She is more than capable of hiring an attorney and pretty much everything can be filed in absentia by her lawyer.
How fucking stupid you must be to believe that. If she's in hock for tens of thousands of dollars (potentially to escalate into 6 figure debt), how is she supposed to hire a competent lawyer to represent her in the US?
Easier said than done. Not going to college will by extension mean not being able to go to medical school, engineering school, and eliminate oneself from many occupations which require post-baccalaureate degrees.
With the Internet nowadays, you can learn about ANYTHING you want, for free.
No you can't. Its littered with paywalls, required texts, and even online college lectures aren't available for all the courses required to graduate.
There's a difference between saying "debt slavery for multiple decades does not make college a worthwhile endeavor" and saying "college is a waste of time (although for some people, it can be)".
It should be noted that NOTHING said before a Grand Jury can be used to bring criminal charges against the speaker. So if you're called to a Grand Jury, and they ask you "Did YOU murder that family?", if you say "Yeah, it was me that did it" then you just got away with murder...
That's not true. A statement like that would be considered "a confession" which was freely given. It also doesn't stop police investigators from collecting information that could be used instead to indict you with the crime. Its also quite possible to accidentally or incompetently self-incriminate oneself in grand jury testimony. That is why there is a 5th amendment that protects you from being compelled to provide testimony against yourself, but that's it.
Under no circumstances should a person ever speak and answer questions of/from a federal agent.
That's morally contemptible. Being silent rather than providing information to law enforcement that could avert or imprison persons conducting criminal activity is abetting the crime.
What should be said is "Any individual is in legal peril anytime they submit to questioning from a LEO. They can choose not to participate when asked by a LEO, cease to answer questions the moment they become suspicious of a LEO's line of questioning, or require the presence of a legal representative during questioning.".
what law they can possibly use to compel a witness in an investigation not related to any law which that witness may have broken.
A witness does not have to be a party to an illegal act to testify, but when summoned, they are legally required to provide testimony. If a witness bears false testimony to the grand jury, that is a crime. If the witness withholds information (that doesn't incriminate him/her) to potential criminal activity (i.e. refuse to testify), they demonstrate that they are participating in a criminal conspiracy (by withholding what they know). This is where the "contempt of court" charge leads to imprisonment.
YOU WON'T MIND WHEN THE US GOVERNMENT JAILS AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNALIST AND PUBLISHER FOR PUBLISHING AMERICAN SECRETS
I'd hardly call Assange an international journalist or Wikileaks a journalistic publisher. Any journalistic endeavor requires nominal standards of accuracy, verification to support their statements, and enough absence of bias to be considered news, and not propaganda.
I'd call Wikileaks a shitshow masquerading as journalists, the way the Trump administration masquerades itself as "responsible" governance.
Contrast that to Snowden, who funnelled information to known journalists with a track record of investigative reporting, and attempted to have them work with a known journalist publishing organization to vet the data, in order to not unduly jeopardize security operations, or endanger individuals.
While I would nominally agree that Assange is a cunt with a penis, there's no reason to believe the Russians gave him the RNC's emails, or that Assange would have motivation to withhold them. Assange is an Australian anarchist who hates the US government. He has no reason to prefer Republican fascists over Democrat fascists.
I do feel sorry for Manning though, sending her to jail and not even letting her be confined to home is bullshit.
Every American citizen has an legal obligation to testify when summoned to a grand jury. A grand jury cannot coerce information out of a witness, provided doing so violates 4th amendment protections. A witness cannot abet criminal activity by refusing to provide information to a grand jury. If for some reason they feel compelled to conceal that activity (or testimony), they are imprisoned for contempt of court. They aren't tortured for the information.
What's bullshit is not being subject to criminal liability, but choosing not to provide information about criminal activity against hapless victims.
I guarantee you that whatever functionality and collection that was being done is continuing under a different program.
Then you know of a specific instance where the illegal mass collection of US citizen data has thwarted a terrorist attack or dismantled a serious criminal conspiracy against the US or its citizens? The NSA isn't shutting down the program because of pangs of conscience; they want to use the money elsewhere, but they can't do so while its allocated to collectng more data than it can process. The whole issue is an albatross over their necks, and the senior management employees in the intelligence umbrella during the Obama administration have all moved on; there's no more management ass to cover.
Why would anyone believe anything the NSA says when they've been caught over and over blatantly lying to the public?
Well, that's true... But any assertion from the NSA is not conclusive proof that the NSA is factually untruthful.
There are lots and lots of ways for a contractor to report illegal activities. And it is a requirement that contractors be briefed on those ways every year.
But they don't get protection under whistleblower laws; they aren't considered federal employees. (The argument could be made that federal employees aren't protected by whistleblower laws...)
Law enforcement has pretty much ruled out ever charging a sitting president.
That is a misleading oversimplification. A paper pusher in DOJ back in 1973 decided that his interpretation of the CotUS meant that the PotUS could not be subject to criminal indictment. There is no validation that his legal theory is correct until it is evaluated in the courts; probably by the SCotUS. We will only know if this is legally considered correct when the argument is successfully used to throw out a prosecution.
The PotUS is definitely not safe from a "sealed" indictment; where the criminal prosecution can occur after the PotUS completes his presidential term. Furthermore, the PotUS, nor his subordinates, are beyond state prosecution, provided the state has standing to prosecute an indictment.
There's got to be at least a dozen more capable calculator apps out there for windows and Linux.
If there were, no one would be interested or ask for Microsoft to open source their calculator program. And, as usual, evangelists ignore what makes this source code desirable. People want accuracy and lack of bugs in their programs. Vetted, proven, production code is more valuable for reusability. Seasoned software professionals already know this.
R&D is a part of any tech companies' business expense. No one is making them spend on R&D. Taxpayers don't get shit for giving away their tax dollars to corporations. Fuck corporate assholes who think they're entitled to pay $0 in taxes.
Another company is not going to swoop into that area and pay 45,000 people $150k.
Who cares? Companies like Google, Apple, HMOs, etc. still plan on paying thousands of *qualified* employees $150K, and they were still going to pay taxes needed to support infrastructure like subways and roads.
Amazon wasn't going to move 45K tech employees to NYC, and then add 45K*$150K per year. They were going to poach the pool of *qualified* employees already working here, and hopefully the more competitive employer market would attract more qualified tech employees to move to NYC.
I didn't have a problem with subsidizing $3 billion of tax rebates to Amazon, or fucking over the unions and local politicians. Attracting a relatively large company such as Amazon is a way to perk up the employment market, and the $3 billion were more like subsidizing its startup costs. But lets not pretend that Amazon was going produce a huge new base of taxpayers for NYC.
NY taxpayers shouldn't be fleeced the way Wisconsin got fleeced by Foxconn. Fuck Amazon and its "give me a handout if you want me to make your employment pool more competitive". And FUAC for pretending to create jobs for NYC while putting NYers deeper in debt with corporate handouts, which we will then be expected to give out to every corporation!!!
I do wonder what they do about cooling. You don't have to underclock a modern server processor by much to dispense with the fan, but you still need some airflow over a large surface area heat sink.
What utility is a fan in the vacuum of space? The real solution is not blasting to space a CPU that generates a lot of heat. That means they'll be "space hardened" SPARCs, or PowerPC, ARM, or Pentium grade chips.
Well, step one is actually delivering a human to step foot on Mars and eventually return to Earth alive & intact.
As for self sustaining colony, its pretty obvious that preparations would have to be made to manufacture technology to service the human population on Mars. And that is doable.
Establishing a Moon colony, which was the original point of my response, is a waste of time, but more important, a waste of resources (money) which could be put to traveling to Mars instead.
Its pathetic that I need to point out to you that something the size of the Moon, traveling at a percentage of light speed, would require centuries to get to another star, let alone a habitable one.
You're an idiot if you think you can attempt any such space project without having a grasp of the monetary investment needed, and the realization that some projects are too expensive to attempt.
I would say that the largest benefit would come if we dig down on the side facing away from Earth and built a radio telescope there.
Or we could plant a radio telescope on the far side of the Moon, and control it remotely, as we do for the Hubble Space Telescope. Until scientists find something to exploit on the Moon, there is no reason to invest in deploying a manned presence on the Moon.
Among the dreams of mars trips and a space elevator, which continue to sucker people and are nothing but perpetual-motion-level idiocy,
Like man flying; you're the idiot. I will say it bothers me when people still talk about a space elevator, when a space catapult or Lofstrom Loop is a more more realizable engineering endeavor. Zubrin designed a Mars space mission back in the 1980's; its thoroughly plausible to attempt, even limiting the project to 1980's technology.
a moon colony is something that will happen.
Not necessarily, because a permanent colony is a stupid thing to attempt. Its stupid because its not economically sustainable if it requires Earth support to exist. Until scientists determine there are vast pockets of Moon ice, or an exploitable economic good, like He3 or "valuable" metals in Moon craters, a Moonbase is not self-sustainable or economically worth it for a government to attempt.
Regardless of other reasoning or misgivings, the ability to start and maintain any presence on the moon is the first step to an interplanetary mission with humans.
Its a waste of money. Its like requiring a colony on the Azores before attempting to find a continent exploring the western sea.. If the project could dismantle the Moon colony as soon as it reaches its first year of sustained existence, then it wouldn't be economically damaging to a Mars attempt, which would be much more rewarding from an engineering standpoint.
No, it is about the same, since most of the cost involved is lifting material off the Earth. What makes Mars "less" preferable is the amount of time needed to travel to it and back.
and offers major provisioning problems as well because expeditions there pretty much **CAN'T** be supplied from Earth
Which makes it a more worthy endeavor. The three day transit time to the Moon is a phony psychological barrier. The reality is that we would rather let 100-1000 NASA employees die on the Moon than spend the money to make sure they could be rescued from an issue that would take longer than three days to kill them.
One can live underground far more cheaply and conveniently in Kansas, the Sahara, the Gobi, or the Australian outback.
It can't be done more "cheaply". Kansas land has a value on part with the GNP of many small nations.
The Sahara, Gobi, and Australian outback are a smidge more plausible. The Sahara would require invading and dismantling the government of the country that would contain this underground experiment. Australia is a smidge more plausible than the Sahara, since I believe Australians could concede there may be a region of the Outback that is not commercially exploitable, but Australia certainly doesn't have the disposable millions to attempt this. The Gobi is an option, but I'm pretty sure the Chinese would prefer to spend the money on building its economy, and not a gedanken science experiment. That leaves Antarctica, but I don't think you grasp that World War III would likely break out if a nation or mega corporation attempted such an underground project.
They won't be able to return to Earth without years of painful readaption to our higher gravity.
If they were born on the Earth, they don't structurally change enough that it would take years to recover; one year tops. If they're born outside of the Earth, structurally they'll never develop what they need to withstand Earth gravity. They'd have to figure out the pre-preparations and devices needed to live long enough to raise offspring; who would not have a problem with Earth gravity.
What would make sense would be to cancel this idiocy as well as its less expensive, but still wildly expensive and quite unproductive cousin, the International Space Station
If you think flinging spam in a can, walking on the Moon, and coming back alive is idiocy, there's no point talking to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Its insights like these which makes me hate the default choice to be anonymous.
What's fishy is why is a Canadian spending money to go to the US for veterinary school? Canada doesn't have veterinary schools?
She is more than capable of hiring an attorney and pretty much everything can be filed in absentia by her lawyer.
How fucking stupid you must be to believe that. If she's in hock for tens of thousands of dollars (potentially to escalate into 6 figure debt), how is she supposed to hire a competent lawyer to represent her in the US?
boycott going to college.
Easier said than done. Not going to college will by extension mean not being able to go to medical school, engineering school, and eliminate oneself from many occupations which require post-baccalaureate degrees.
With the Internet nowadays, you can learn about ANYTHING you want, for free.
No you can't. Its littered with paywalls, required texts, and even online college lectures aren't available for all the courses required to graduate.
There's a difference between saying "debt slavery for multiple decades does not make college a worthwhile endeavor" and saying "college is a waste of time (although for some people, it can be)".
It should be noted that NOTHING said before a Grand Jury can be used to bring criminal charges against the speaker. So if you're called to a Grand Jury, and they ask you "Did YOU murder that family?", if you say "Yeah, it was me that did it" then you just got away with murder...
That's not true. A statement like that would be considered "a confession" which was freely given. It also doesn't stop police investigators from collecting information that could be used instead to indict you with the crime. Its also quite possible to accidentally or incompetently self-incriminate oneself in grand jury testimony. That is why there is a 5th amendment that protects you from being compelled to provide testimony against yourself, but that's it.
Under no circumstances should a person ever speak and answer questions of/from a federal agent.
That's morally contemptible. Being silent rather than providing information to law enforcement that could avert or imprison persons conducting criminal activity is abetting the crime.
What should be said is "Any individual is in legal peril anytime they submit to questioning from a LEO. They can choose not to participate when asked by a LEO, cease to answer questions the moment they become suspicious of a LEO's line of questioning, or require the presence of a legal representative during questioning.".
what law they can possibly use to compel a witness in an investigation not related to any law which that witness may have broken.
A witness does not have to be a party to an illegal act to testify, but when summoned, they are legally required to provide testimony. If a witness bears false testimony to the grand jury, that is a crime. If the witness withholds information (that doesn't incriminate him/her) to potential criminal activity (i.e. refuse to testify), they demonstrate that they are participating in a criminal conspiracy (by withholding what they know). This is where the "contempt of court" charge leads to imprisonment.
YOU WON'T MIND WHEN THE US GOVERNMENT JAILS AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNALIST AND PUBLISHER FOR PUBLISHING AMERICAN SECRETS
I'd hardly call Assange an international journalist or Wikileaks a journalistic publisher. Any journalistic endeavor requires nominal standards of accuracy, verification to support their statements, and enough absence of bias to be considered news, and not propaganda.
I'd call Wikileaks a shitshow masquerading as journalists, the way the Trump administration masquerades itself as "responsible" governance.
Contrast that to Snowden, who funnelled information to known journalists with a track record of investigative reporting, and attempted to have them work with a known journalist publishing organization to vet the data, in order to not unduly jeopardize security operations, or endanger individuals.
While I would nominally agree that Assange is a cunt with a penis, there's no reason to believe the Russians gave him the RNC's emails, or that Assange would have motivation to withhold them. Assange is an Australian anarchist who hates the US government. He has no reason to prefer Republican fascists over Democrat fascists.
I do feel sorry for Manning though, sending her to jail and not even letting her be confined to home is bullshit.
Every American citizen has an legal obligation to testify when summoned to a grand jury. A grand jury cannot coerce information out of a witness, provided doing so violates 4th amendment protections. A witness cannot abet criminal activity by refusing to provide information to a grand jury. If for some reason they feel compelled to conceal that activity (or testimony), they are imprisoned for contempt of court. They aren't tortured for the information.
What's bullshit is not being subject to criminal liability, but choosing not to provide information about criminal activity against hapless victims.
I guarantee you that whatever functionality and collection that was being done is continuing under a different program.
Then you know of a specific instance where the illegal mass collection of US citizen data has thwarted a terrorist attack or dismantled a serious criminal conspiracy against the US or its citizens? The NSA isn't shutting down the program because of pangs of conscience; they want to use the money elsewhere, but they can't do so while its allocated to collectng more data than it can process. The whole issue is an albatross over their necks, and the senior management employees in the intelligence umbrella during the Obama administration have all moved on; there's no more management ass to cover.
Why would anyone believe anything the NSA says when they've been caught over and over blatantly lying to the public?
Well, that's true... But any assertion from the NSA is not conclusive proof that the NSA is factually untruthful.
There are lots and lots of ways for a contractor to report illegal activities. And it is a requirement that contractors be briefed on those ways every year.
But they don't get protection under whistleblower laws; they aren't considered federal employees. (The argument could be made that federal employees aren't protected by whistleblower laws...)
Law enforcement has pretty much ruled out ever charging a sitting president.
That is a misleading oversimplification. A paper pusher in DOJ back in 1973 decided that his interpretation of the CotUS meant that the PotUS could not be subject to criminal indictment. There is no validation that his legal theory is correct until it is evaluated in the courts; probably by the SCotUS. We will only know if this is legally considered correct when the argument is successfully used to throw out a prosecution.
The PotUS is definitely not safe from a "sealed" indictment; where the criminal prosecution can occur after the PotUS completes his presidential term. Furthermore, the PotUS, nor his subordinates, are beyond state prosecution, provided the state has standing to prosecute an indictment.
There's got to be at least a dozen more capable calculator apps out there for windows and Linux.
If there were, no one would be interested or ask for Microsoft to open source their calculator program. And, as usual, evangelists ignore what makes this source code desirable. People want accuracy and lack of bugs in their programs. Vetted, proven, production code is more valuable for reusability. Seasoned software professionals already know this.
R&D is a part of any tech companies' business expense. No one is making them spend on R&D. Taxpayers don't get shit for giving away their tax dollars to corporations. Fuck corporate assholes who think they're entitled to pay $0 in taxes.
Another company is not going to swoop into that area and pay 45,000 people $150k.
Who cares? Companies like Google, Apple, HMOs, etc. still plan on paying thousands of *qualified* employees $150K, and they were still going to pay taxes needed to support infrastructure like subways and roads.
Amazon wasn't going to move 45K tech employees to NYC, and then add 45K*$150K per year. They were going to poach the pool of *qualified* employees already working here, and hopefully the more competitive employer market would attract more qualified tech employees to move to NYC.
I didn't have a problem with subsidizing $3 billion of tax rebates to Amazon, or fucking over the unions and local politicians. Attracting a relatively large company such as Amazon is a way to perk up the employment market, and the $3 billion were more like subsidizing its startup costs. But lets not pretend that Amazon was going produce a huge new base of taxpayers for NYC.
NY taxpayers shouldn't be fleeced the way Wisconsin got fleeced by Foxconn. Fuck Amazon and its "give me a handout if you want me to make your employment pool more competitive". And FUAC for pretending to create jobs for NYC while putting NYers deeper in debt with corporate handouts, which we will then be expected to give out to every corporation!!!
I do wonder what they do about cooling. You don't have to underclock a modern server processor by much to dispense with the fan, but you still need some airflow over a large surface area heat sink.
What utility is a fan in the vacuum of space? The real solution is not blasting to space a CPU that generates a lot of heat. That means they'll be "space hardened" SPARCs, or PowerPC, ARM, or Pentium grade chips.
Well, step one is actually delivering a human to step foot on Mars and eventually return to Earth alive & intact.
As for self sustaining colony, its pretty obvious that preparations would have to be made to manufacture technology to service the human population on Mars. And that is doable.
Establishing a Moon colony, which was the original point of my response, is a waste of time, but more important, a waste of resources (money) which could be put to traveling to Mars instead.
Its pathetic that I need to point out to you that something the size of the Moon, traveling at a percentage of light speed, would require centuries to get to another star, let alone a habitable one.
This should be obvious. How can NASA make a serious attempt at budgeting for a multimillion manned project while Trump is PotUS?
You're an idiot if you think you can attempt any such space project without having a grasp of the monetary investment needed, and the realization that some projects are too expensive to attempt.
I would say that the largest benefit would come if we dig down on the side facing away from Earth and built a radio telescope there.
Or we could plant a radio telescope on the far side of the Moon, and control it remotely, as we do for the Hubble Space Telescope. Until scientists find something to exploit on the Moon, there is no reason to invest in deploying a manned presence on the Moon.
Among the dreams of mars trips and a space elevator, which continue to sucker people and are nothing but perpetual-motion-level idiocy,
Like man flying; you're the idiot. I will say it bothers me when people still talk about a space elevator, when a space catapult or Lofstrom Loop is a more more realizable engineering endeavor. Zubrin designed a Mars space mission back in the 1980's; its thoroughly plausible to attempt, even limiting the project to 1980's technology.
a moon colony is something that will happen.
Not necessarily, because a permanent colony is a stupid thing to attempt. Its stupid because its not economically sustainable if it requires Earth support to exist. Until scientists determine there are vast pockets of Moon ice, or an exploitable economic good, like He3 or "valuable" metals in Moon craters, a Moonbase is not self-sustainable or economically worth it for a government to attempt.
Regardless of other reasoning or misgivings, the ability to start and maintain any presence on the moon is the first step to an interplanetary mission with humans.
Its a waste of money. Its like requiring a colony on the Azores before attempting to find a continent exploring the western sea.. If the project could dismantle the Moon colony as soon as it reaches its first year of sustained existence, then it wouldn't be economically damaging to a Mars attempt, which would be much more rewarding from an engineering standpoint.
Mars is much worse cost wise
No, it is about the same, since most of the cost involved is lifting material off the Earth. What makes Mars "less" preferable is the amount of time needed to travel to it and back.
and offers major provisioning problems as well because expeditions there pretty much **CAN'T** be supplied from Earth
Which makes it a more worthy endeavor. The three day transit time to the Moon is a phony psychological barrier. The reality is that we would rather let 100-1000 NASA employees die on the Moon than spend the money to make sure they could be rescued from an issue that would take longer than three days to kill them.
One can live underground far more cheaply and conveniently in Kansas, the Sahara, the Gobi, or the Australian outback.
It can't be done more "cheaply". Kansas land has a value on part with the GNP of many small nations.
The Sahara, Gobi, and Australian outback are a smidge more plausible. The Sahara would require invading and dismantling the government of the country that would contain this underground experiment. Australia is a smidge more plausible than the Sahara, since I believe Australians could concede there may be a region of the Outback that is not commercially exploitable, but Australia certainly doesn't have the disposable millions to attempt this. The Gobi is an option, but I'm pretty sure the Chinese would prefer to spend the money on building its economy, and not a gedanken science experiment. That leaves Antarctica, but I don't think you grasp that World War III would likely break out if a nation or mega corporation attempted such an underground project.
They won't be able to return to Earth without years of painful readaption to our higher gravity.
If they were born on the Earth, they don't structurally change enough that it would take years to recover; one year tops. If they're born outside of the Earth, structurally they'll never develop what they need to withstand Earth gravity. They'd have to figure out the pre-preparations and devices needed to live long enough to raise offspring; who would not have a problem with Earth gravity.
What would make sense would be to cancel this idiocy as well as its less expensive, but still wildly expensive and quite unproductive cousin, the International Space Station
If you think flinging spam in a can, walking on the Moon, and coming back alive is idiocy, there's no point talking to you.
Damn, that's hilarious. What hair-brained scheme could be devised for today's humans to move or split an object the mass of the Earth?