. It's the way our system is designed. A handful of Congressmen are supposed to be able to bring things to a screeching halt to prevent tyranny of the majority. It's one of our more important checks-and-balances. Just because you can't see that for some reason doesn't make this a bedrock principle for our republic.
Um, no, that is exactly how it works. You really ought to read up on the subject sometime, I found it quite fascinating when I first studied it in 8th-grade civics class roughly 30 years ago. That's probably where you should start. Just being helpful!
The LAWS of this nation dictate how much we tell the world we're obligating ourselves to spend indirectly. The funding is supposed to be nothing more than a procedural matter. Think of our laws as a credit card balance. Whether we agree to fund the government or not, the money is already spent. When we DON'T fund the government, then we become a deadbeat nation (as rating organizations will start to reflect).
None of that is true, no matter how much you desire it to be. Simply put, laws do not in any way create future obligations. The one exception to this are specific entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, and salaries for Federal judges). Those funds are required to be allocated and spent; no others are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_budget_process
Um, neither of the major parties has ever had a candidate for President who was a high-ranking member of the KKK. The closest you can come is that Harry S Truman (D) was a member for about two years in the early 20s.
Ah man, now I want to see Boehner give an address on the steps of the Capitol holding a sawed-off shotgun and talking about boomsticks!
You're incapable of feeling sympathy for someone who's stuck in a similar shitty situation as you just went through? With that level of empathy you just might be a sociopath.
So what? No Congress is required to fund any law or agency created by a previous one. They can just ignore them and not provide any funds. That's what the phrase "power of the purse" means.
That is the stupidest thing I've read today. It was so dumb I had to double check I wasn't on reddit.
Yes, this is news for nerds. Some of us actually give a shit about what happens in the wider world, too.
>let's say the salt is, say, a 20 character random phrase using numbers, letters and symbols, what is the weak spot?
The weak spot is in your supposition that they used a salt that strong. That's a huge stretch to make and I think it's highly unlikely they did so. They could've used a two-character salt and still, technically, have used salted and hashed passwords. Doesn't mean it'll take very long to crack them, though.
>The emails are unfortunate, since now these people are prime targets for phishing
Not just phishing. Do you realize how many sites now use your email address as your username? I just had to go and change not just my LivingSocial account, but half a dozen others, too, that used the same email/password combination. This is a serious pain in the ass.
I'll save the poster some time: if you ask Reddit, they'll tell you it was Sunil Tripathi. Case closed.
It's been nine hours since I posted my request for your city and state with no response. I think it's safe to say you're full of bullshit.
For the record, I'm in Richardson, TX, and pay 5.6/kwh to my electricity provider, a private company. We've never had blackouts or brownouts, and even at peak usage during the summer have no problems with getting enough power to keep things cool. There is not a state monopoly on this planet that can make those claims at that rate.
My utilities board is a 'state run monopoly' and does a fantastic job of keeping prices low
Frankly, I don't believe you. Please post your city and state so this can be verified.
Because state-run monopolies are famous for low prices, excellent customer service, and being at the forefront of technological advance.
This is an older video, but it shows just how companies manage to avoid hiring qualified Americans just to flood the market with cheap H1B laborers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
If what you're saying tracked closely with reality, one would expect to see presidential campaigns spend four times as much, per person, in Wyoming than in California. But what's really happening is that neither California nor Wyoming get any money spent in them, it all goes to swing states.
See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/track-presidential-campaign-ads-2012/ The only money showing up in either state is just spillover from neighboring, battleground states.
Of course, this just raises another potential reason to ditch the electoral college.
;)
Um, asteroids don't make sounds.
The WTO might have a thing or two to say about that.
Good point. As someone once observed, you don't own a piece of terrain until a 19-year old with a gun stands there and says you own it.
The global economy is worth almost $70 trillion dollars; a sudden influx of 0.27% of that amount would have negligible impact on the value of goods and services.
Whoever can land on it. Possession being 9/10s of the law and all that.
Did you even read the fucking summary?
Have you ever been on fucking Twitter? People retweet shit all the time, regardless of what it says. If they retweet something with the product hashtag, and then get something from Amex to confirm there's a good chance they'll retweet that, too, without even reading it.
Mark my words, this won't last because the public is too stupid to use it safely.