I think the US does want him at this point. IF for no other reason than to question him about sources under threat of prosecution. Sweden won't extradite him to the USA, but the UK clearly would. The USA wouldn't likely attempt to snatch him out of Sweden as he fears. Sweden wouldn't allow it and the risks to USA operatives would be high with a low reward.
Assange is pretty much a pawn in the grand scheme of things anyway. I doubt the USA would care all that much what happens at this point. I'm guessing they really only care that he's kept offline.
The 14th amendment has been interpreted as 'birth right citizenship" for the most part but this is not universally agreed too. There is one test case for LEGAL immigrants, which confers citizenship to their children born here and that I fully accept as fine. There has been no interpretation for ILLEGAL immigrant's children born here. I suggest we test that in the courts by passing a law that says only persons who are children of parents who are LEGALLY here are given citizenship and let the courts sort out if the 14th amendment really says that. I think it's conceivable that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means LEGALLY residing within the USA.
Also, I knew #4 would require a Supreme Court decision for public schools though High School. However, College level education would not. Some states already treat illegals as non-residents for tuition and admission purposes.
Finally, ER visits are not PUBLIC assistance but a cost of doing business as an ER. If you are an ER, you accept everyone who enters the front door, provide any emergency medical care required, regardless of who they are. What I'm saying is NO public assistance from taxpayer funds for illegal immigrants. If you present yourself to the welfare office looking for assistance, but fail the E-Verify check, you get no public assistance beyond conveyance to their country of origin (so you can ask to be deported ONCE and we will send you home). Private charities or organizations are allowed to help, but must clearly use private funding sources to do so.
But you understand that this is designed to get illegals to self deport by making it hard for them to work and live here. My hope is that if they cannot work and support themselves as illegals, they will go home, get temporary work permits and come back legally, at which point, I'm fine with them being here.
I'm a Trump supporter and I can attest that this is NOT true. I see LOTS of anti-trump leftist propaganda on Facebook and the advertisements they toss my way.
However, I think Facebook really doesn't have much to do with the majority of what I see that's not ads. What you see in Facebook is mostly driven by your circle of friends and what they post. In my case, I have a number of ardent liberals who are rabidly anti-trump in my circle of friends (you know, the type that went to all those post election riots, I mean protests). Maybe I'm just unique in that my circle of friends are not of a singular political mindset?
My guess is your Pro Trump friend simply only has pro-Trump friends on Facebook, which is why their feed is all pro-Trump stuff. I know that some of the ardent anti Trump "friends" I used to have on FB have stopped including me on their posts and have stopped reading mine. This isn't Facebook, this is people's natural tendency to select friends who are more like them. Call it confirmation bias...
It's that too, but it's a way to point a finger at a semi-competitor and say "See, we are as bad as THEY are!" when the facts seem to be contrary to that assertion. The whole announcement was an attempt to bolster Apple's image at the expense of Facebook.
Read this for what it is. Tim is just kicking Facebook in the teeth while hey are down.
Why do I say this? FB's users ARE the thing they collect data about and sell, yea that's true. But who doesn't already know that Apple collects their user's information in order to market to their users? The only difference is Apple may not SELL the data to OTHERS to do this. But as big as Apple is this sure seems like a distinction without any difference given that they do collect marketing data.
That's an interesting take on this. The US and UK have a pretty strong extradition agreement and if he was just in the UK he'd obviously be pulled to the US. However, the question is in what precedence would the two extradition requests would have. The UK is leaving the EU so there is a time clock on this option, once they are officially out, the USA will get first dibs.
IF Sweden get's him, then extradition to the USA is unlikely. Though there are ways for the USA to snatch him (basically kidnap him while the Swedes look the other way), Extraordinary rendition kind of action. But I doubt the Swedes would knowingly let this happen.
IF the US gets him, he's not going to make it to Sweden...
I'm not a UK lawyer and I don't know any who could confirm or deny what you say. But your take is interesting for as long as the UK remains in the EU.
If he does walk out the front door it will be straight into the arms of waiting UK police...
I'm sure the Brits will "deal" with him if he does and I'm guessing that will include an all expense paid trip to the USA and any number of federal prisons for the majority of his remaining life.
So, it's the embassy or a "real" prison. Some choice the guy has left himself. He might have been better served by keeping a low internet profile...
Protecting depositors by bailing out banks... To get money back into circulation by getting it back into banks and not stuffed in mattresses... Sort of the "trickle down theory" if you think about it.
Actually, I think the real benefit was to expand the money supply dramatically and quickly. Even with that, recovery was muted by the dust bowel and what Carter would have called a "general malaise" where the population was focused on possible impending doom and hesitant to take risks. The real recovery didn't start in earnest until the outbreak of WWII and the massive military spending by all sorts of countries buying arms from the USA...
Of course.. The danger of this printing money thing is inflation, and eventually the price will be paid though the devaluation of savings because it buys less and less over time. In 1900 a million dollars was quite the mound of cash and almost nobody ever saw that much in their lifetimes, now days, many people see a million dollars go though their hands every few years.
There is a reason there is FDIC insurance in the US...
Teddy Roosevelt did that FIDC thing in a somewhat successful effort to stem the tide of the great depression by printing a LOT of money to bail out the insolvent banks. This was designed to stop the bank runs that where sucking all the cash out of the economy by stuffing it into mattresses for safe keeping.
It was the original "To BIG to fail" bail out, at taxpayers expense and we've not been able to stop doing it for every financial hiccup since.
That's why you store all phones in shielded containers when not being actively worked on. Shielded containers and bags are commonly available and should already be in use in any facility that handles electronics. So, when the phone arrives and is unpacked, it is immediately put in a shielded bag. It stays in this bag until it is being worked on. Any parts of the process where the phone is possibly under power is done with the phone in a shielded container or room.
How about putting a faraday cage around any device under test that is possibly powered on? Also store all phones not being worked on in shielded boxes.
I've worked in a factory that built RF devices which would have been very disruptive had they been turned on in the wild (or the parking lot), so this is what we did. Any time the device could have been powered, it was in a faraday cage, shielded box or some other way to be 100% sure it wasn't going to disrupt the neighbors. The building was also nearly fully shielded (being a metal sided structure with a metal roof) as well.
Everything was great until maintenance put in a variable frequency motor controllers on the air handlers.... Those things put out some huge amounts of RF and DID bother both us testers (by interfering with our test equipment) and the neighbors..
How is this different from pretty much all other groups of government bureaucrats world wide?
Certainly the USA has more than it's share of idiots who think they are the smartest folks in the room because they won an election or two. I'm sure the fine people of the UK have the same issue.
It seems questionable to even allow pitstops while in that state - one would think even if you can pas someone using the pits then you'd still be gaining an unfair advantage by pitting while everyone is forced to drive slowly.
Perhaps just slowing down pit road speeds to exactly match the transit time of the track? Include a "full stop" requirement unless the trip though the pits was unavoidable due to a racing event or track obstruction.
That way, passing though the pits would cost you time if choose to take pit road, and would still make it a benefit over stopping under race conditions. If the pit road trip is unavoidable for safety reasons, it's a wash because you don't have to stop.
FIRST - Stop as much illegal immigration and encourage illegals to self deport by doing the following things:
1. Implement E-Verify nation wide and require it be followed by all employers. Follow up that requirement with strict enforcement. If you are not a citizen and don't have a work visa, you don't work here.
2. Visa exit tracking - Implement tracking of visa entries AND exits so we know who's here that have overstayed their visas. Step up enforcement of visa overstays.
3. Deport Criminals - Start deporting illegal immigrants who commit felonies after they are done with their prison time.
4. No access Social Services - Eliminate ALL social services for illegal immigrants including welfare, public education systems (including college).
5. Build the wall - Maybe not a physical wall, but a practical one. Protect our borders.
6. End "born here" citizenship for children of illegals. Make it necessary for at least one parent to be here legally before we confer US citizenship on a child.
SECOND - After the above are in place and starting to work....
1. Implement/Expand a "guest worker" visa program which allows foreign nationals to serve in seasonal labor. Make it easy to get such a visa, but make it necessary to apply for and receive it in your home country.
2. For those with existing DACA exemptions, citizenship is available after an extended wait of at least a decade if they stay here. If they wish, they will be given preferential treatment for guest worker permits. However, if they self deport, they will be able to immediately apply for citizenship and a guest worker permit with preferential treatment (the front of the line).
3. Open a path to citizenship for LEGAL immigrants based on merit. Preference given to immigrants with H1b's then seasonal work permits followed by other immigrants who apply. But, we need to end the visa lottery and chain migration beyond immediate family (To include parents, children and siblings only).
Yes that's correct, compassion for people who committed a minor civil violation in order to come here and help their families is purely a political issue and ther's no moral authority behind it. And it was entirely invented by the Democrats. It's not that it used to be a bi-partisan issue supported by presidents from both parties and then Republicans threw immigrants under the bus in order to appeal to the more extreme part of their base. [/sarcasm]
Well now, hit a nerve have I?
Why do you somehow think your side in this debate is the ONLY one with compassion for these people? Your assumption is wrong and shows your political bias and an active unwillingness to actually SOLVE the problem. You don't want a solution, you want the election issue to campaign on.
I think if you where to really discuss this with the opposing party, you'd find them wiling to deal with this issue in a fair and compassionate way. However, you have pretty much cut off all possible avenues of discussion with your "Only we have Moral high ground" perspective that precludes any solution except yours from consideration. This has all the hallmarks of a demagogue worthy campaign issue which has more value to you unsolved. You don't want to solve this, you want to run on it.
"Federal immigration officials enforce federal immigration law."
This only seems to be a"controversy" because it hurts Democrat electoral chances...
Actually.. It is only an issue because it HELPS the democrats in their campaigns... That and the demographic most represented by illegals tends to vote democratic. So democrats get votes from today's voters from that demographic and if amnesty is given again they will have a huge influx of new voters from the same demographic.
You can bet that if the demographic was more likely to help republicans this wouldn't be a controversy unless amnesty was being discussed.
That's a question for your lawyer friend.. I do not know.
The issue is that YOU have the responsibility to preserve any and all information that you reasonably know is relevant to criminal or civil legal actions if you can. You are afforded the right to delete any information as part of an automated processes and can legally delete any and all records/documents prior to becoming aware of the legal action and as long as you are taking reasonable care to preserve any data as soon as you are aware.
The question you are asking has to do with the period between when you become aware of the data should be preserved and when you can turn off the automation that deletes it. Seems this would put this squarely in the grey area, where you cannot reach the device to turn off the automatic scrub but you know it will delete information. Your justification would be that you couldn't stop the automation because they had your device. I suppose they would argue you had an obligation to tell them but you would also be able to claim that you didn't have access to the device because they took it so you couldn't stop the process. I'm guessing the court would have to figure what side that falls on, which might be good, if you are trying to avoid criminal prosecution.
Thinking about this.... The problem is that YOU cannot destroy evidence once you become aware that it might be wanted by law enforcement or subject to civil lawsuit.
IF your device is programed to do a secure erase after a given length of time w/o a successful login by you, I suppose that you could conceivably wait that length of time... The key would be that you'd have to specifically NOT take any action to erase the device (like entering the wrong password or something) and that you are not misrepresenting your ability to actually unlock the device. Basically, you would have to explain that the device was programmed to secure erase anytime it was out of your control for a specific duration.
I'm no lawyer, but that *might* be sufficient to destroy the evidence w/o being held responsible for it, but I'm betting that it might not be a good idea in the long run. Better to just not keep any data on the portable device where it's obvious in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the US does want him at this point. IF for no other reason than to question him about sources under threat of prosecution. Sweden won't extradite him to the USA, but the UK clearly would. The USA wouldn't likely attempt to snatch him out of Sweden as he fears. Sweden wouldn't allow it and the risks to USA operatives would be high with a low reward.
Assange is pretty much a pawn in the grand scheme of things anyway. I doubt the USA would care all that much what happens at this point. I'm guessing they really only care that he's kept offline.
Hmmm... I did some investigation on this...
The 14th amendment has been interpreted as 'birth right citizenship" for the most part but this is not universally agreed too. There is one test case for LEGAL immigrants, which confers citizenship to their children born here and that I fully accept as fine. There has been no interpretation for ILLEGAL immigrant's children born here. I suggest we test that in the courts by passing a law that says only persons who are children of parents who are LEGALLY here are given citizenship and let the courts sort out if the 14th amendment really says that. I think it's conceivable that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means LEGALLY residing within the USA.
Also, I knew #4 would require a Supreme Court decision for public schools though High School. However, College level education would not. Some states already treat illegals as non-residents for tuition and admission purposes.
Finally, ER visits are not PUBLIC assistance but a cost of doing business as an ER. If you are an ER, you accept everyone who enters the front door, provide any emergency medical care required, regardless of who they are. What I'm saying is NO public assistance from taxpayer funds for illegal immigrants. If you present yourself to the welfare office looking for assistance, but fail the E-Verify check, you get no public assistance beyond conveyance to their country of origin (so you can ask to be deported ONCE and we will send you home). Private charities or organizations are allowed to help, but must clearly use private funding sources to do so.
But you understand that this is designed to get illegals to self deport by making it hard for them to work and live here. My hope is that if they cannot work and support themselves as illegals, they will go home, get temporary work permits and come back legally, at which point, I'm fine with them being here.
I'm a Trump supporter and I can attest that this is NOT true. I see LOTS of anti-trump leftist propaganda on Facebook and the advertisements they toss my way.
However, I think Facebook really doesn't have much to do with the majority of what I see that's not ads. What you see in Facebook is mostly driven by your circle of friends and what they post. In my case, I have a number of ardent liberals who are rabidly anti-trump in my circle of friends (you know, the type that went to all those post election riots, I mean protests). Maybe I'm just unique in that my circle of friends are not of a singular political mindset?
My guess is your Pro Trump friend simply only has pro-Trump friends on Facebook, which is why their feed is all pro-Trump stuff. I know that some of the ardent anti Trump "friends" I used to have on FB have stopped including me on their posts and have stopped reading mine. This isn't Facebook, this is people's natural tendency to select friends who are more like them. Call it confirmation bias...
That sir, is a funny one.. Wish I had mod points today..
It's that too, but it's a way to point a finger at a semi-competitor and say "See, we are as bad as THEY are!" when the facts seem to be contrary to that assertion. The whole announcement was an attempt to bolster Apple's image at the expense of Facebook.
Read this for what it is. Tim is just kicking Facebook in the teeth while hey are down.
Why do I say this? FB's users ARE the thing they collect data about and sell, yea that's true. But who doesn't already know that Apple collects their user's information in order to market to their users? The only difference is Apple may not SELL the data to OTHERS to do this. But as big as Apple is this sure seems like a distinction without any difference given that they do collect marketing data.
That's an interesting take on this. The US and UK have a pretty strong extradition agreement and if he was just in the UK he'd obviously be pulled to the US. However, the question is in what precedence would the two extradition requests would have. The UK is leaving the EU so there is a time clock on this option, once they are officially out, the USA will get first dibs.
IF Sweden get's him, then extradition to the USA is unlikely. Though there are ways for the USA to snatch him (basically kidnap him while the Swedes look the other way), Extraordinary rendition kind of action. But I doubt the Swedes would knowingly let this happen.
IF the US gets him, he's not going to make it to Sweden...
I'm not a UK lawyer and I don't know any who could confirm or deny what you say. But your take is interesting for as long as the UK remains in the EU.
Either way, it's not a good thing for hm.
If he does walk out the front door it will be straight into the arms of waiting UK police...
I'm sure the Brits will "deal" with him if he does and I'm guessing that will include an all expense paid trip to the USA and any number of federal prisons for the majority of his remaining life.
So, it's the embassy or a "real" prison. Some choice the guy has left himself. He might have been better served by keeping a low internet profile...
He can walk out the front door anytime he wishes...
(sarc)Trading the Gilded cage in the embassy for a British jail cell? Yea, he's "free" to choose. (/sarc)
Yes, Franklin.. Sorry for the mistake.
Protecting depositors by bailing out banks... To get money back into circulation by getting it back into banks and not stuffed in mattresses... Sort of the "trickle down theory" if you think about it.
Actually, I think the real benefit was to expand the money supply dramatically and quickly. Even with that, recovery was muted by the dust bowel and what Carter would have called a "general malaise" where the population was focused on possible impending doom and hesitant to take risks. The real recovery didn't start in earnest until the outbreak of WWII and the massive military spending by all sorts of countries buying arms from the USA...
Of course.. The danger of this printing money thing is inflation, and eventually the price will be paid though the devaluation of savings because it buys less and less over time. In 1900 a million dollars was quite the mound of cash and almost nobody ever saw that much in their lifetimes, now days, many people see a million dollars go though their hands every few years.
Are soon parted... /s
There is a reason there is FDIC insurance in the US...
Teddy Roosevelt did that FIDC thing in a somewhat successful effort to stem the tide of the great depression by printing a LOT of money to bail out the insolvent banks. This was designed to stop the bank runs that where sucking all the cash out of the economy by stuffing it into mattresses for safe keeping.
It was the original "To BIG to fail" bail out, at taxpayers expense and we've not been able to stop doing it for every financial hiccup since.
That's why you store all phones in shielded containers when not being actively worked on. Shielded containers and bags are commonly available and should already be in use in any facility that handles electronics. So, when the phone arrives and is unpacked, it is immediately put in a shielded bag. It stays in this bag until it is being worked on. Any parts of the process where the phone is possibly under power is done with the phone in a shielded container or room.
This isn't rocket science...
How about putting a faraday cage around any device under test that is possibly powered on? Also store all phones not being worked on in shielded boxes.
I've worked in a factory that built RF devices which would have been very disruptive had they been turned on in the wild (or the parking lot), so this is what we did. Any time the device could have been powered, it was in a faraday cage, shielded box or some other way to be 100% sure it wasn't going to disrupt the neighbors. The building was also nearly fully shielded (being a metal sided structure with a metal roof) as well.
Everything was great until maintenance put in a variable frequency motor controllers on the air handlers.... Those things put out some huge amounts of RF and DID bother both us testers (by interfering with our test equipment) and the neighbors..
This will take TWO bills.... The first has to work before the second can be done.
Feel free to offer them yourself too.
How is this different from pretty much all other groups of government bureaucrats world wide?
Certainly the USA has more than it's share of idiots who think they are the smartest folks in the room because they won an election or two. I'm sure the fine people of the UK have the same issue.
justice warrior social telescope?
Here's looking at you kid.. Don't mess up.
Along with Linux for the Desktop....
I doubt it has an atmosphere, but it doesn't really matter.
What would nuclear materials matter? I'm guessing the answer is no, given this was a manned station and nuclear materials are kind of dangerous...
I'm guessing the only possible issue is propellant tanks, which are likely empty but could survive re-entry.
Question.. What's this have to do with NVidia and self driving cars?
It seems questionable to even allow pitstops while in that state - one would think even if you can pas someone using the pits then you'd still be gaining an unfair advantage by pitting while everyone is forced to drive slowly.
Perhaps just slowing down pit road speeds to exactly match the transit time of the track? Include a "full stop" requirement unless the trip though the pits was unavoidable due to a racing event or track obstruction.
That way, passing though the pits would cost you time if choose to take pit road, and would still make it a benefit over stopping under race conditions. If the pit road trip is unavoidable for safety reasons, it's a wash because you don't have to stop.
Yep, I can...
FIRST - Stop as much illegal immigration and encourage illegals to self deport by doing the following things:
1. Implement E-Verify nation wide and require it be followed by all employers. Follow up that requirement with strict enforcement. If you are not a citizen and don't have a work visa, you don't work here.
2. Visa exit tracking - Implement tracking of visa entries AND exits so we know who's here that have overstayed their visas. Step up enforcement of visa overstays.
3. Deport Criminals - Start deporting illegal immigrants who commit felonies after they are done with their prison time.
4. No access Social Services - Eliminate ALL social services for illegal immigrants including welfare, public education systems (including college).
5. Build the wall - Maybe not a physical wall, but a practical one. Protect our borders.
6. End "born here" citizenship for children of illegals. Make it necessary for at least one parent to be here legally before we confer US citizenship on a child.
SECOND - After the above are in place and starting to work....
1. Implement/Expand a "guest worker" visa program which allows foreign nationals to serve in seasonal labor. Make it easy to get such a visa, but make it necessary to apply for and receive it in your home country.
2. For those with existing DACA exemptions, citizenship is available after an extended wait of at least a decade if they stay here. If they wish, they will be given preferential treatment for guest worker permits. However, if they self deport, they will be able to immediately apply for citizenship and a guest worker permit with preferential treatment (the front of the line).
3. Open a path to citizenship for LEGAL immigrants based on merit. Preference given to immigrants with H1b's then seasonal work permits followed by other immigrants who apply. But, we need to end the visa lottery and chain migration beyond immediate family (To include parents, children and siblings only).
Yes that's correct, compassion for people who committed a minor civil violation in order to come here and help their families is purely a political issue and ther's no moral authority behind it. And it was entirely invented by the Democrats. It's not that it used to be a bi-partisan issue supported by presidents from both parties and then Republicans threw immigrants under the bus in order to appeal to the more extreme part of their base. [/sarcasm]
Well now, hit a nerve have I?
Why do you somehow think your side in this debate is the ONLY one with compassion for these people? Your assumption is wrong and shows your political bias and an active unwillingness to actually SOLVE the problem. You don't want a solution, you want the election issue to campaign on.
I think if you where to really discuss this with the opposing party, you'd find them wiling to deal with this issue in a fair and compassionate way. However, you have pretty much cut off all possible avenues of discussion with your "Only we have Moral high ground" perspective that precludes any solution except yours from consideration. This has all the hallmarks of a demagogue worthy campaign issue which has more value to you unsolved. You don't want to solve this, you want to run on it.
"Federal immigration officials enforce federal immigration law."
This only seems to be a"controversy" because it hurts Democrat electoral chances...
Actually.. It is only an issue because it HELPS the democrats in their campaigns... That and the demographic most represented by illegals tends to vote democratic. So democrats get votes from today's voters from that demographic and if amnesty is given again they will have a huge influx of new voters from the same demographic.
You can bet that if the demographic was more likely to help republicans this wouldn't be a controversy unless amnesty was being discussed.
That's a question for your lawyer friend.. I do not know.
The issue is that YOU have the responsibility to preserve any and all information that you reasonably know is relevant to criminal or civil legal actions if you can. You are afforded the right to delete any information as part of an automated processes and can legally delete any and all records/documents prior to becoming aware of the legal action and as long as you are taking reasonable care to preserve any data as soon as you are aware.
The question you are asking has to do with the period between when you become aware of the data should be preserved and when you can turn off the automation that deletes it. Seems this would put this squarely in the grey area, where you cannot reach the device to turn off the automatic scrub but you know it will delete information. Your justification would be that you couldn't stop the automation because they had your device. I suppose they would argue you had an obligation to tell them but you would also be able to claim that you didn't have access to the device because they took it so you couldn't stop the process. I'm guessing the court would have to figure what side that falls on, which might be good, if you are trying to avoid criminal prosecution.
Thinking about this.... The problem is that YOU cannot destroy evidence once you become aware that it might be wanted by law enforcement or subject to civil lawsuit.
IF your device is programed to do a secure erase after a given length of time w/o a successful login by you, I suppose that you could conceivably wait that length of time... The key would be that you'd have to specifically NOT take any action to erase the device (like entering the wrong password or something) and that you are not misrepresenting your ability to actually unlock the device. Basically, you would have to explain that the device was programmed to secure erase anytime it was out of your control for a specific duration.
I'm no lawyer, but that *might* be sufficient to destroy the evidence w/o being held responsible for it, but I'm betting that it might not be a good idea in the long run. Better to just not keep any data on the portable device where it's obvious in the first place.
AND would be resistant to court orders or warrants?
Good luck finding a way to do that.