That would depend on how you identified the people to be rounded up. Just driving down the street and selecting people on appearance, yeah that's illegal. If on the other hand you were to collect evidence that certain industries/locations were employing illegals and then raid them and check the documentation status of all the workers on site, that would likely be completely kosher. (I'm looking at you agriculture, meat processing and construction) Of course taking action against large corporations would mean a huge political outcry and a ton of lawsuits/drop in donations so it would never happen.
And that shows you, that public-face (illegals are bad!) and private behavior (oooh, I can employ these guys as contractors for a pittance and not have to pay payroll taxes, social security taxes, or other benefits!) will usually have the private behavior win-out.
That's why you wait a long time and have mandatory appeals at the circuit level before execution. Gives the public, even his sympathizers, time to forget, or time for it to just become a fact of life.
I'm assuming that they were not going to offer him a plea-deal, given how the State had a very compelling case with an orgy of evidence against him. I don't think that a guilty plea would automatically allow him to avoid a death sentence; arguably a guilty plea could have meant less time in front of a jury to make the case that he was a dumb kid manipulated into these acts by both a maniacal older brother whom he looked up to all his life, and that the community he was kept in as a minor up until only a year and change before the attack left him poorly able to make the right decision for himself.
He's gone through a trial phase, now he'll go through a penalty phase. That's almost like having two trials to make this point instead of the one (ie, the penalty phase) that he would have had before.
Assuming that federal courts with the death penalty work like the state court in my area it only takes one juror to avoid execution. If his defense team can credibly portray that his radicalization was both caused by his brother and that he truly understands now what he has done then that might be enough to keep at least one juror from voting for execution. Obviously we won't know until that phase concludes if such a strategy works.
I have a current driving licence, a current passport, etc. all the usual gubbins and have not once been required to give either of the above.
I'm sure someone will tell me some rubbish about facial biometrics and the shape of my chin, etc. but I'm not at all convinced on that either and we all know what simple cosmetics can achieve in the cheapest of TV shows.
And I have a beard and need vision correction, so it's unlikely that they could easily pick me out by the shape of my jawline or my eyes as those arguably have changed with differing beard length and style, along with different eyeglasses from time to time.
The question is, could enough of such pics actually cause the NSA to shed employees past the point of being unworkable? Would hundreds of thousands of such pictures finally push them over the edge and break the system?
The Japanese have been masters of production. One bomb, that could be a fluke. Two bombs, close together, both devastating, demonstrates that the manufacturer understands the process and could have more of them in the pipeline.
So they attempted to ride the coattails of Bitcoin and failed. Not exactly a surprise given that Bitcoin doesn't have a central authority on whose coattails to ride in the first place.
Would you accept a wildly volitaile, difficult to spend scrip that could be taxed at its highest exchange point or possibly even banned without any recourse, as your salary?
And pay to bring in a business-grade connection to a place where you have control over the environment, and operate a computer as a mail server in that environment, and work diligently to keep that mail server secure, plus work to ensure that your mail server is accepted to other mail servers somehow getting whitelisted.
I used to run my own services at home in this fashion. It was a pain in the ass. Most people are not capable of doing this.
I doubt that would have been enough. Attacking a sparsely populated area wouldn't have demonstrated the resolve that the United States was willing to completely annihilate Japan, and there wasn't enough material left to drop more than two more bombs in earnest.
If I remember my history correctly, there was only one more uranium core left by the time the Device, Little Boy, and Fat Man were used.
If what others in this thread have said is accurate, it sounds like the government of Japan wanted to unconditionally surrender after the firebombing of Toyko, but that the military was against it and probably would not have gone along with it had the government tried. The atomic bombs and the significant destruction they created made it clear that more total destruction would be coming in a cold, mechanized way. Didn't matter that the United States was effectively bluffing, we'd demonstrated that we could do it twice, so they couldn't count on us not being able to do it more times.
My point was that a Dresden-style bombing campaign would have expanded to the entire archipelago, urban and rural, and that the islands would have been reduced to a moonscape. Tokyo as it had been was destroyed, but there was a lot more of Japan left that hadn't been razed that could have been. Japan obviously hadn't surrendered to terms that the United States was willing to accept, and if the Japanese military was not ready to lay down arms then any internal debate amongst the Japanese couldn't really be considered by the US military. Fact of the matter is, we simply don't know how much continued firebombing and carpetbombing would have been necessary to force the Japanese military to accept their government's desire to surrender. If they hadn't been willing to surrender after the destruction of Tokyo then perhaps the bigger stick in the form of nuclear weapons was necessary.
I'm a little curious as to how quickly the Soviet Union could have entered the fray in useful strength. They had such a fight on their hands taking out Germany that I expect the bulk of their men and materiel were literally at the opposite end of the continent, and the Russian East has never been especially well developed. I expect it would have taken considerable time to shift all of the personnel, equipment, and supply lines to prepare for a meaningful assault on Japan. They also had the little matter of attempting to put large portions of their country, right up to their capital, back together after the pounding they took from the Germans.
We probably would have just spent considerable resources carpetbombing and firing battleship guns at them, long before setting foot on any of the main Japanese islands. Remember, by this point in the war the United States had figured out how to use radio for shell detonators; they were being used in antiaircraft weapons predominately but were used as antipersonnel shells too. They would detect an object and explode on detection. For antiaircraft use that was the aircraft itself, and for antipersonnel use it was the ground or the building it was fired at. I'm guessing that if the atomic bombs hadn't been developed or if their development had stalled further, new bombs and new shells designed to set fire to the predominately wooden structures that most Japanese people lived in would have replaced many of the high-explosive bombs used for military targets. Burn down the neighborhoods. Burn down the government buildings. Burn down the factories. Use the conventional bombs on the hardened military targets.
If such a scenario had played-out and the Japanese government had not surrendered and instead chosen to right for every inch of territory, then I do expect that all of those purple hearts would have been needed, and it would have been a lot bloodier for both sides, but arguably far worse for the Japanese than for the Americans and allies.
Or they can claim to have put bombs one school in the city, after they crash a subway train into a station, then use excavation equipment to rob a gold repository, to make it look like they planted the gold on a ship that they blow up in the middle of the harbor...
But they can respond with appropriate force levels, and with intelligence behind their response. Like contacting the security company to find out if the alarm is set or if there's any security cameras to get feeds from, or contacting the municipal director of the library services department to find out what the regular status of the building should be at that time to know if it should be open or closed or staffed or what.
There are a lot of checks that they can at least attempt to perform before storming the building in body armor.
I don't know anything about this "Internet Association", but given that the name really doesn't mean anything at all, if they are anti-net-neutrality then maybe they're pro-network-business, and as such they're trying to profit from both ends?
Just a guess. After all, I can name any organization anything that I want, even if that name is Orwellian doublespeak for exactly the opposite of what it sounds like it should be.
I've had an edition of that encyclopedia for many years. I feel that Shute's work is science fiction too, but it was not marketed as science fiction when it debuted and concepts of the end of the world, apocalypse, judgment day, etc are by no means the exclusive domain of science fiction. I also can sympathize with arguments that exclude fifties nuclear war paranoia stories outside of the realm of science fiction when they conjecture a desolate world that is simply dead or dying, as opposed to stories where nuclear war leads to the rise of fantastic creatures or superhuman abilities.
After all, if science fiction is defined too broadly, then all fiction about what could happen becomes science fiction, which simply isn't the case.
On the Beach was not marketed as a science fiction work. Features no aliens, no fantastic technology, no superhuman abilities. Doesn't even show a significantly different human culture. It tells a narrative of what could happen after what, at the time, was considered a distinct possibility in the form of nuclear war.
It's speculative fiction more than science fiction.
If the point is to judge the work on its merit, then knowing who the author is turns the competition into a popularity contest, and criteria other than the work itself become the basis for coming to a conclusion.
Orchestras switched to a system that didn't let the judge physically see or know who the musician was so that the quality of their playing, not their gender, race, or any other characteristic defined how they were rated.
Slashdot Mirror
That would depend on how you identified the people to be rounded up. Just driving down the street and selecting people on appearance, yeah that's illegal. If on the other hand you were to collect evidence that certain industries/locations were employing illegals and then raid them and check the documentation status of all the workers on site, that would likely be completely kosher. (I'm looking at you agriculture, meat processing and construction) Of course taking action against large corporations would mean a huge political outcry and a ton of lawsuits/drop in donations so it would never happen.
And that shows you, that public-face (illegals are bad!) and private behavior (oooh, I can employ these guys as contractors for a pittance and not have to pay payroll taxes, social security taxes, or other benefits!) will usually have the private behavior win-out.
Hypocrisy in action.
That's why you wait a long time and have mandatory appeals at the circuit level before execution. Gives the public, even his sympathizers, time to forget, or time for it to just become a fact of life.
I'm assuming that they were not going to offer him a plea-deal, given how the State had a very compelling case with an orgy of evidence against him. I don't think that a guilty plea would automatically allow him to avoid a death sentence; arguably a guilty plea could have meant less time in front of a jury to make the case that he was a dumb kid manipulated into these acts by both a maniacal older brother whom he looked up to all his life, and that the community he was kept in as a minor up until only a year and change before the attack left him poorly able to make the right decision for himself.
He's gone through a trial phase, now he'll go through a penalty phase. That's almost like having two trials to make this point instead of the one (ie, the penalty phase) that he would have had before.
Assuming that federal courts with the death penalty work like the state court in my area it only takes one juror to avoid execution. If his defense team can credibly portray that his radicalization was both caused by his brother and that he truly understands now what he has done then that might be enough to keep at least one juror from voting for execution. Obviously we won't know until that phase concludes if such a strategy works.
And those are teenagers, minors. I'm talking about adults ostensibly sending them to themselves.
I have a current driving licence, a current passport, etc. all the usual gubbins and have not once been required to give either of the above.
I'm sure someone will tell me some rubbish about facial biometrics and the shape of my chin, etc. but I'm not at all convinced on that either and we all know what simple cosmetics can achieve in the cheapest of TV shows.
And I have a beard and need vision correction, so it's unlikely that they could easily pick me out by the shape of my jawline or my eyes as those arguably have changed with differing beard length and style, along with different eyeglasses from time to time.
How could they incarcerate anyone for sending private self-made images that are not illegal from one of their personal e-mail accounts to another?
The question is, could enough of such pics actually cause the NSA to shed employees past the point of being unworkable? Would hundreds of thousands of such pictures finally push them over the edge and break the system?
The Japanese have been masters of production. One bomb, that could be a fluke. Two bombs, close together, both devastating, demonstrates that the manufacturer understands the process and could have more of them in the pipeline.
So they attempted to ride the coattails of Bitcoin and failed. Not exactly a surprise given that Bitcoin doesn't have a central authority on whose coattails to ride in the first place.
Would you accept a wildly volitaile, difficult to spend scrip that could be taxed at its highest exchange point or possibly even banned without any recourse, as your salary?
You know, 73.9% of statistics are made up on the spot...
And pay to bring in a business-grade connection to a place where you have control over the environment, and operate a computer as a mail server in that environment, and work diligently to keep that mail server secure, plus work to ensure that your mail server is accepted to other mail servers somehow getting whitelisted.
I used to run my own services at home in this fashion. It was a pain in the ass. Most people are not capable of doing this.
Users cannot be fixed. The best that we have is making our software as close to user-proof as possible. It will never be foolproof.
I doubt that would have been enough. Attacking a sparsely populated area wouldn't have demonstrated the resolve that the United States was willing to completely annihilate Japan, and there wasn't enough material left to drop more than two more bombs in earnest.
If I remember my history correctly, there was only one more uranium core left by the time the Device, Little Boy, and Fat Man were used.
If what others in this thread have said is accurate, it sounds like the government of Japan wanted to unconditionally surrender after the firebombing of Toyko, but that the military was against it and probably would not have gone along with it had the government tried. The atomic bombs and the significant destruction they created made it clear that more total destruction would be coming in a cold, mechanized way. Didn't matter that the United States was effectively bluffing, we'd demonstrated that we could do it twice, so they couldn't count on us not being able to do it more times.
My point was that a Dresden-style bombing campaign would have expanded to the entire archipelago, urban and rural, and that the islands would have been reduced to a moonscape. Tokyo as it had been was destroyed, but there was a lot more of Japan left that hadn't been razed that could have been. Japan obviously hadn't surrendered to terms that the United States was willing to accept, and if the Japanese military was not ready to lay down arms then any internal debate amongst the Japanese couldn't really be considered by the US military. Fact of the matter is, we simply don't know how much continued firebombing and carpetbombing would have been necessary to force the Japanese military to accept their government's desire to surrender. If they hadn't been willing to surrender after the destruction of Tokyo then perhaps the bigger stick in the form of nuclear weapons was necessary.
I'm a little curious as to how quickly the Soviet Union could have entered the fray in useful strength. They had such a fight on their hands taking out Germany that I expect the bulk of their men and materiel were literally at the opposite end of the continent, and the Russian East has never been especially well developed. I expect it would have taken considerable time to shift all of the personnel, equipment, and supply lines to prepare for a meaningful assault on Japan. They also had the little matter of attempting to put large portions of their country, right up to their capital, back together after the pounding they took from the Germans.
We probably would have just spent considerable resources carpetbombing and firing battleship guns at them, long before setting foot on any of the main Japanese islands. Remember, by this point in the war the United States had figured out how to use radio for shell detonators; they were being used in antiaircraft weapons predominately but were used as antipersonnel shells too. They would detect an object and explode on detection. For antiaircraft use that was the aircraft itself, and for antipersonnel use it was the ground or the building it was fired at. I'm guessing that if the atomic bombs hadn't been developed or if their development had stalled further, new bombs and new shells designed to set fire to the predominately wooden structures that most Japanese people lived in would have replaced many of the high-explosive bombs used for military targets. Burn down the neighborhoods. Burn down the government buildings. Burn down the factories. Use the conventional bombs on the hardened military targets.
If such a scenario had played-out and the Japanese government had not surrendered and instead chosen to right for every inch of territory, then I do expect that all of those purple hearts would have been needed, and it would have been a lot bloodier for both sides, but arguably far worse for the Japanese than for the Americans and allies.
Or they can claim to have put bombs one school in the city, after they crash a subway train into a station, then use excavation equipment to rob a gold repository, to make it look like they planted the gold on a ship that they blow up in the middle of the harbor...
But they can respond with appropriate force levels, and with intelligence behind their response. Like contacting the security company to find out if the alarm is set or if there's any security cameras to get feeds from, or contacting the municipal director of the library services department to find out what the regular status of the building should be at that time to know if it should be open or closed or staffed or what.
There are a lot of checks that they can at least attempt to perform before storming the building in body armor.
I'm glad he was able to redeem himself, after he shot Erkel.
I don't know anything about this "Internet Association", but given that the name really doesn't mean anything at all, if they are anti-net-neutrality then maybe they're pro-network-business, and as such they're trying to profit from both ends?
Just a guess. After all, I can name any organization anything that I want, even if that name is Orwellian doublespeak for exactly the opposite of what it sounds like it should be.
I've had an edition of that encyclopedia for many years. I feel that Shute's work is science fiction too, but it was not marketed as science fiction when it debuted and concepts of the end of the world, apocalypse, judgment day, etc are by no means the exclusive domain of science fiction. I also can sympathize with arguments that exclude fifties nuclear war paranoia stories outside of the realm of science fiction when they conjecture a desolate world that is simply dead or dying, as opposed to stories where nuclear war leads to the rise of fantastic creatures or superhuman abilities.
After all, if science fiction is defined too broadly, then all fiction about what could happen becomes science fiction, which simply isn't the case.
On the Beach was not marketed as a science fiction work. Features no aliens, no fantastic technology, no superhuman abilities. Doesn't even show a significantly different human culture. It tells a narrative of what could happen after what, at the time, was considered a distinct possibility in the form of nuclear war.
It's speculative fiction more than science fiction.
If the point is to judge the work on its merit, then knowing who the author is turns the competition into a popularity contest, and criteria other than the work itself become the basis for coming to a conclusion.
Orchestras switched to a system that didn't let the judge physically see or know who the musician was so that the quality of their playing, not their gender, race, or any other characteristic defined how they were rated.
"It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black." -Nigel Tufnel, This Is Spinal Tap