mens rea. Meaning that you have to have a guilty mind (i.e., intent) to have broken the law
My understanding of "mens rea" is that the defendant knew (understood) that they were performing the action (the "actus reus") irrespective of whether or not they knew that the action was illegal. Some people commit physical actions but don't know what they're doing... or can't stop themselves (e.g. the insane, underage child lashing out, etc).
And that the demonstration of intent (knowingly breaking the law) only exacerbates the offence.
Then again, IANAL, so my legal commentaries are probably as valuable as those of the underage child I mentioned above...
I refuse to vote for the 2 major parties. Many tell me I'm "throwing away my vote", as those for whom I vote have no chance of winning. And you know what? 99.9% of the time they're right! But...
-> every now and then, change does happen
-> when the assholes in power notice that their winning margins are thinning, you better believe it grabs their attention
he did not lose his freedom of speech at all; freedom of speech != freedom from any and all ramifications.
So in your version of the USA, people can say whatever they like, and consequently be (fired | publicly shamed | arrested | executed) and you consider that freedom of speech?
I'd hate to think what you consider to be a LACK of freedom of speech! Cutting-out of tongue at birth?
There's no way the politicians will change the law so they can no longer get paid
They may fight us, but I refuse to roll-over and play dead.
I'm moderately active in trying to raise awareness of such practices:
- I contact politicians and express my dissatisfaction
- I contact advocacy groups / unions / etc and show my support
- I add comments on popular Australian newspaper forums, aiming to raise awareness and expose the hypocrisy and moral corruption of our politicians
(if nothing else, I can at least sow disdain with the current parties)
- I contact journalists and give them suggestions for stories that will also raise awareness of corrupt practices
- I share facts with family, friends and colleagues -- again, to sow disdain with the current setup (conscious not to become overbearing)
And I always make it clear that I loathe both major parties in Australia. It pains me when I see my fellow Australians blindly support one party and vilify the other: both parties are horrible! I believe we need to weaken the major parties (which necessarily means more smaller parties) so that they adjust their stance and truly serve the public.
In the future, I'm hoping to mobilise my neighbours into getting active and seeking to participate in our local (municipal) politics. So many local seats are so darn marginal, one only needs to influence a couple of hundred people to change the outcome.
Yes, I'm very hopeful (naive? deluded?) but I've made some waves, and will continue to.
Please don't lose hope. Become a thorn in their side!
For a power company there is absolutely no difference whether YOUR washing machine stops washing and they have to get rid of the 1kW that machine was draining OR YOUR solar plant suddenly increases its output by 1kW.
Dang, that's a great example. I'm enjoying reading your responses; you're arming me with better arguments to counter those who irrationally favour protecting old energy giants instead of clean energy.
I'm happy to meet you half way: I don't mind paying extra for 10 - 15 years or so, until we transition to a society where the average home doesn't even need to be connected to an electric utility. As more homes disconnect, I expect utilities to raise the price of electricity, improving the ROI of alternative sources, accelerating the disconnection of residences.
So long as when the time comes, utilities don't try to prevent me from going off-grid. Or don't try to force a flat bill on me even if I don't use their service; just because they've got a few politicians in their pockets.
But I suspect that when that time comes they'll change their arguments. Because ultimately, these companies want to protect their profit margins, and renewal energy is a direct, and imminent, threat.
they need to try and think of another way of ending the conversation
That used to be me, when I was younger. However for several years now:
Salesperson: Hi sir. How are you today? Me: No thanks. [While I continue walking, without pausing.]
We have plenty of people in Sydney CBD streets trying to hawk something. Thankfully, I have never found them to be particularly aggressive / persistent.
I must say I agree with everything you wrote... except the whole "getting shot in the back". My approach would be to remain in the officer's presence, but to essentially remain mute (or indicate a disinclination to answer) -- surely he can't shoot you for not speaking??? -- until / unless I have my own legal representation.
In Australia, I believe (IANAL) that we are legally required to give our name, address and D.O.B to police if apprehended. That's it. Only a judge can compel one to speak; and then it becomes a broader issue if one chooses to disobey a judge. If a judge asks for your TrueCrypt passphrase, it's hard to know what you'd do when faced with a couple of years imprisonment.
And I say the above as someone whose life is incredibly mundane (and very law abiding); yet I still believe in the right to privacy.
There is nothing wrong with a buyer preferring to get a factory locked down box if they so choose.
Yes, there is. Can you honestly not see the gradual slide towards loss of freedom?
Why not make it optional? That way, a technical person could get into the menu and disable it. A non-technical person wouldn't even know this is possible, and leave it as default.
Problem solved, without imposing draconian measures on everyone!
There should be a permanent sh!tlist pinned to the top of Slashdot with any vendor that promotes this scheme for "PCs".
Yep, second this.
Given so many of us here on Slashdot are the go-to guys / gals for tech with our families and friends, we could certainly hit the manufacturer's where it hurts... in their hip-pockets! Bringing any such list to the attention of manufacturers may even dissuade them from attempting this. (?)
Well, that's essentially wordplay: technically, you ARE legally obliged to comply with the judicial system. However, is the judicial system morally fair?
If you ever travel to Saudi Arabia with your wife, do you consider it fair to physically beat her because she may disagree with you? Do you consider it morally right that a 12 year old girl can be married off? Do you think the Patriot Act is morally right? What about when US telco's broke the law and were granted retroactive immunity by the President, making it legal. Is that morally right? Do you think racial segregation was right? Women not allowed to vote? Slaves in ancient times?!
Just because something is LAW doesn't make it RIGHT.
Slashdot Mirror
One could host ownCloud with this plug-in on a home server (RPi?) but admittedly we're talking small numbers of people.
Ditto.
My primary reason for disk encryption is to protect my data from lost / stolen hardware.
But another benefit is that it makes it that much easier disposing of obsolete storage.
Quit making a boob out of yourself!
My understanding of "mens rea" is that the defendant knew (understood) that they were performing the action (the "actus reus") irrespective of whether or not they knew that the action was illegal. Some people commit physical actions but don't know what they're doing ... or can't stop themselves (e.g. the insane, underage child lashing out, etc).
And that the demonstration of intent (knowingly breaking the law) only exacerbates the offence.
Then again, IANAL, so my legal commentaries are probably as valuable as those of the underage child I mentioned above ...
Wrong. Read bullet-point "5" at the bottom of this page:
https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/products/vs-2015-product-editions.aspx
+5
I absolutely endorse your statements.
I refuse to vote for the 2 major parties. ...
Many tell me I'm "throwing away my vote", as those for whom I vote have no chance of winning.
And you know what? 99.9% of the time they're right! But
-> every now and then, change does happen
-> when the assholes in power notice that their winning margins are thinning, you better believe it grabs their attention
Here's what I have previously said on the subject.
Again, I absolutely agree with your stance.
Hey bud, you would have been better-off using this:
LastPass Adobe email hack check
LastPass got a hold of the database and offers a checking service.
So in your version of the USA, people can say whatever they like, and consequently be (fired | publicly shamed | arrested | executed) and you consider that freedom of speech?
I'd hate to think what you consider to be a LACK of freedom of speech! Cutting-out of tongue at birth?
They may fight us, but I refuse to roll-over and play dead.
I'm moderately active in trying to raise awareness of such practices:
- I contact politicians and express my dissatisfaction
- I contact advocacy groups / unions / etc and show my support
- I add comments on popular Australian newspaper forums, aiming to raise awareness and expose the hypocrisy and moral corruption of our politicians
(if nothing else, I can at least sow disdain with the current parties)
- I contact journalists and give them suggestions for stories that will also raise awareness of corrupt practices
- I share facts with family, friends and colleagues -- again, to sow disdain with the current setup (conscious not to become overbearing)
And I always make it clear that I loathe both major parties in Australia. It pains me when I see my fellow Australians blindly support one party and vilify the other: both parties are horrible! I believe we need to weaken the major parties (which necessarily means more smaller parties) so that they adjust their stance and truly serve the public.
In the future, I'm hoping to mobilise my neighbours into getting active and seeking to participate in our local (municipal) politics. So many local seats are so darn marginal, one only needs to influence a couple of hundred people to change the outcome.
Yes, I'm very hopeful (naive? deluded?) but I've made some waves, and will continue to.
Please don't lose hope. Become a thorn in their side!
Dang, that's a great example.
I'm enjoying reading your responses; you're arming me with better arguments to counter those who irrationally favour protecting old energy giants instead of clean energy.
Thanks! (Danke!)
I'm happy to meet you half way:
I don't mind paying extra for 10 - 15 years or so, until we transition to a society where the average home doesn't even need to be connected to an electric utility.
As more homes disconnect, I expect utilities to raise the price of electricity, improving the ROI of alternative sources, accelerating the disconnection of residences.
So long as when the time comes, utilities don't try to prevent me from going off-grid. Or don't try to force a flat bill on me even if I don't use their service; just because they've got a few politicians in their pockets.
But I suspect that when that time comes they'll change their arguments. Because ultimately, these companies want to protect their profit margins, and renewal energy is a direct, and imminent, threat.
And / Or right-wing politicians are protecting their political donations from -- and future board-level seats with -- big energy companies.
Interpreting as:
Interpret instead as:
That used to be me, when I was younger. However for several years now:
Salesperson: Hi sir. How are you today?
Me: No thanks. [While I continue walking, without pausing.]
We have plenty of people in Sydney CBD streets trying to hawk something.
Thankfully, I have never found them to be particularly aggressive / persistent.
Too true.
e.g. dog tag
Woot, I just learned a new word: "intumescent"
*sob* I love /. !
Nicely written.
I must say I agree with everything you wrote ... except the whole "getting shot in the back". My approach would be to remain in the officer's presence, but to essentially remain mute (or indicate a disinclination to answer) -- surely he can't shoot you for not speaking??? -- until / unless I have my own legal representation.
In Australia, I believe (IANAL) that we are legally required to give our name, address and D.O.B to police if apprehended. That's it. Only a judge can compel one to speak; and then it becomes a broader issue if one chooses to disobey a judge. If a judge asks for your TrueCrypt passphrase, it's hard to know what you'd do when faced with a couple of years imprisonment.
And I say the above as someone whose life is incredibly mundane (and very law abiding); yet I still believe in the right to privacy.
Yes, there is. Can you honestly not see the gradual slide towards loss of freedom?
Why not make it optional? That way, a technical person could get into the menu and disable it.
A non-technical person wouldn't even know this is possible, and leave it as default.
Problem solved, without imposing draconian measures on everyone!
Yep, second this.
Given so many of us here on Slashdot are the go-to guys / gals for tech with our families and friends, we could certainly hit the manufacturer's where it hurts ... in their hip-pockets! Bringing any such list to the attention of manufacturers may even dissuade them from attempting this. (?)
(a) Docking station.
(b) Your favourite setup -- with a single cable -- could also have fallen behind the desk.
To be fair, he gave you a good example of where USB would be safer than Thunderbolt:
There's physical access, and then there's physical access.
Aside from Gigaom, my knowledge of Om comes from watching him many times on Twit, and he seemed like a very genial, knowledgeable individual.
Now if AC has personal experience with Om, that's another story.
Well, that's essentially wordplay: technically, you ARE legally obliged to comply with the judicial system.
However, is the judicial system morally fair?
If you ever travel to Saudi Arabia with your wife, do you consider it fair to physically beat her because she may disagree with you?
Do you consider it morally right that a 12 year old girl can be married off?
Do you think the Patriot Act is morally right?
What about when US telco's broke the law and were granted retroactive immunity by the President, making it legal. Is that morally right?
Do you think racial segregation was right? Women not allowed to vote? Slaves in ancient times?!
Just because something is LAW doesn't make it RIGHT.
Heh heh! Good pick-up, nicely done.