Military intelligence played a major role in fighting dating to well before the Revolutionary War. Spies, intercepting communications, and secret messages aren't new developments.
I'm curious as to how the Fourth Ammendment protects you from having your international phone conversation tapped by agents from the other country you are talking to.
This goes towards the "expectation of privacy" issue.
Also, since the program is in fact related to the prosecution of a war then we're not talking about legal proceedings and instead are dealing with intelligence gathering. The Constitution vested broad powers to the Commander in Chief in that case.
If they're disclosing information to a third-party then they'd be in direct violation of any gag order. An NDA or a promise not to talk doesn't cut it. If they can't talk, they can't talk.
Instead we get "hints" about "black-suited lawyers" and just how fed up the poor victim is in all this.
Apparently Karl Rove and his mind control lasers are SOOOO powerful that they can get the UK's police, Scotland Yard, Pakistan's military, and NSA to all work together quietly for months then suddenly start a bunch of arrests the day AFTER Lieberman loses a primary.
You sir, are an idiot. How many people would need to be involved in such a conspiracy? And this just to make a loss less painful? Come on, if someone was really to go to all of this effort don't you think they'd make sure it happened BEFORE the vote?
You see Israel gave back the Gaza strip. What did they get for their troubles? Suicide bombings and rocket attacks. They also pulled out of Syria and got the same for their efforts. Every time Israel retreated the other side used it to claim victory.
You keep thinking that it's just a matter of Israel going back to their historic borders and all would be nice. Of course there is that problem about the Madrid bombing and Andalusia...
It's amazing how we all sit here and complain about the lack of a paper trail for the voting machines when the single biggest lack of a paper trail is verifiable ID for the voters themselves.
How many states actually require you to produce a photo ID in order to vote? Every time another state tries to introduce it we hear shouts of "Jim Crowe" and how it will disenfranchize those who don't have ID.
How about all the voters who are effectively disinfranchized by those who vote more than once? (In this case it's even worse as the action is invalidating the efforts of someone who actually made it to the poll and voted.)
So, how about this: limits on absentee balloting, verifing ID at the poling station, national standard for voter registration, and electronic machines that print out completed paper ballots that are then put in a ballot box (both an automatic tally and the paper tally is then available).
Oh, and one final thing. If all this is in place than can we stop with all of the "they stole the election" rubbish?
You realize that any change to the electoral college would result in two things: 1) Campaigning only in major population centers. WI wouldn't see a single presidential candidate. 2) Country-wide recounts. Consider the hash of the recount in Fla where there were the issues of differring vote counting standards between the various counties. Imagine this being country-wide.
The system of checks and balances remains firmly in place. Congress cannot unilaterally override the Constitution. The language is actually probably boiler-plate to help avoid a Constitutional challenge of the new law.
As for the President we've already seen that the courts can and will override the Executive branch when they claim Constitutional privledges (Hamdan v Rumsfeld). In that case they said "go back to the Legislative branch to get clarifying law, until then we say this is beyond your Constitutional scope of power".
Technically it's not rooting an OS but actually is almost it's own OS (hypervisor actually) that is running the OS in a virtual machine. Couldn't you get the same effect by hacking BIOS?
It is reasonable to expect that the contents of your mail are private. It is unreasonable to expect that the address that the letter is sent to is private. This goes directly towards pen register information from the phone company. The number of who called and what number they called is not protected while the actual conversation is.
Last time I checked the ol' Constitution, the checks and balances didn't include unelected newspaper reporters deciding what gets classified and what doesn't.
I'm sooo glad that Mr. Keller feels that he is qualified to sit in judgement and wave the almight "public right to know" just so that they can sell a few more papers on their way to bankruptcy.
Former official both Democratic and Republican urged them not to publish, but NOOOOO, Mr. Keller apparently knows better.
Too bad he didn't publish earlier, maybe Hambali would still be free...
First off, bank transactions are not 4th ammendment protected. Just like phone number pen registers. The information has to travel through third parties so it has been ruled that there is no "reasonable expectation of privacy" for said data.
More importantly, the SWIFT system is used to support massive international wire transfers, usually from one bank to another. We're not talking about Western Union transfers and we're not talking about your ATM records.
The really amazing thing is that if you read the entire article you'll see that the Administration has been going to great lengths to protect privacy with additional audits and the requirement of preparing internal subpoenas (yes, they're not vetted by a court) before making any request for data. To date the program has already been responsible for some major terrorist captures and was apparently quite successful.
Many states have laws that allow for under-age minors to marry if their guardians approve.
As for the "banging anything I can get my hands on" well this is certainly a normal desire but the issue isn't the banging but what can be the result of it. How would you like to have been staring at either marriage or child support payments at the age of 15?
I think the various registry laws are outrageous as well. "Remember the children" unfortunately makes a strong rallying cry for a lot of bad laws. That however has nothing to do with "14 year olds should be able to decide on things like sex" and "informed consent" which is why I mentioned that you were mixing two things together.
Wouldn't you think that a 14 year old has enough on their plate without worrying about becoming a mommy or daddy before they can drive? We could also go into the whole area of whether they are physiologically ready (beyond mere menses) to carry a baby to term.
Yes, the age of consent is arbitrary, just like driving, drinking, and voting too. If you really don't like it then lobby to change it.
You're combining two issues here. First is age of consent, second is prosecution of violations (combined with the additional burdens placed on "sex offenders"). Your friend can complain all he wants about the way the law has treated him but as a 20 year old he was cognizant of the relevant laws (at least as far as the statutory rape part) and chose to violate them. (Note that many states are now modifying those laws to take into account age differences of the two parties involved so a 19 year old with a 17 year old isn't the same as a 40 year old with a 17 year old.)
Yes the age of consent is arbitrary, but then again so are the ages for driving, voting, and drinking. You'll also see that the age of consent varies from state to state. This isn't some moral issue or puritanical holdover, it's what the people in each state have decided makes sense to them.
Maybe the thing is to lobby for new laws and have procreation licenses issued just like drivers licenses. If you can prove that you are mature enough to understand and deal with the consequences of these actions then you're free to act.
At the age of 14 it is really hard for most kids to really understand the consequences of a sexual relationship. Now, maybe some few kids can actually comprehend this and thus provide a meaningful consent, but it's very few and there's no good test we can give them to screen the mature from the immature. So, a "magical age" was created where it was decided that most people would in fact be able to understand complex relationships. Yes, some people over this age don't really comprehend the issue, but the line had to be drawn somewhere.
Bad shape by a constant = Windows 4.0 to Windows XP Bad shape by an order of magnitude = Windows 98 to Windows Me Bad shape by an infinite order = MS Bob
and of course you have a language that printers have been speaking for quite a long time. You could even "send a document in PS format directly to a printer..."
Remarkable. MS once again on the bleeding edge of technology.
Despite your attack on my credibility, the difficulties related to dealing with both stem cells and cloning remain.
It would appear that these yo-yo's are needlessly diving headlong into a moral morasse when there are in fact problems that need to be resolved before tackling human cloning. Additionally, since medical advances are being made daily with the use of Adult Stem Cells that don't have the therapeutic issues of rejection or cloning.
I'd also point out that one of the supposed "smartest people in the world, and the best in the field" was recently pointed out to have failed miserably with cloning. To the point of actually falsifying data to hide that fact.
So while your gut is busy dismissing my "unsupportable feeling" (an irony in and of itself) I'll stick with what I've come across in my admittedly limited research and reading. The point being that there are difficulties enough and areas to study and advance without dealing with cloning.
Slashdot Mirror
Military intelligence played a major role in fighting dating to well before the Revolutionary War. Spies, intercepting communications, and secret messages aren't new developments.
4 /spies.cfm
http://www.history.org/Foundation/journal/Summer0
In fact, the framers DID acknowledge this when they invested the power of gathering intelligence in the Commander in Chief.
I'm curious as to how the Fourth Ammendment protects you from having your international phone conversation tapped by agents from the other country you are talking to.
This goes towards the "expectation of privacy" issue.
Also, since the program is in fact related to the prosecution of a war then we're not talking about legal proceedings and instead are dealing with intelligence gathering. The Constitution vested broad powers to the Commander in Chief in that case.
If they're disclosing information to a third-party then they'd be in direct violation of any gag order. An NDA or a promise not to talk doesn't cut it. If they can't talk, they can't talk.
Instead we get "hints" about "black-suited lawyers" and just how fed up the poor victim is in all this.
Let's see. Suppose I search a database for a specific name, is that mining?
If so, then the local cops are data mining DMV records every time they run a license plate.
Apparently Karl Rove and his mind control lasers are SOOOO powerful that they can get the UK's police, Scotland Yard, Pakistan's military, and NSA to all work together quietly for months then suddenly start a bunch of arrests the day AFTER Lieberman loses a primary.
You sir, are an idiot. How many people would need to be involved in such a conspiracy? And this just to make a loss less painful? Come on, if someone was really to go to all of this effort don't you think they'd make sure it happened BEFORE the vote?
Yes, you are a fool.
You see Israel gave back the Gaza strip. What did they get for their troubles? Suicide bombings and rocket attacks. They also pulled out of Syria and got the same for their efforts. Every time Israel retreated the other side used it to claim victory.
You keep thinking that it's just a matter of Israel going back to their historic borders and all would be nice. Of course there is that problem about the Madrid bombing and Andalusia...
Well, slap some pr0n up on those 30" monitors and something will sure go thru the roof...
Is the person who started the whole controversy was lieing in order to willfully and maliciously damage the reputation of the White House.
Yes, sir, good ol' Joe Wilson himself was the one who was busy spreading lies to the newspapers, first anonymously, and then in a bylined NYT Op-Ed.
Of course, people then asked, who sent Wilson on this trip? It appears that the Administration made the fatal mistake of telling the truth.
It's amazing how we all sit here and complain about the lack of a paper trail for the voting machines when the single biggest lack of a paper trail is verifiable ID for the voters themselves.
How many states actually require you to produce a photo ID in order to vote? Every time another state tries to introduce it we hear shouts of "Jim Crowe" and how it will disenfranchize those who don't have ID.
How about all the voters who are effectively disinfranchized by those who vote more than once? (In this case it's even worse as the action is invalidating the efforts of someone who actually made it to the poll and voted.)
So, how about this: limits on absentee balloting, verifing ID at the poling station, national standard for voter registration, and electronic machines that print out completed paper ballots that are then put in a ballot box (both an automatic tally and the paper tally is then available).
Oh, and one final thing. If all this is in place than can we stop with all of the "they stole the election" rubbish?
You realize that any change to the electoral college would result in two things:
1) Campaigning only in major population centers. WI wouldn't see a single presidential candidate.
2) Country-wide recounts. Consider the hash of the recount in Fla where there were the issues of differring vote counting standards between the various counties. Imagine this being country-wide.
welcome our new surrendering robotic overlords.
The system of checks and balances remains firmly in place. Congress cannot unilaterally override the Constitution. The language is actually probably boiler-plate to help avoid a Constitutional challenge of the new law.
As for the President we've already seen that the courts can and will override the Executive branch when they claim Constitutional privledges (Hamdan v Rumsfeld). In that case they said "go back to the Legislative branch to get clarifying law, until then we say this is beyond your Constitutional scope of power".
Technically it's not rooting an OS but actually is almost it's own OS (hypervisor actually) that is running the OS in a virtual machine. Couldn't you get the same effect by hacking BIOS?
(Yeah, it doesn't work, but...)
Would this mean Bugs' old "stick the finger in to keep gun from shooting" routine would violate the DMCA?
It is reasonable to expect that the contents of your mail are private. It is unreasonable to expect that the address that the letter is sent to is private. This goes directly towards pen register information from the phone company. The number of who called and what number they called is not protected while the actual conversation is.
Last time I checked the ol' Constitution, the checks and balances didn't include unelected newspaper reporters deciding what gets classified and what doesn't.
I'm sooo glad that Mr. Keller feels that he is qualified to sit in judgement and wave the almight "public right to know" just so that they can sell a few more papers on their way to bankruptcy.
Former official both Democratic and Republican urged them not to publish, but NOOOOO, Mr. Keller apparently knows better.
Too bad he didn't publish earlier, maybe Hambali would still be free...
First off, bank transactions are not 4th ammendment protected. Just like phone number pen registers. The information has to travel through third parties so it has been ruled that there is no "reasonable expectation of privacy" for said data.
More importantly, the SWIFT system is used to support massive international wire transfers, usually from one bank to another. We're not talking about Western Union transfers and we're not talking about your ATM records.
The really amazing thing is that if you read the entire article you'll see that the Administration has been going to great lengths to protect privacy with additional audits and the requirement of preparing internal subpoenas (yes, they're not vetted by a court) before making any request for data. To date the program has already been responsible for some major terrorist captures and was apparently quite successful.
Many states have laws that allow for under-age minors to marry if their guardians approve.
As for the "banging anything I can get my hands on" well this is certainly a normal desire but the issue isn't the banging but what can be the result of it. How would you like to have been staring at either marriage or child support payments at the age of 15?
I think the various registry laws are outrageous as well. "Remember the children" unfortunately makes a strong rallying cry for a lot of bad laws. That however has nothing to do with "14 year olds should be able to decide on things like sex" and "informed consent" which is why I mentioned that you were mixing two things together.
Historically people died a lot younger too.
Wouldn't you think that a 14 year old has enough on their plate without worrying about becoming a mommy or daddy before they can drive? We could also go into the whole area of whether they are physiologically ready (beyond mere menses) to carry a baby to term.
Yes, the age of consent is arbitrary, just like driving, drinking, and voting too. If you really don't like it then lobby to change it.
You're combining two issues here. First is age of consent, second is prosecution of violations (combined with the additional burdens placed on "sex offenders"). Your friend can complain all he wants about the way the law has treated him but as a 20 year old he was cognizant of the relevant laws (at least as far as the statutory rape part) and chose to violate them. (Note that many states are now modifying those laws to take into account age differences of the two parties involved so a 19 year old with a 17 year old isn't the same as a 40 year old with a 17 year old.)
Yes the age of consent is arbitrary, but then again so are the ages for driving, voting, and drinking. You'll also see that the age of consent varies from state to state. This isn't some moral issue or puritanical holdover, it's what the people in each state have decided makes sense to them.
Maybe the thing is to lobby for new laws and have procreation licenses issued just like drivers licenses. If you can prove that you are mature enough to understand and deal with the consequences of these actions then you're free to act.
At the age of 14 it is really hard for most kids to really understand the consequences of a sexual relationship. Now, maybe some few kids can actually comprehend this and thus provide a meaningful consent, but it's very few and there's no good test we can give them to screen the mature from the immature. So, a "magical age" was created where it was decided that most people would in fact be able to understand complex relationships. Yes, some people over this age don't really comprehend the issue, but the line had to be drawn somewhere.
Bad shape by a constant = Windows 4.0 to Windows XP
Bad shape by an order of magnitude = Windows 98 to Windows Me
Bad shape by an infinite order = MS Bob
and of course you have a language that printers have been speaking for quite a long time. You could even "send a document in PS format directly to a printer..."
Remarkable. MS once again on the bleeding edge of technology.
Despite your attack on my credibility, the difficulties related to dealing with both stem cells and cloning remain.
It would appear that these yo-yo's are needlessly diving headlong into a moral morasse when there are in fact problems that need to be resolved before tackling human cloning. Additionally, since medical advances are being made daily with the use of Adult Stem Cells that don't have the therapeutic issues of rejection or cloning.
I'd also point out that one of the supposed "smartest people in the world, and the best in the field" was recently pointed out to have failed miserably with cloning. To the point of actually falsifying data to hide that fact.
So while your gut is busy dismissing my "unsupportable feeling" (an irony in and of itself) I'll stick with what I've come across in my admittedly limited research and reading. The point being that there are difficulties enough and areas to study and advance without dealing with cloning.