This is why I generally prefer to keep hard tabs for indentation, and uses spaces for alignment. Different people have different preferences. I've seen 2, 3, 4 and 8 in the wild. This really sucks when you have all 4 types working on the same project. Any decent editor (I'm scowling at you, notepad) allows you to configure the rendered size of a tab.
Selfie taken while at the bench, duck-faced, straining to turn around to catch both the defense & prosecution in the background with the caption, "About to sentence the schmuck to death! #selfie #yolo"
Whether that has anything to do with systemd, I don't know. It shouldn't, but as desktop environments do rely on udev to detect flash drives and discs, and udev may now have dependencies on systemd, maybe systemd is the root of those problems.
From the behavior, I doubt the problems you're exhibiting are due to systemd. Sounds like they're happening in user land which isn't really systemd's area (it's starting daemons & what not). That's my *guess* and nothing more. That deleting dot folders out of your home directory changes behavior strongly suggests that to me, however.
Since you mention udev, could it possibly have something to do with device ids changing, or even missing, in unexpected ways between boots? I have problems with that on my home Windows desktop. Well, maybe not exactly that, but after a soft reboot, I virtually never see my boot drive detected by my SATA RAID controller (boot drive is an SSD and I've a RAID5 for data & holding VMs). A hard reboot always fixes the problem. At first I thought it was a problem with the SSD, but the problem has happened with several different models & manufacturers, so I'm suspecting firmware on the RAID controller now (unfortunately no updates, and I seem to be the only one exhibiting the problem).
Don't take this as either an endorsement or condemnation of systemd. I really don't know enough about systemd versus init.d to contribute anything worthwhile to a pros/cons discussion. All I've observed is that it seems to be an old man vs. kids battle style battle. i.e. the kids are changing stuff and the old man proverbially yelling at the kids to get off his lawn (this analogy is not intended to make any assumptions or accusations regarding the age of the individuals on either side - for all I know systemd is being driven by the same people that came up with init.d and thought their first effort wasn't what they wanted or needed and tried a different approach).
Making no comment on the quality, intention or target of the parent, but regarding what I quote above: Is this not supposed to drive you to the greatest virtue of OSS?
Isn't the whole idea between (F)OSS to make it your own? In modern parlance: fork it. You don't like systemd? Fine, fork the distro and do whatever you want with it.
What I've gather from the whole systemd hatred is that a lot of people hate it, and would rather spend their time ranting about their hate than either fixing their complaints or forking a distro that meets their desires.
I'm a developer whose code sometimes runs on Linux. As long as my code runs on any distro, I have no horse in the race as far as how the system boots
I know you're probably purposely being obtuse here, but the IRS doesn't seize your money if you deposit more than $10K at a time. If they did, I would be broke, as they would seize my paycheck every month. The $10K "limit" is a threshold for an alert, not extra-jurisdictional action to seize your money. That the $10k level was imposed decades ago, when it was far less common for individuals to be making deposits or withdrawals of that amount, still holds today is just another example of how short-sighted and slow moving the federal government is. The size of the transfer isn't the only key, either. Financial institutions may also need to track the country of origin & destination of money transfers (i.e. so you can't wire money to/accept from Iran or North Korea).
The $10K transfer "limit" is akin to the $100 bill being made the largest physical denomination. It doesn't make it illegal to have more than $100 in cash, it makes it impractical to have significantly more than that in hand, physically. (There're even calls to make $50 or $20 USD the largest physical denomination). Basically the US federal government wants to make it illegal/difficult/impractical to move large sums of US currency surreptitiously, at least without being noticed and recorded/tracked.
Yeah, i mean, if you're going to effectively patent troll, target the company with the most value first.
This is not usually how patent trolls operate. They usually test the waters against small companies that can ill afford to take a infringement case to trial. Once a certain level of precedence is set with victories or settlements at a relatively cheep cost, then you go after the big fish with the big pockets (having already fattened your own war chest with prior "wins".
This isn't year 2000 anymore. Most of the commercial database vendors have "developer editions" available for free. There's usually a bunch of restrictions such as total database size, number of concurrent connections (usually 1) or local access only. Microsoft has made a pared-down SQL Server available for free under monikers such as "Compact Edition", "Express Edition" and (I think?) "Embedded Edition". Currently, with SQL Server 2014, it's Express Edition and a size limit of 10 GB per database. I don't see a connection limit specified, just a compute restriction of "the lesser of 1 socket or 4 cores". I've seen some Windows games utilize this engine to store game assets.
The main reason I currently run Win8.1 is for Hyper-V. Unlike its predecessor Virtual PC, it actually supports Linux guest VMs, and it also does it well. Probably the only missing feature is the ability to share folders between host & guest. It works so much more smoothly than VirtualBox. Little things like being able to use an active ftp connection from a VM, rather than forcing passive mode (yes, people still use FTP in 2015) or have the VM suspend/resume when the host is rebooted automatically is awesome (especially when you leave your laptop at work on the weekend updates are applied).
Granted, the Win8.1 UI generally sucks - too much crap I don't care about forced into the main start menu by default - but it only takes about 10 mins to clean that up and get stuff I actually use pinned to the start menu or task bar. My 90% most commonly used apps are just pinned to the task bar - Visual Studio, Outlook, IntelliJ, MTPuTTY, etc, so I rarely even see the Win8.1 start menu. IE & the Windows Store are the very first things removed/unpinned.
I have, about a year ago. My Surface Pro 2, on wake from sleep, wouldn't allow me to enter credentials, it would just sit at the login screen. The attached keyboard wouldn't allow input, and the on-screen touch keyboard wouldn't show up. Only work around was a hard reboot. Turns out the Surface didn't really like being put to sleep while using a full-screen game, such as Civ 5. Never did get an official resolution to the issue, but I haven't had the problem as of late (maybe quietly fixed somewhere along the way).
For enterprise support, the few times I've had to reach out, they've been very helpful and responsive. Granted, the company I was working for was paying for that support (and no, I have no idea of the financial terms of the contract).
Is this maybe why Comcast twice inside of 3 days invoked Emergency Broadcast System tests, the latest being roughly 8:15 CDT last night? (Previous was on Sunday, both disrupted recorded/on demand programs, neither was live).
The media bias is evident when you look at who and why they attack certain individuals. Biden has gotten away with a lot of stuff. He basically groped a woman in public, in front of cameras, and the reaction was "Oh, Biden....", but when Dan Quayle only accepted a different spelling of potato at a spelling bee, he was vilified. Another example of bias is look at DHS funding: some media outlets are blaming Republicans of denying funding, yet it's Dems that are blocking the vote through parliamentary measures because they don't have the votes to outright block it.
As I've seen it, the Koch brothers are not for gay marriage, one has said he's basically fine with it and doesn't get why everyone's in a big fuss about it.
I, for one, tend to be fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal or, rather, laissez faire. I don't care to subsidize others lifestyles, but I won't comment on or condemn others' lifestyle choices. However, I'm willing to state that marriage is not a constitutional right, and as such, should be left as an issue of states' rights. I'm also willing to state that the primary reason this is an issue is because the federal government grants certain privileges (nominally in the form of tax breaks) to such qualifying "couples". The argument to extend such protections is under the 14th Amendment "equal protection" clause, yet neither sexual orientation nor marital status is listed, under that amendment, as protected classes. Thus, if you extend that qualification to same-sex couples, you're still alienating another class: single individuals and still violating the spirit of the 14th Amendment. What it boils down to, if you treated all people equally, as individuals, regardless of marital status, gay or otherwise marriage would be a non-existent issue.
I picked a singular, complete, quote from her, directly, that appears to be very telling of her mindset. I'm not assuming anything, I'm exercising literacy and understanding words of the English language. "could have offended" is not the same as "offended". I didn't try and reconstitute what I thought I heard someone behind me said at conference after I heard the word "dongle". Walk down the street or mingle among any large crowd of people. You'll likely, in very short order, hear a lot of things taken out of context may be offensive. Even if you heard the sentence "I want to give her my dongle", so what? You don't, without context, know who "her" is, what the dongle is, or why the dongle should be given to her. Yeah, you can make anything sexual. I want to her in the . Done. In today's society, we jump to the worst conclusions, publicly shame and convict in the media, nevermind whether what we perceive has any actual bearing on reality.
So she heard something, figured it's a sex-related joke, deemed it sexist, got outraged, snapped a pic and posted a snarky comment on twitter.
Yes, it snowballed, but someone had to get that snowball rolling down the hill to begin with, and that was someone was Adria Richards.
If you read the interview in the article, she claims to have empathy towards "Hank", but her past and present actions reek of her being a sociopath. Even her own remarks insinuate that she wasn't offended, but she made a shit-storm because they could appear to be offensive to her. In her mind, and she states this in the interview, that because she is a black Jewish woman, and he is a white male, that she basically decided he needed to made an example of and that they got what was coming to them, because they don't understand where she comes from. She took racist and sexist actions by assuming things about these two because of parts of a private conversation she eavesdropped on because they are white and male, and she is black and female. She made no attempt to even privately or discretely address her perceived transgression, instead immediately publicly shamed them with a he-said/she-said allegation. I'd wager if she knew any personally identifying info when she snapped the photo & tweeted it, she'd have included that, as well. She has no remorse, and considering how public and detailed this whole incident has been and her (re)actions along the way, I don't see it as a surprise she's still unemployed. I don't see very many companies wanting to take on that legal time bomb. I'm sure there are companies where she'd be welcome (probably certain media/political outlets targeting certain niche demographics), but after this, I think she'll be hard-pressed to find a job in "normal" corporate environment.
Yeah, the interview doesn't exactly paint her in any better of a light than people already hold her in. In her own words she basically states she's racist and sexist with a possible religious bias:
“Not too bad,” she said. She thought more and shook her head decisively. “He’s a white male. I’m a black Jewish female. He was saying things that could be inferred as offensive to me, sitting in front of him.
(emphasis mine). The way that's phrased, to me, states that she was not offended, but chose to manufacture offense via the photo & tweets, and that resulted in real world damage to peoples lives. Not just to the two men, but their families, as well.
While I do think that a lot of the stuff that was done and said to her after this incident are despicable, it doesn't make her any less of a hurtful, spiteful, vindictive, hypocritical, hateful excuse of a human being. Additionally, her comment about Downs Syndrome is just...disturbing.
Not to be pedantic or argumentative, but how are you sure your open hardware design isn't manipulated or back-door'd after you hand it over to a 3rd party for manufacturing? There is no single person in the world that build a useful general purpose (in today's standards) computer from hardware to software, guaranteeing that no one else has had an opportunity along the way to manipulate it in some fashion. At some point, you have to start trusting people/organizations/companies. The fewer involved, the greater level of trust you can reasonably assume. We've already seen how the "many eyes" postulation may be flawed (see: openssl). I chalk that up more to human nature: everyone assumes everyone else is looking, so until you personally have a problem, you don't look, you just assume & trust. I know I do this; I only read others' code when I'm bored or have to. Once I'm sufficiently bored by reading others' code that I'm not paid to read, I get back to my regular job.
There's another part that I didn't bring up: Dish will be fined. But, where does that money go? To the people impacted by their acts? No. It will disappear into the fed government somewhere. Whatever fines are collected should be distributed to the people that they violated - and I'm not one of them.
Fair enough, I did read it several times, but managed to miss, each time, the "and require" part under Section 15. I'd suggest that it wouldn't withstand a challenge under the 4th or 5th Amendments, but seeing as how the SCOTUS has previously ruled the 1st Amendment doesn't (always) apply during public school, I'm not sure how well that would fare.
Market Cap of Dish Network is roughly $34B, so the max potential fine is roughly 30x what the company is worth. If levied, it means *poof*, gone. Won't happen. There will be a fine, but I'll be surprised if it ends up being more than even $30M.
I don't follow your interpretation of the law you linked to.
Section 10. Prohibited inquiry.
(a) It is unlawful for a post-secondary school to request
or require a student or his or her parent or guardian to
provide a password or other related account information in
order to gain access to the student's account or profile on a
social networking website or to demand access in any manner to
a student's account or profile on a social networking website.
That seem's pretty straight forward: it is unlawful to request or require dissemination of a password.
What I suspect you object to is this:
(2) monitor usage of the post-secondary school's
electronic equipment and the post-secondary school's
electronic mail without requesting or requiring a student
to provide a password or other related account information
in order to gain access to the student's account or profile
on a social networking website.
What I read this to mean (and I'm not a lawyer, of course), is without approval or consent, they may monitor school-provided equipment and provided email. i.e., if you utilize your school's email service, they may read that at will, without your consent. Note the possessive in "post-secondary school's electronic mail". This seems pretty plain to me they are not allowed to monitor, say your gmail access (unless they have a man-in-the-middle setup and you access it utilizing the school's network, read: electronic equipment).
As an Illinois resident, I read through it several times, just on the chance I missed something. Like you, I see no where that anyone, either the victim or the accused are being compelled to provide even so much as a screen name, let alone full on credentials for any sort of account. Another misleading click-bait headline just to rile everyone up.
I could get behind this, but I'd go one step further: include lawyers whose suits are tossed out for being frivolous. 3 lawsuits tossed for being frivolous (not necessarily for without merit, lacking standing or losing), and you're disbarred, never to practice law again.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why I generally prefer to keep hard tabs for indentation, and uses spaces for alignment. Different people have different preferences. I've seen 2, 3, 4 and 8 in the wild. This really sucks when you have all 4 types working on the same project. Any decent editor (I'm scowling at you, notepad) allows you to configure the rendered size of a tab.
Selfie taken while at the bench, duck-faced, straining to turn around to catch both the defense & prosecution in the background with the caption, "About to sentence the schmuck to death! #selfie #yolo"
Whether that has anything to do with systemd, I don't know. It shouldn't, but as desktop environments do rely on udev to detect flash drives and discs, and udev may now have dependencies on systemd, maybe systemd is the root of those problems.
From the behavior, I doubt the problems you're exhibiting are due to systemd. Sounds like they're happening in user land which isn't really systemd's area (it's starting daemons & what not). That's my *guess* and nothing more. That deleting dot folders out of your home directory changes behavior strongly suggests that to me, however.
Since you mention udev, could it possibly have something to do with device ids changing, or even missing, in unexpected ways between boots? I have problems with that on my home Windows desktop. Well, maybe not exactly that, but after a soft reboot, I virtually never see my boot drive detected by my SATA RAID controller (boot drive is an SSD and I've a RAID5 for data & holding VMs). A hard reboot always fixes the problem. At first I thought it was a problem with the SSD, but the problem has happened with several different models & manufacturers, so I'm suspecting firmware on the RAID controller now (unfortunately no updates, and I seem to be the only one exhibiting the problem).
Don't take this as either an endorsement or condemnation of systemd. I really don't know enough about systemd versus init.d to contribute anything worthwhile to a pros/cons discussion. All I've observed is that it seems to be an old man vs. kids battle style battle. i.e. the kids are changing stuff and the old man proverbially yelling at the kids to get off his lawn (this analogy is not intended to make any assumptions or accusations regarding the age of the individuals on either side - for all I know systemd is being driven by the same people that came up with init.d and thought their first effort wasn't what they wanted or needed and tried a different approach).
is being shoved down their throats
Making no comment on the quality, intention or target of the parent, but regarding what I quote above: Is this not supposed to drive you to the greatest virtue of OSS?
Isn't the whole idea between (F)OSS to make it your own? In modern parlance: fork it. You don't like systemd? Fine, fork the distro and do whatever you want with it.
What I've gather from the whole systemd hatred is that a lot of people hate it, and would rather spend their time ranting about their hate than either fixing their complaints or forking a distro that meets their desires.
I'm a developer whose code sometimes runs on Linux. As long as my code runs on any distro, I have no horse in the race as far as how the system boots
error pop-up messages every time I boot
And, what are they?
I seriously ask because are the errors real or are they because of systemd
I'm primarily a windows guy, but I run ubuntu 14 server in a VM, and I don't see OS level errors ever.
I know you're probably purposely being obtuse here, but the IRS doesn't seize your money if you deposit more than $10K at a time. If they did, I would be broke, as they would seize my paycheck every month. The $10K "limit" is a threshold for an alert, not extra-jurisdictional action to seize your money. That the $10k level was imposed decades ago, when it was far less common for individuals to be making deposits or withdrawals of that amount, still holds today is just another example of how short-sighted and slow moving the federal government is. The size of the transfer isn't the only key, either. Financial institutions may also need to track the country of origin & destination of money transfers (i.e. so you can't wire money to/accept from Iran or North Korea).
The $10K transfer "limit" is akin to the $100 bill being made the largest physical denomination. It doesn't make it illegal to have more than $100 in cash, it makes it impractical to have significantly more than that in hand, physically. (There're even calls to make $50 or $20 USD the largest physical denomination). Basically the US federal government wants to make it illegal/difficult/impractical to move large sums of US currency surreptitiously, at least without being noticed and recorded/tracked.
Yeah, i mean, if you're going to effectively patent troll, target the company with the most value first.
This is not usually how patent trolls operate. They usually test the waters against small companies that can ill afford to take a infringement case to trial. Once a certain level of precedence is set with victories or settlements at a relatively cheep cost, then you go after the big fish with the big pockets (having already fattened your own war chest with prior "wins".
This isn't year 2000 anymore. Most of the commercial database vendors have "developer editions" available for free. There's usually a bunch of restrictions such as total database size, number of concurrent connections (usually 1) or local access only. Microsoft has made a pared-down SQL Server available for free under monikers such as "Compact Edition", "Express Edition" and (I think?) "Embedded Edition". Currently, with SQL Server 2014, it's Express Edition and a size limit of 10 GB per database. I don't see a connection limit specified, just a compute restriction of "the lesser of 1 socket or 4 cores". I've seen some Windows games utilize this engine to store game assets.
The main reason I currently run Win8.1 is for Hyper-V. Unlike its predecessor Virtual PC, it actually supports Linux guest VMs, and it also does it well. Probably the only missing feature is the ability to share folders between host & guest. It works so much more smoothly than VirtualBox. Little things like being able to use an active ftp connection from a VM, rather than forcing passive mode (yes, people still use FTP in 2015) or have the VM suspend/resume when the host is rebooted automatically is awesome (especially when you leave your laptop at work on the weekend updates are applied).
Granted, the Win8.1 UI generally sucks - too much crap I don't care about forced into the main start menu by default - but it only takes about 10 mins to clean that up and get stuff I actually use pinned to the start menu or task bar. My 90% most commonly used apps are just pinned to the task bar - Visual Studio, Outlook, IntelliJ, MTPuTTY, etc, so I rarely even see the Win8.1 start menu. IE & the Windows Store are the very first things removed/unpinned.
I have, about a year ago. My Surface Pro 2, on wake from sleep, wouldn't allow me to enter credentials, it would just sit at the login screen. The attached keyboard wouldn't allow input, and the on-screen touch keyboard wouldn't show up. Only work around was a hard reboot. Turns out the Surface didn't really like being put to sleep while using a full-screen game, such as Civ 5. Never did get an official resolution to the issue, but I haven't had the problem as of late (maybe quietly fixed somewhere along the way).
For enterprise support, the few times I've had to reach out, they've been very helpful and responsive. Granted, the company I was working for was paying for that support (and no, I have no idea of the financial terms of the contract).
Is this maybe why Comcast twice inside of 3 days invoked Emergency Broadcast System tests, the latest being roughly 8:15 CDT last night? (Previous was on Sunday, both disrupted recorded/on demand programs, neither was live).
The media bias is evident when you look at who and why they attack certain individuals. Biden has gotten away with a lot of stuff. He basically groped a woman in public, in front of cameras, and the reaction was "Oh, Biden....", but when Dan Quayle only accepted a different spelling of potato at a spelling bee, he was vilified. Another example of bias is look at DHS funding: some media outlets are blaming Republicans of denying funding, yet it's Dems that are blocking the vote through parliamentary measures because they don't have the votes to outright block it.
As I've seen it, the Koch brothers are not for gay marriage, one has said he's basically fine with it and doesn't get why everyone's in a big fuss about it.
I, for one, tend to be fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal or, rather, laissez faire. I don't care to subsidize others lifestyles, but I won't comment on or condemn others' lifestyle choices. However, I'm willing to state that marriage is not a constitutional right, and as such, should be left as an issue of states' rights. I'm also willing to state that the primary reason this is an issue is because the federal government grants certain privileges (nominally in the form of tax breaks) to such qualifying "couples". The argument to extend such protections is under the 14th Amendment "equal protection" clause, yet neither sexual orientation nor marital status is listed, under that amendment, as protected classes. Thus, if you extend that qualification to same-sex couples, you're still alienating another class: single individuals and still violating the spirit of the 14th Amendment. What it boils down to, if you treated all people equally, as individuals, regardless of marital status, gay or otherwise marriage would be a non-existent issue.
I picked a singular, complete, quote from her, directly, that appears to be very telling of her mindset. I'm not assuming anything, I'm exercising literacy and understanding words of the English language. "could have offended" is not the same as "offended". I didn't try and reconstitute what I thought I heard someone behind me said at conference after I heard the word "dongle". Walk down the street or mingle among any large crowd of people. You'll likely, in very short order, hear a lot of things taken out of context may be offensive. Even if you heard the sentence "I want to give her my dongle", so what? You don't, without context, know who "her" is, what the dongle is, or why the dongle should be given to her. Yeah, you can make anything sexual. I want to her in the . Done. In today's society, we jump to the worst conclusions, publicly shame and convict in the media, nevermind whether what we perceive has any actual bearing on reality.
So she heard something, figured it's a sex-related joke, deemed it sexist, got outraged, snapped a pic and posted a snarky comment on twitter.
Yes, it snowballed, but someone had to get that snowball rolling down the hill to begin with, and that was someone was Adria Richards.
If you read the interview in the article, she claims to have empathy towards "Hank", but her past and present actions reek of her being a sociopath. Even her own remarks insinuate that she wasn't offended, but she made a shit-storm because they could appear to be offensive to her. In her mind, and she states this in the interview, that because she is a black Jewish woman, and he is a white male, that she basically decided he needed to made an example of and that they got what was coming to them, because they don't understand where she comes from. She took racist and sexist actions by assuming things about these two because of parts of a private conversation she eavesdropped on because they are white and male, and she is black and female. She made no attempt to even privately or discretely address her perceived transgression, instead immediately publicly shamed them with a he-said/she-said allegation. I'd wager if she knew any personally identifying info when she snapped the photo & tweeted it, she'd have included that, as well. She has no remorse, and considering how public and detailed this whole incident has been and her (re)actions along the way, I don't see it as a surprise she's still unemployed. I don't see very many companies wanting to take on that legal time bomb. I'm sure there are companies where she'd be welcome (probably certain media/political outlets targeting certain niche demographics), but after this, I think she'll be hard-pressed to find a job in "normal" corporate environment.
I quoted directly from the article of the interview. Sorry I did not indicate that, just sort of assumed it would be conveyed.
Yeah, the interview doesn't exactly paint her in any better of a light than people already hold her in. In her own words she basically states she's racist and sexist with a possible religious bias:
“Not too bad,” she said. She thought more and shook her head decisively. “He’s a white male. I’m a black Jewish female. He was saying things that could be inferred as offensive to me, sitting in front of him.
(emphasis mine). The way that's phrased, to me, states that she was not offended, but chose to manufacture offense via the photo & tweets, and that resulted in real world damage to peoples lives. Not just to the two men, but their families, as well.
While I do think that a lot of the stuff that was done and said to her after this incident are despicable, it doesn't make her any less of a hurtful, spiteful, vindictive, hypocritical, hateful excuse of a human being. Additionally, her comment about Downs Syndrome is just...disturbing.
Not to be pedantic or argumentative, but how are you sure your open hardware design isn't manipulated or back-door'd after you hand it over to a 3rd party for manufacturing? There is no single person in the world that build a useful general purpose (in today's standards) computer from hardware to software, guaranteeing that no one else has had an opportunity along the way to manipulate it in some fashion. At some point, you have to start trusting people/organizations/companies. The fewer involved, the greater level of trust you can reasonably assume. We've already seen how the "many eyes" postulation may be flawed (see: openssl). I chalk that up more to human nature: everyone assumes everyone else is looking, so until you personally have a problem, you don't look, you just assume & trust. I know I do this; I only read others' code when I'm bored or have to. Once I'm sufficiently bored by reading others' code that I'm not paid to read, I get back to my regular job.
There's another part that I didn't bring up: Dish will be fined. But, where does that money go? To the people impacted by their acts? No. It will disappear into the fed government somewhere. Whatever fines are collected should be distributed to the people that they violated - and I'm not one of them.
Fair enough, I did read it several times, but managed to miss, each time, the "and require" part under Section 15. I'd suggest that it wouldn't withstand a challenge under the 4th or 5th Amendments, but seeing as how the SCOTUS has previously ruled the 1st Amendment doesn't (always) apply during public school, I'm not sure how well that would fare.
Market Cap of Dish Network is roughly $34B, so the max potential fine is roughly 30x what the company is worth. If levied, it means *poof*, gone. Won't happen. There will be a fine, but I'll be surprised if it ends up being more than even $30M.
You can browse to "chrome://plugins" and explicitly disable the built-in flash.
Pray tell: what is illegal about being pressured to accept a plea bargain?
Section 10. Prohibited inquiry. (a) It is unlawful for a post-secondary school to request or require a student or his or her parent or guardian to provide a password or other related account information in order to gain access to the student's account or profile on a social networking website or to demand access in any manner to a student's account or profile on a social networking website.
That seem's pretty straight forward: it is unlawful to request or require dissemination of a password.
What I suspect you object to is this:
(2) monitor usage of the post-secondary school's electronic equipment and the post-secondary school's electronic mail without requesting or requiring a student to provide a password or other related account information in order to gain access to the student's account or profile on a social networking website.
What I read this to mean (and I'm not a lawyer, of course), is without approval or consent, they may monitor school-provided equipment and provided email. i.e., if you utilize your school's email service, they may read that at will, without your consent. Note the possessive in "post-secondary school's electronic mail". This seems pretty plain to me they are not allowed to monitor, say your gmail access (unless they have a man-in-the-middle setup and you access it utilizing the school's network, read: electronic equipment).
As an Illinois resident, I read through it several times, just on the chance I missed something. Like you, I see no where that anyone, either the victim or the accused are being compelled to provide even so much as a screen name, let alone full on credentials for any sort of account. Another misleading click-bait headline just to rile everyone up.
I could get behind this, but I'd go one step further: include lawyers whose suits are tossed out for being frivolous. 3 lawsuits tossed for being frivolous (not necessarily for without merit, lacking standing or losing), and you're disbarred, never to practice law again.