... get a room. Don't do this in view of the public (or drones). I'm not a prude and have nothing against prostitution. But this sort of behavior just provides ammunition for the social conservative nut-cases.
No problem. Let's just enter that NSL into evidence and see exactly what it does or does not say we are allowed to do. Eventually, the FBI/NSA/whoever is going to run up against a company with deep enough pockets. And that company will find it worth it's while to screw with them for a while. And maybe even make them look like a bunch of fools in front of a judge.
Keep in mind that this entire NSL garbage is a maneuver to bypass judicial oversight and the search warrant system. So I imagine there are a lot of judges that are just aching to get these TLAs into court and rake them over the coals.
... are a price you pay for anonymity. No persistent logins and getting bounced back to the 'Please identify your country/region' page. Too bad. I use private browsing (a far cry from Tor-like anonymity) and I have to go through this all the time. Big deal.
If the alternative is some temporary identity token which might be abused by 'bots, I'm OK with CAPTCHAs.
Probably not. Rumor has it that it's an Israeli company. And most companies based in foreign nations that are involved in security or intelligence work are not available for purchase by outsiders. Or anyone not inside the good old boys intelligence circle (definitely not Apple).
... a Global Citizen? And how can we be sure that they are expressing their own beliefs and not voting to please their nations' secret police to stay out of the gulag? I suppose we could trust this survey if it were conducted on a dark net.
"The State" as in the federal government is prohibited from interference with peoples right to keep and bear arms. It grants nothing. The people already have that right.
Also used in India. This could be foresight on the part of BARTs designers, as they anticipated accommodating increased ridership by placing passengers on top of the cars. The wider gauge is more stable and less likely to shake them off.
The second amendment doesn't address infringing upon the formation of a militia. That's already addressed in the body of the Constitution. The infringement prohibited is the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
If by some stretch you think that there should be some grounds to prohibit firearm ownership to certain people, that would also disqualify them from joining the militia. No problem there. But there may also be conditions that prohibit them from joining the militia which have no bearing on their ability to keep firearms. And those conditions might be completely under the control of the state or some political entity. So they could be used as a de facto back door to arming political friends and disarming enemies, for example. By manipulating the militia (and firearm ownership) regulations to suit their whims.
The idea that membership in a political organization was a prerequisite for a firearms permit goes back to 1930s in Germany.
Slashdot Mirror
Outsource it.
Not interested.
"It is the most faggy goddamned thing you could ever imagine." -- R. M. Nixon
7 billion intelligent meat bags and a few billion big animals
All they want is the cat food.
The lesson here is form a co-op an run a brothel,
So then this guy will open a motel and rig the rooms for video. He could name it the Bates Motel .....
Is prostitution illegal in the US or something?
It's not a federal law. On a state-by-state basis, prostitution is illegal in 49 of 50 states.
He probably masturbates
With a name like Mr. Bates .....
3. He isn't American.
This.
Thanks to regulations, American scientific inquiry by young people is limited to how to mod a vaper to volatilize hash oil.
I'll wait until they support Linux and OSX
It took my tailor 60 years to make.
This is why certain people shouldn't read SlashDot
Read it? I barely parse the subject line before formulating a response.
Still waiting for Microsoft to jump up and yell "April Fools" over the Metro UI.
Try to argue in court against a judge
No problem. Let's just enter that NSL into evidence and see exactly what it does or does not say we are allowed to do. Eventually, the FBI/NSA/whoever is going to run up against a company with deep enough pockets. And that company will find it worth it's while to screw with them for a while. And maybe even make them look like a bunch of fools in front of a judge.
Keep in mind that this entire NSL garbage is a maneuver to bypass judicial oversight and the search warrant system. So I imagine there are a lot of judges that are just aching to get these TLAs into court and rake them over the coals.
If the alternative is some temporary identity token which might be abused by 'bots, I'm OK with CAPTCHAs.
So use the systemd halt service.
A Tor use is clearly hiding something illegal.
Posted by Anonymous Coward.
Probably not. Rumor has it that it's an Israeli company. And most companies based in foreign nations that are involved in security or intelligence work are not available for purchase by outsiders. Or anyone not inside the good old boys intelligence circle (definitely not Apple).
And they have plenty of reasons to lie.
Just watch. Every 'no knock' warrant served in So Cal for the next few years will be based on 'intelligence' gathered from Farook's phone.
Done
"The State" as in the federal government is prohibited from interference with peoples right to keep and bear arms. It grants nothing. The people already have that right.
No great loss. The pictures it would have returned were bound to be heavily pixelated anyway.
Also used in India. This could be foresight on the part of BARTs designers, as they anticipated accommodating increased ridership by placing passengers on top of the cars. The wider gauge is more stable and less likely to shake them off.
The second amendment doesn't address infringing upon the formation of a militia. That's already addressed in the body of the Constitution. The infringement prohibited is the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
If by some stretch you think that there should be some grounds to prohibit firearm ownership to certain people, that would also disqualify them from joining the militia. No problem there. But there may also be conditions that prohibit them from joining the militia which have no bearing on their ability to keep firearms. And those conditions might be completely under the control of the state or some political entity. So they could be used as a de facto back door to arming political friends and disarming enemies, for example. By manipulating the militia (and firearm ownership) regulations to suit their whims.
The idea that membership in a political organization was a prerequisite for a firearms permit goes back to 1930s in Germany.