i have insurance for ALL device on my person carte of a rider on my homeowners insurance. There's a $100 deductible (per incident, not per device), and it covers loss, theft, accidental, and incidental damage. It covers me, my wife, anything in our cars, and anything a 3rd party has on them while they're with us so long as they're "staying with us" for the night. (for example, and this was the specific example they gave: my parents come to stay for the holidays, and we go out to dinner. While out, seeing a movie, my car is broken into and Dad's camera and laptop are stolen. HIS stuff is covered by my insurance. Same goes if we're mugged. If I drop his DSLR trying to take a picture, also covered).
It costs me about $45 a year for this rider on my policy. it has a $10,000 per incident coverage, and $25,000 annual maximum. (default is much less, but I'll regularly travel with 2 laptops, a media device, a few phones, and several cameras, so i could easily have 10K worth of gear in my car).
This is an extension of the electronics rider on the policy, which bumped my home electronics coverage from $5k to 25K of covered items, which itself cost about $14 a year more, and I added the accidental/incidental clause for a bit more. (note to all you with homeowners insurance, the default electronics and appliance coverage likely does not even cover your fridge, washer, dryer, water heater, AC, heater, etc, let alone your TV, stereo, computers, devices, and more. Without this rider, those each need to be itemized with your insurer, or if you burn down or take a bad lightning strike, you'll be left holding the bag for the difference! Talk to your insurer and make you everything is not only covered, but covered for COMPERABLE OR BETTER REPLACEMENT, most only covers depreciated value, which is worthless! Talk to your insurer and make sure you have an electronics rider!!!)
I buy warranties on most devices, and always pay for at least $10 of the device using my Visa card as well (even when financed otherwise), so I get the additional 1 year warranty extension from them. However, the additional coverage for loss and damage is WELL worth it. I regularly get devices replaced within the 3-5 year terms. In fact, I've not bought a printer/fax in nearly 10 years thanks to BestBuy, but i get a new one about every 18-24 months and buy a new $29 warranty on it.
I've had 2 cases where I used the insurance. One time I was bumped at a trade show, and destroyed a several hundred dollar lens on my camera, filed a report and had the cash in a few days. The other time, my was a car wreck that destroyed a laptop. I've never used it for "malicious" purposes, but I did get IN WRITING from my provider that I was in fact covered for "fits of anger" though i was cautioned that frequent use of that clause could get my insurance dropped. However, since I'm using home insurance on 2 houses, 2 cars, multiple rider policies, and some additional coverage, all from the same company, odds are the near $3500 a year I pay them is keeping them happy enough to replace a few minor devices if I chose to.
Actually, the United States is not a Democracy. It's a Socialist Federated Democratic Republic. Always has been, since the first taxes were collected and used for a public project.
People might believe that poeple of an opposite view might become violent. However, that's not the case of law, it;s whether or not the people joining the organization know it;s INTENT is Violent, and that it specifically provides materials and training in preparation for a violent act.
Just because some physical fighting, possibly involving guns, is possible in the minds of some nut job paranoids who can't even identify that we in fact ARE a form of socialist government (and so is nearly every government on EARTH!) does not mean people are ORGANIZING with the express intent to overthrow our government by violent means. If they are, they have to register...
Actually, there are a significant number of issues.
ENGINES may be handling it fine, whoever, fuel lines and gas tanks are corroding from the inside out due the the ethanol in the gas. Multiple car companies, including Lexus, Toyota, GM and more) have had recalls to replace damaged fuel systems, and there have been fuel leaks, car fires, and deaths associated with the change to ethanol vs MTBE. Ethanol also eats through fiberglass fuel cannisters and tanks in other vehicles. If you car, lawnmower, or other vehicle has a Fiberglas fuel tank DO NOT use an ethanol blend of gas, it will destroy your fuel system, cause build-up in your engine, and could be a serious fire hazzard.
In older cars, Ethanol is also corrosive to engine seals (rubber vs more modern carbon composite seals). Over time this dramatically drops the efficiency of the engine further, and can cause engine failure after long term exposure.
Further, the core reason for replacing MTBE with ethanol was the prevention of pollutants in runoff, however we've learned since then it was actually the fuel oxygenates, not the MTBE, causing this pollution, and with ethanol being less fuel efficient (fewer joules per litre) than MTBE, there's now a push to replace it again.
If you car is not a "flex-fuel" vehicle, you should NEVER put anything over 10% ethanol in your car, and if possible, but ethanol-free fuel. Flex fuel vehicles have both custom fuel systems, and are designed to run alcohol fuels without risk of corrosion of critical components. They also have computers programmed to adjust to the changing oxygen and compression requirements of different fuels. 10% won't cause serious power issues with your car, but over several years of use, especially in humid environments of if moisture gets in your fuel tank, the damage is very real. 2 cycle engines like lawn equipment are extremely susceptible as well. What makes matters worse, there's no good system for guaranteeing the ethanol content in gasoline. The pump says it's "up to 10%" however field testing of tanker trucks hauling fresh fuel have found as high as 30% content. The local blending done at distribution centers varies, and they'll make whatever blend is cheapest to make based on the current price of the components of the fuel. In some cases, ethanol is actually cheaper than regular gas, and they'll overuse ethanol. If your engine has trouble, and you bring it in for service, and it;s not a flex-fuel car but your ethanol content is over 10%, they'll assume you used e85 at some point, and void your warranty. This has happened a LOT (check various forums).
Well, reading it isn't exactly the same as joining the party either....and in todays world, do you think there's a single sane person who believes the Communist Party is actually a group of violent people hellbent on overthrow of the US government through force?
Me thinks this is simply a ploy to keep people on existing, non-700MHz technology for their phone plans, so that Verizon can avoid "open network" devices for a longer time period. Essentially, wether or not your device, that you acwuired from a non-Verizon source, has ANY voice network chip in it other than strictly LTE, then Verizon could refuse it on their network, or refuse to allow the device you bought from them on someone lese's network...
Undermining the stability of the economy may be a bad thing, and should be punishable if it can be proven they did so with knowledge of the potential outcomes, and for their own profit and benefit. However, undermining the economic stability of a nation is not in itself equivalent to an attempt to overthrow a government, nor does it include the additional requirements of the Smith Act in that is must a) be intended to be done both by force of violence, and at the soonest opportunity, b) recruits brought into the offending organization must be brought in under that impression, that they are being recruited to, though violence, overthrow the government.
Also, they're registered as a bank in SC, and therefor, most juries would assume them criminals in SC, therefor the statute of requiring them to register or pay a fine is met:)
If you're making an express effort to be private (traveling in tinted cars from behind private doors) then you'll also equally have the ability to disable locate. There's no difference. 1 in 10,000 people go to that effort, and the law is not made for exceptions, it's made for the general wellbeing and protection of the people. 1 in 10,000 is not the "people" We make exceptions to the law, and we make exceptions in court. If they do collect this data they can legally collect, a judge can still throw it out, and even due process may not be good enough for the cop you;re suing if his justification was "just in case". All invasion by investigation must have an explicit planned result before it is collected. Besides, we could just as easily follow EVERY car leaving a residence to target sites and back, and have "reasonable" ideas as you your location.
However, this level of privacy ONLY applies to those SEARCHED. If you're hiding from locate, and we want you, they'll just GET A WARRANT and remotely turn it on anyway... If you put a warrant in the way, and they have due process, they'll get the warrant, whether or not you;re really a suspect, simply as long as you're associated and there's due process. If you;re not associated, they're NOT looking you up, as this search has ELECTRONIC PROOF, further, nothing is stopping the phone company from NOTIFYING you that you were pinged (many do, as soon as the investigation is closed), nor does anything prevent you from cross checking them by making a FIA request to FIND OUT if they're snooping on you (as the billing record of them searching your locale would be public documentation, even though any active case would not be).
If you have no concerns about being watched by ordinary citizens in public (which is statistically orders of magnitude more dangerous to your person and your privacy than being watched by authorities), then this system has no implications. It's also not a real time monitored nor a random system, and is only activated through due process. if they were tracking everyone everywhere, we'd have issue for sure. Of course, your PHONE COMPANY IS TRACKING YOU, and the data they collect IS for sale (it's just anonymized, which on a large scale, is how the government would see it themselves, just a mass data set).
All you're saying is, essentially, in exchange for a judges purview after data is collected on a suspect (due process of evidence admission), you want it done first (warrant), and done every time. This increases costs and puts strain on the court system, but offers a tiny bit of public assurance (keeps the paranoid like you happy). However, the REALITY is that if due process is brought to a judge for a non-invasive electronic location search of a suspect, it would ALWAYS be permitted, so in essence, this request buys NO ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS. That is the deminition of the rule for when the supreme court determines something requires or does not require a warrant. Would, in reasonable cases, a request for a warrant ever be denied? No? no warrant required. Done. This is such a common and approved request, like pulling phone records, no judge provided probably cause would ever refuse. Since regardless of the scenario, whether they pull the data with or without a warrant, should it effect your life or freedom on any level, a judge reviews it either way. If he deems at a later point that due process was NOT followed, you get a nice civil case against some cops. The cops KNOW THIS, and thus do not abuse this privileged. If a cop wants to find you, HE WILL, and with or without a warrant, stopping this location search has NO BEARING, it is simply one of many available tools that already require no warrant to accomplish the same goal.
that said, this does NOT mean that your entire cell phone tracking history is admissible in court... No, FURTHER collection of that data WILL require a warrant. However, request of a piece of data as in "where were you at X o'clock on Z date" can be accessed in this system, and THAT is not
However, Mac OS was not the pioneer of the GUI. Lisa OS if anything was the start 2 years earlier, however, even this tipped a big hat and admittedly had significant influence from the Xerox Alto and PARC. PARC introduced windows, radio buttons, and icons in the first WYSIWYG GUI. Lisa added a contextual menu bar system on top of this work, as well as drag and drop. System (1.0), the original Mac OS lacked many of Lisa's features, which would not be included until System 7, and some not until OS X 10.0... system (1.0) even lacked an HFS file system instead using a flat file system. System X (1-4) was a fairly limited GUI compared to the Lisa, unfortunately, the Lisa was more complicated, and it's hardware was more than double the price, and thus failed.
I had my 14.4 running at 19.2 with a firmware crack, and my 28.8 running at 56K (then 64K) with a similar crack. I've seen 14.4s running at 56K as well. Especially the US Robotics external models (which were FAR FAR FAR superior to internal modems on every level!)
We've been on Mobileme since the.Mac years, about the time OS X 10.3 came out. Never had any issues with it, other than some post-launch bugs with mobileme in 2008.
Certainly no issues with e-mail (Mom and Dad use it as their primary accounts, My wife uses it as her secondary). Syncing is sometimes wierd, but usually only when there's very little space on the.mac drive.
I'm expecting a huge cut in the price (down to $39 a year if not 29), an again doubling if not more of the storage (I think up to 100GB per account soon), much tighter integration with the iPad, and more. There's a lot coming from Apple's cloud computing initiatives, and current mobileme users are going to reap some big benefits at cut over for their loyalty I'm sure. Improved online backups, new iWeb with a more web 2.0 focus, better integration with flicker/facebook/etc, streaming services, back-2-my-mac improvements, and more.
Lisa was revolutionary, it was the PRICE that sucked big time. A basic PC for a student, a school, or a small office that didn't need complex spreadsheets or graphically impressive documents was about half the price. Apple misjudged how people would quantify the value of WYSIWYG, and overpriced and over engineered the system (not to mention bundling in too much R&D cost into the initial run).
The Lisa and the Macintosh XL were virtually the same. The Macintosh (original) was a different OS platform completely (different ROM) , and was far less powerful (though it was slightly faster in terms of CPU, having aged 2 years). The big separation between Lisa and Macintosh was the Lisa was a workstation class machine, and the Mac was a home computer. It even had a HDD, Protected Memory (not otherwise available until OS X!), virtual memory, and cooperative multitasking. The OS was a bit more complex than the Mac OS, but better in many ways.
We did not trade ours in for a Mac Plus, as many other people did (which included a cash rebate in addition to the trade), as there was no easy way to convert the lisa files we'd created into Mac files, and we had a TON of work on it. Instead, we actually bough a Mac to go beside it, and started a slow process of remaking all our docs on the Mac. We sold the Lisa to a museum in 2006, it still worked.
Agreed. i had many a $100+ bill from AOL in the early days (which, btw, was itself Mac Only for quite some time, 1989 - 1991, Mac only, Dos in 1991, Windows 3.x not until 1993..., AOL 3.0 was the first 32 bit version for PCs.) I played a lot of Neverwinter Nights on AOL in the early days...
No, eWorld died because a) most Mac users couldn't run it, b) they had a limited list of providers, and came a bit late to the game behind Prodigy and Compuserve and AOL making it difficult to find others online who shared the same service, and AOL was still a closed network at that time (no open Internet until 1995?), and c) it had virtually zero marketing budget, limited almost exclusively to posters in Apple stores, which Mac owners rarely visited, and attempts for Quantum to include the software free with systems got killed before the PC version released (it never did, but was nearly complete).
I agree. My PowerComputing system was in fact the bet Mac I ever owned. No, not compared to existing performance, but it was made entirely of server class components, highly expansible, i even had an x86 processor on a card in it running Windows in a VM! What you got for the money, what it included, and how far ahead of the competition (Apple as well as PC)it was is completely amazing.
I had that machine from 1995 until 2002, when i sold it to a law firm that had another one with a dead motherboard. I paid just over $1600 for it initially, and 7 years later sold it for $850. It was still running in 2006 last I heard from that client.
1) turn of locate if you want to be private. It's only turned on otherwise by a warrant (yes, a warrant, not just due process), or when you dial 911 and your phone switches to the secure mode for doing so. 2) When the technology improves, congress will again have to REQUEST further access, and if a judge sees that as getting too private, it will become a warrant-able request. That's on a technology by technology basis for now, and thus far it's working. 3) it's real time only when they click "refresh" over and over (and pay for each click). I've seen this system hands on. I doubt you have. A local department was criticized for having several thousand requests (in excess of the local population count in a year) for access for data during a public records search about a year ago, but when the data was actually analyzed, they found it was for only a couple hundred suspects, with multiple hundred requests in short periods of time.
If the local laws in Baltimore fly in the face of national law, then either replace your local politicians, or get a lawyer to follow through with a case and have the law overturned in higher court. Complaining about it gets you nowhere. If you don't like it, and can't stand waiting, MOVE, the rest of the country seems to do just fine. I'm not an expert in your local laws, but I've seen first hand federal laws trump very similar local laws.
next, whether or not a car is drivable matters nothing to the state as far as the regulation for tags, taxes, and insurance. It has a VIN number, it must be tagged, unless you get official documentation from your DMV otherwise (typically requires the car to be a classic in the process of reconstruction).
A cop may not care for a GPS history, but his SUPERVISOR will. it;s your RIGHT to request a supervisor on-site before any search (as well as a lawyer, which I'd recommend). However, if it went that far, and the cop was a real ass, and the supervisor went with it, that GPS log data would be an EASY victory in court and get you a few grand (likely many tens of thousands) on a harassment and illegal search charge, and the cop, and probably the supervisor, would be out of work. Your failure to enforce your rights is not my problem. Also, there's no "lawsuit" for the damage to your car, they simply PAY UP, as part of due process, in the form of a settlement based on your insurance companie's estimate, as this saves the trouble and expense of the suit they loose (and trust me, they pay, otherwise the insurance company has to, and THEIR lawyers WILL fight it).
A tip may be filed, however, if that's the case, your neighbor is risking long term imprisonment by filing an illegitimate tip. If it;s real, and you got caught (sounds like you did), then he was being a GOOD CITIZEN, and should be rewarded for having the courage to turn in a neighbor for breaking the law. If it was a "false tip" which as you say nothing can prevent from happening, and the cops do act (which is DUE PROCESS DEFINED), then that guy gets a nasty visit from the cops in return when they find the tip a bad one.
If your friend was never served, and have a valid address based on his currently local ID, and had a job he was paying taxes on, then it should be damned easy for even a court appointed lawyer to get your friend off. I'm sure there were mitigating circumstances (like he lied about not being served). If the DA falsified records, go prove it, it's easy to prove... Oh, that didn't happen? Probably wasn't fake. Your own story collaborates that the records needed to be corrected, and he was to be properly served. This sounds ongoing,and that he has not reappeared in court for what he was improperly summonsed for. Sounds like he has a good case for lost compensation coming to him. Hope he has a good lawyer (one that sees this process through to the point he's working exclusively free only for a cut of the settlement, assuming that's larger than a pre-negotiated amount, and if not, it;s because even his lawyer thinks he's guilty or has not case.
I've been through rough patches with the courts myself, due to paperwork issues related to switching from a local insurer to a national one (the local guy was pissed I left, and filed a "self terminated" insurance form with the DMV, who canceled my license, then i hit a check point. I got a "ticket" but was let go since I did have proof of insurance on me, though not what the DMV record showed. I had to show up in court with my insurance transfer paperwork and show proof of insurance from the date it ended, which i had. The local insurer lost his certification, spent 30 days in jail, paid my fine ($75 for not having a valid license, which I had to pay to get in re-instated while waiting for a court date), and paid my legal fees, and lot time from work (3 total days). It was a hassle, but it happens, and I'm glad they actually care to CHECK for insurance, even if there are flaws in the documentation process that let an occasion
It's fracking unlocked!!! It requires no plan the store is OPEN TO ALL, with over 150,000 apps and growing.
The ONLY think that is locked is the OS, and they don;t like outright porn only because there's no good parental control system. (once an app is bought, it;s bought, there's no use level control yet, wait for OS 4...).
The point is NOT for this to be a full fledged PC, the point is exactly so that you DO NOT have to drag out a PC every time you want to do something quick, or stream a movie, or create a simple document, nor do you need to have your phone handy to get notifications. This is always on, and convenient.
Safari is 100% ACID 5, HTML 5 and Webkit compatible. As long as your form is not generated in Flash (it should NOT be, for a hundred security reasons), then safari can open it. I work for a MAJOR insurance provider, and we have a few tens of millions of people hitting our sites, and have thousands of web based forms, all ie6 native. Safari supports all of them. I use Safari as my primary browser (for the history search functions mostly, that's a awesome system, that and it's fast, and rarely crashes, and uses sandboxed sessions). I have no issues at all unless the site REQUIRES either flash or silverlight (and there's a silverlight plug-in for the mac already, and it;s in development for the iPad, as is office 2010...)
If you run a company, and you expect ANYONE with a Mac might access your site and need a form, then i suggest your Devs include safari in their testing (we do). The iPad also has a local file system, if you bothered to actually read the documentation out there (you CAn save and export files, how else could you EDIT them?)
Wrong. It's an "instant gratification" platform. A PC Companion. The bridge device you use to control your home theater, chat on social sites, make a phone call, respond to messages, and more (most importantly including EDIT THE QUICK DOCUMENT), WITHOUT having to turn on a PC. In addition to that, it's a a full color e-reader, surfing platform, comic book platform, media player, and car video screen (hang it from the back of your seat and let the kids watch, instead of adding a SEPARATE car movie screen).
It;s everything the iPod/iPhone isn't good at because of the small screen, it's always on receiving notifications like a phone and powers on instantly unlike a PC, and it requires no active patching regiment or security software. Finally, it shares apps with all your other Apple devices without buying additional (expensive) licenses.
Its a near perfect platform in between. Something to leave lying around that keeps you informed and communicating without having to lug around (and contactly plug in) a PC.
When i see something on TV i want to look up, I don;t want tyo wait 3 minutes for a laptop to boot, connect to the net, and finally do a search, with an iPad, I can do that, and also handle more than the occasional message (managing e-mail is as important as simply reading it, and the iPhone is a terrible e-mail management platform, but a PC is a wholly inconvenient platform, this solves BOTH issues. It;s is SO worth $600 to me...
Actually, a couple THOUSAND people touched it, at the release. Tens of thousands of developers are working with the GUI. Press was given ample opportunity to do everything other than an extended personal review (which is mostly unnecessary at this point given it;s the same OS, the only real differences are in performance and form factor, which can be analyzed in minutes).
OK, example 1, due process if followed, and yes in Bltimore, upon a tip and due process followed, they can invade if they "witness a crime in progress" which must be completely documented. They can NOT just "break in" on a tip. You have not studied that case law.
Illegal car on your property, that's all they nbeed to know. bot no, they won't enter the locked garrage on a tip alone, but that tip might get an officer to "pay attention" and if they see the garrage open, or if you drive the car, yes, they'll document it, then come back and take it.
In many states, your PROPERTY is not private, only the inside of your home is, since people like meter readers and public servants need access to your LAND. Further, a standing garrage qualifies differently in some states. They can't search it without a warrant, but they can impound a car inside of it then have evidence of. (typically, they ask to see it or see it themselves, the city really doesn't care enough to risk a lawsuit over a small municipal fine).
In SC driving without a license on your person is a $75 fine, but more importantly, they can't let you continue to drive without it unless you have other documents proving your identity, and your insurance on you, and they look up and validate your currently active license and lack of warrants against you.
Being in public is not probable cause. Getting pulled over is. eing parked in a known drug neighbood might be enough, but so long as you don;t stop there, even if a cop does pull you over, you can easily POINT AT YOUR GPS and show him you;ve been following a route, at which point, probable cause is refuted, and you can not be searched unless he finds another reason (object in plain sight, runs your tag and finds open unpaid violations, etc).
If the city disassembles your car, or causes DAMAGE to your property, without a warrant, then they ARE liable for the damage. I've seen this to on a street side, but only after they've called in a warrant, or only after they found illegal drugs in the car, or only if the person has outstanding warrants and is a know drug trafficker. You have to understand, the cop doing that teardown, first off he's not doing his "assigned" duty of pulling people over, so he had to call in that change, and get backup to tear the car down. Next, that's a risk to the city, and he's gonna have to do a LOT of paperwork later, and even more if he's wrong. If he is wrong, you got inconvenienced, and you get your car rebuilt on the city's dollar, and he'll NEVER do that again, nor will anyone in his division.
Suing a cop for illegally collecting evidence? Yea, it does work. Seen it happen. And that eviodence, as much as the court hates it, gets thrown out. I'm actually in favor of it NOT getting thrown out, so long as the cops punishment for illegal collection if at least 50% of your conviction. How many copy do you know who'd risk a year in jail to see you get 2, huh?
Get a clue? this is case law fact moron. You're the one not living in reality. I'm an Italian from a NY italian family. I've got friends and collegues and family who are lawyers, cops, firemen, and more. I;'ve SEEN this crap first hand. Cops are not evil. They have families. And they're PARANOID about people like you who take away their power to defend themselves from real criminals, and all they care about is putting away real criminals. They don't give a SHIT about joe bob who minds his business and plays nice with society. They have no reason to risk their job or freedom just to see who their friend's wife might have been seeing on the side. (they can find that out easy enough just by driving around town).
All a warrant is boils down to preapproval for evidence collection. Due process colelcts evidence, but that eveidence is subject to REVIEW post-collection, prior to being admissible in court. That's it, that's the ONLY difference.
Due Process is the documentation that exists to prove the collection itself was "reasonable"
The 5th amendment clarifies this, the 4th amendment does NOT stand alone as a single statement.
The courts, through case law, have essentially deemed certain collections of data, in certain documentable scenarios, is ALL pre-approved (aka, a warrant would ALWAYS be issued, without question, so why do it). They STILl have review of the evidence before trial, and they REVIEW the Due process reasoning, and you still have rights.
1) You can go somewhere private, and we still saw you go there. 2) This data is tower location only, not GPS coordinates, it's only accurate to parts of a MILE, not feet or meters. If it gets you within a few city blocks it's doing well.... 3) lack of a warrant does NOT imply lack of Due Process. Nor does it imply lack of cost or manpower. Tracking you via cell (which is not real time, just history data btw), is more efficient yes, but still requires manpower, an active case file to bill the cost against, and a reason to do so.
See, you don;t even understand what a Warrant is, and that's your problem. When evidence comes to court, it's reviewed by a judge for admission. A warrant is simply ADVANCE APPROVAL to collect the evidence. If they follow DUE PROCESS instead, for thing's they're allowed to, the judge STILL gets to determine if it was validly collected, and rejects it if he determines a warrant should have been used. If it was simply collected WITHOUT due process, it was ILLEGALLY collected and an invasion, and the cop gets fined or fired or imprisoned depending on the severity of the invasion.
Well, if doesn't. It requires DUE PROCESS. You fail to understand the significance between that and a warrant. It;s simple.
With Due Process, certain things are approved to be done by officers and the government without prior approval or oversioght by the courts. On other things the court asks for a warrant, which simply put, is them pre-approving the collection of evidence. If you used Due process, they can choose oversight at TRIAL time and remove the evidence, if they have a warrant they pre-approved the evidence for trial, that's IT.
Due process is follower in either case. Without Due Process, it's "unreasonable" search, is automatically thrown out of court, and the person/department who conducted the search is subject to potential civil and criminal penalty.
i know a lot of cops. they all have families. NONE of them would EVER violate due process in collecting data. All it gets them is either fired, or a criminal's lawyer laughing at them in court as they leave free.
Occasionally, someone does illegally access data. it;s makes NATIONAL news, and they go to jail, locked up for years or decades with the people they put there.... That's ALLWAYS in their minds, and it's a place worse than hell for them. A cop in prison is almost a death sentence (and often is), especially since the other cops will often disrespect them as their actions make the public fear the other honest, good cops.
Well, since they have to have a person's name, and a phone account number, they'd already HAVE those leads... Also, this is TOWER location, not GPS specific data (unless they called 911). It;s only accurate to a few hundred yards. Thats WAY to big of a net. The rest, they likely have cameras, receipts, and witnesses to track SOME of the people in the areas down, the old fashioned way.
Cought in the net? "sir, our records show you were in the area, did you see anything?" "no" "Ok, if you think of something give us a call..." "Thank you for being concerned and following up officer"
unless you walk up to your front door smoking a joint or holding an illegal firearm, what's the harm really?
It does not require a warrant. The supreme court agrees. Law agrees. The legislators that passed that law were not summarily voted out of office. The public did not revolt. A constitutional convention was not called forth by the states. Over and done.
Warrant is simply a preaffirmation of due process being followed. Due Process is never NOT required to get this data. Getting it WITHOUT due process IS illegal under "unreasonable" search. You have to take BOTH the 4th and 5th amendment together on this. The government can take you life, liberty, or posessions simply based on due process alone. The courts decided how and when a WARRANT should apply in cases where there is question of "reasonable" search. Where you already have been IN PUBLIC?, there's little unreasonable about them knowing that information. This was upheld, INCLUDING the use of an electronic device to get that information.
It;s not "nothing to hide" It's OUT IN PUBLIC. They're not recording your calls, just noting where you've been to within a few hundred yards... and only if they PAY to get that data, based on specific date ranges, and after following due process.
take this away from the cops, then the manpower to track and associate criminals goes up 10 fold. The ability to refute alibi goes away without witnesses or other evidence. (camera footage, receipts, etc)
The government could really care less about you. You nut jobs personalize it like it's a living breathing thing that thinks evil thoughts. No, it's a bunch of individual people who are each accountable, and who each risk everything if they fuck up.
yes, a few people with the right access can do the wrong thing (insurance adjusters looking up celebritie's health records for example, someone goes to jail for that in my industry on a regular basis). Howver, that's the POINT, they're accoutnable, it;s documented, they GO TO JAIL if they access it illegally.
Slashdot Mirror
i have insurance for ALL device on my person carte of a rider on my homeowners insurance. There's a $100 deductible (per incident, not per device), and it covers loss, theft, accidental, and incidental damage. It covers me, my wife, anything in our cars, and anything a 3rd party has on them while they're with us so long as they're "staying with us" for the night. (for example, and this was the specific example they gave: my parents come to stay for the holidays, and we go out to dinner. While out, seeing a movie, my car is broken into and Dad's camera and laptop are stolen. HIS stuff is covered by my insurance. Same goes if we're mugged. If I drop his DSLR trying to take a picture, also covered).
It costs me about $45 a year for this rider on my policy. it has a $10,000 per incident coverage, and $25,000 annual maximum. (default is much less, but I'll regularly travel with 2 laptops, a media device, a few phones, and several cameras, so i could easily have 10K worth of gear in my car).
This is an extension of the electronics rider on the policy, which bumped my home electronics coverage from $5k to 25K of covered items, which itself cost about $14 a year more, and I added the accidental/incidental clause for a bit more. (note to all you with homeowners insurance, the default electronics and appliance coverage likely does not even cover your fridge, washer, dryer, water heater, AC, heater, etc, let alone your TV, stereo, computers, devices, and more. Without this rider, those each need to be itemized with your insurer, or if you burn down or take a bad lightning strike, you'll be left holding the bag for the difference! Talk to your insurer and make you everything is not only covered, but covered for COMPERABLE OR BETTER REPLACEMENT, most only covers depreciated value, which is worthless! Talk to your insurer and make sure you have an electronics rider!!!)
I buy warranties on most devices, and always pay for at least $10 of the device using my Visa card as well (even when financed otherwise), so I get the additional 1 year warranty extension from them. However, the additional coverage for loss and damage is WELL worth it. I regularly get devices replaced within the 3-5 year terms. In fact, I've not bought a printer/fax in nearly 10 years thanks to BestBuy, but i get a new one about every 18-24 months and buy a new $29 warranty on it.
I've had 2 cases where I used the insurance. One time I was bumped at a trade show, and destroyed a several hundred dollar lens on my camera, filed a report and had the cash in a few days. The other time, my was a car wreck that destroyed a laptop. I've never used it for "malicious" purposes, but I did get IN WRITING from my provider that I was in fact covered for "fits of anger" though i was cautioned that frequent use of that clause could get my insurance dropped. However, since I'm using home insurance on 2 houses, 2 cars, multiple rider policies, and some additional coverage, all from the same company, odds are the near $3500 a year I pay them is keeping them happy enough to replace a few minor devices if I chose to.
Actually, the United States is not a Democracy. It's a Socialist Federated Democratic Republic. Always has been, since the first taxes were collected and used for a public project.
People might believe that poeple of an opposite view might become violent. However, that's not the case of law, it;s whether or not the people joining the organization know it;s INTENT is Violent, and that it specifically provides materials and training in preparation for a violent act.
Just because some physical fighting, possibly involving guns, is possible in the minds of some nut job paranoids who can't even identify that we in fact ARE a form of socialist government (and so is nearly every government on EARTH!) does not mean people are ORGANIZING with the express intent to overthrow our government by violent means. If they are, they have to register...
Yup. Corn was selected because it was the only major American crop on the list of the best ethanol producing materials.
Actually, there are a significant number of issues.
ENGINES may be handling it fine, whoever, fuel lines and gas tanks are corroding from the inside out due the the ethanol in the gas. Multiple car companies, including Lexus, Toyota, GM and more) have had recalls to replace damaged fuel systems, and there have been fuel leaks, car fires, and deaths associated with the change to ethanol vs MTBE. Ethanol also eats through fiberglass fuel cannisters and tanks in other vehicles. If you car, lawnmower, or other vehicle has a Fiberglas fuel tank DO NOT use an ethanol blend of gas, it will destroy your fuel system, cause build-up in your engine, and could be a serious fire hazzard.
In older cars, Ethanol is also corrosive to engine seals (rubber vs more modern carbon composite seals). Over time this dramatically drops the efficiency of the engine further, and can cause engine failure after long term exposure.
Further, the core reason for replacing MTBE with ethanol was the prevention of pollutants in runoff, however we've learned since then it was actually the fuel oxygenates, not the MTBE, causing this pollution, and with ethanol being less fuel efficient (fewer joules per litre) than MTBE, there's now a push to replace it again.
If you car is not a "flex-fuel" vehicle, you should NEVER put anything over 10% ethanol in your car, and if possible, but ethanol-free fuel. Flex fuel vehicles have both custom fuel systems, and are designed to run alcohol fuels without risk of corrosion of critical components. They also have computers programmed to adjust to the changing oxygen and compression requirements of different fuels. 10% won't cause serious power issues with your car, but over several years of use, especially in humid environments of if moisture gets in your fuel tank, the damage is very real. 2 cycle engines like lawn equipment are extremely susceptible as well. What makes matters worse, there's no good system for guaranteeing the ethanol content in gasoline. The pump says it's "up to 10%" however field testing of tanker trucks hauling fresh fuel have found as high as 30% content. The local blending done at distribution centers varies, and they'll make whatever blend is cheapest to make based on the current price of the components of the fuel. In some cases, ethanol is actually cheaper than regular gas, and they'll overuse ethanol. If your engine has trouble, and you bring it in for service, and it;s not a flex-fuel car but your ethanol content is over 10%, they'll assume you used e85 at some point, and void your warranty. This has happened a LOT (check various forums).
Well, reading it isn't exactly the same as joining the party either. ...and in todays world, do you think there's a single sane person who believes the Communist Party is actually a group of violent people hellbent on overthrow of the US government through force?
Me thinks this is simply a ploy to keep people on existing, non-700MHz technology for their phone plans, so that Verizon can avoid "open network" devices for a longer time period. Essentially, wether or not your device, that you acwuired from a non-Verizon source, has ANY voice network chip in it other than strictly LTE, then Verizon could refuse it on their network, or refuse to allow the device you bought from them on someone lese's network...
Undermining the stability of the economy may be a bad thing, and should be punishable if it can be proven they did so with knowledge of the potential outcomes, and for their own profit and benefit. However, undermining the economic stability of a nation is not in itself equivalent to an attempt to overthrow a government, nor does it include the additional requirements of the Smith Act in that is must a) be intended to be done both by force of violence, and at the soonest opportunity, b) recruits brought into the offending organization must be brought in under that impression, that they are being recruited to, though violence, overthrow the government.
Also, they're registered as a bank in SC, and therefor, most juries would assume them criminals in SC, therefor the statute of requiring them to register or pay a fine is met :)
If you're making an express effort to be private (traveling in tinted cars from behind private doors) then you'll also equally have the ability to disable locate. There's no difference. 1 in 10,000 people go to that effort, and the law is not made for exceptions, it's made for the general wellbeing and protection of the people. 1 in 10,000 is not the "people" We make exceptions to the law, and we make exceptions in court. If they do collect this data they can legally collect, a judge can still throw it out, and even due process may not be good enough for the cop you;re suing if his justification was "just in case". All invasion by investigation must have an explicit planned result before it is collected. Besides, we could just as easily follow EVERY car leaving a residence to target sites and back, and have "reasonable" ideas as you your location.
However, this level of privacy ONLY applies to those SEARCHED. If you're hiding from locate, and we want you, they'll just GET A WARRANT and remotely turn it on anyway... If you put a warrant in the way, and they have due process, they'll get the warrant, whether or not you;re really a suspect, simply as long as you're associated and there's due process. If you;re not associated, they're NOT looking you up, as this search has ELECTRONIC PROOF, further, nothing is stopping the phone company from NOTIFYING you that you were pinged (many do, as soon as the investigation is closed), nor does anything prevent you from cross checking them by making a FIA request to FIND OUT if they're snooping on you (as the billing record of them searching your locale would be public documentation, even though any active case would not be).
If you have no concerns about being watched by ordinary citizens in public (which is statistically orders of magnitude more dangerous to your person and your privacy than being watched by authorities), then this system has no implications. It's also not a real time monitored nor a random system, and is only activated through due process. if they were tracking everyone everywhere, we'd have issue for sure. Of course, your PHONE COMPANY IS TRACKING YOU, and the data they collect IS for sale (it's just anonymized, which on a large scale, is how the government would see it themselves, just a mass data set).
All you're saying is, essentially, in exchange for a judges purview after data is collected on a suspect (due process of evidence admission), you want it done first (warrant), and done every time. This increases costs and puts strain on the court system, but offers a tiny bit of public assurance (keeps the paranoid like you happy). However, the REALITY is that if due process is brought to a judge for a non-invasive electronic location search of a suspect, it would ALWAYS be permitted, so in essence, this request buys NO ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS. That is the deminition of the rule for when the supreme court determines something requires or does not require a warrant. Would, in reasonable cases, a request for a warrant ever be denied? No? no warrant required. Done. This is such a common and approved request, like pulling phone records, no judge provided probably cause would ever refuse. Since regardless of the scenario, whether they pull the data with or without a warrant, should it effect your life or freedom on any level, a judge reviews it either way. If he deems at a later point that due process was NOT followed, you get a nice civil case against some cops. The cops KNOW THIS, and thus do not abuse this privileged. If a cop wants to find you, HE WILL, and with or without a warrant, stopping this location search has NO BEARING, it is simply one of many available tools that already require no warrant to accomplish the same goal.
that said, this does NOT mean that your entire cell phone tracking history is admissible in court... No, FURTHER collection of that data WILL require a warrant. However, request of a piece of data as in "where were you at X o'clock on Z date" can be accessed in this system, and THAT is not
Correct on most counts, nice retort.
However, Mac OS was not the pioneer of the GUI. Lisa OS if anything was the start 2 years earlier, however, even this tipped a big hat and admittedly had significant influence from the Xerox Alto and PARC. PARC introduced windows, radio buttons, and icons in the first WYSIWYG GUI. Lisa added a contextual menu bar system on top of this work, as well as drag and drop. System (1.0), the original Mac OS lacked many of Lisa's features, which would not be included until System 7, and some not until OS X 10.0... system (1.0) even lacked an HFS file system instead using a flat file system. System X (1-4) was a fairly limited GUI compared to the Lisa, unfortunately, the Lisa was more complicated, and it's hardware was more than double the price, and thus failed.
I had my 14.4 running at 19.2 with a firmware crack, and my 28.8 running at 56K (then 64K) with a similar crack. I've seen 14.4s running at 56K as well. Especially the US Robotics external models (which were FAR FAR FAR superior to internal modems on every level!)
We've been on Mobileme since the .Mac years, about the time OS X 10.3 came out. Never had any issues with it, other than some post-launch bugs with mobileme in 2008.
Certainly no issues with e-mail (Mom and Dad use it as their primary accounts, My wife uses it as her secondary). Syncing is sometimes wierd, but usually only when there's very little space on the .mac drive.
I'm expecting a huge cut in the price (down to $39 a year if not 29), an again doubling if not more of the storage (I think up to 100GB per account soon), much tighter integration with the iPad, and more. There's a lot coming from Apple's cloud computing initiatives, and current mobileme users are going to reap some big benefits at cut over for their loyalty I'm sure. Improved online backups, new iWeb with a more web 2.0 focus, better integration with flicker/facebook/etc, streaming services, back-2-my-mac improvements, and more.
Lisa was revolutionary, it was the PRICE that sucked big time. A basic PC for a student, a school, or a small office that didn't need complex spreadsheets or graphically impressive documents was about half the price. Apple misjudged how people would quantify the value of WYSIWYG, and overpriced and over engineered the system (not to mention bundling in too much R&D cost into the initial run).
The Lisa and the Macintosh XL were virtually the same. The Macintosh (original) was a different OS platform completely (different ROM) , and was far less powerful (though it was slightly faster in terms of CPU, having aged 2 years). The big separation between Lisa and Macintosh was the Lisa was a workstation class machine, and the Mac was a home computer. It even had a HDD, Protected Memory (not otherwise available until OS X!), virtual memory, and cooperative multitasking. The OS was a bit more complex than the Mac OS, but better in many ways.
We did not trade ours in for a Mac Plus, as many other people did (which included a cash rebate in addition to the trade), as there was no easy way to convert the lisa files we'd created into Mac files, and we had a TON of work on it. Instead, we actually bough a Mac to go beside it, and started a slow process of remaking all our docs on the Mac. We sold the Lisa to a museum in 2006, it still worked.
Agreed. i had many a $100+ bill from AOL in the early days (which, btw, was itself Mac Only for quite some time, 1989 - 1991, Mac only, Dos in 1991, Windows 3.x not until 1993..., AOL 3.0 was the first 32 bit version for PCs.) I played a lot of Neverwinter Nights on AOL in the early days...
No, eWorld died because a) most Mac users couldn't run it, b) they had a limited list of providers, and came a bit late to the game behind Prodigy and Compuserve and AOL making it difficult to find others online who shared the same service, and AOL was still a closed network at that time (no open Internet until 1995?), and c) it had virtually zero marketing budget, limited almost exclusively to posters in Apple stores, which Mac owners rarely visited, and attempts for Quantum to include the software free with systems got killed before the PC version released (it never did, but was nearly complete).
I agree. My PowerComputing system was in fact the bet Mac I ever owned. No, not compared to existing performance, but it was made entirely of server class components, highly expansible, i even had an x86 processor on a card in it running Windows in a VM! What you got for the money, what it included, and how far ahead of the competition (Apple as well as PC)it was is completely amazing.
I had that machine from 1995 until 2002, when i sold it to a law firm that had another one with a dead motherboard. I paid just over $1600 for it initially, and 7 years later sold it for $850. It was still running in 2006 last I heard from that client.
1) turn of locate if you want to be private. It's only turned on otherwise by a warrant (yes, a warrant, not just due process), or when you dial 911 and your phone switches to the secure mode for doing so.
2) When the technology improves, congress will again have to REQUEST further access, and if a judge sees that as getting too private, it will become a warrant-able request. That's on a technology by technology basis for now, and thus far it's working.
3) it's real time only when they click "refresh" over and over (and pay for each click). I've seen this system hands on. I doubt you have. A local department was criticized for having several thousand requests (in excess of the local population count in a year) for access for data during a public records search about a year ago, but when the data was actually analyzed, they found it was for only a couple hundred suspects, with multiple hundred requests in short periods of time.
If the local laws in Baltimore fly in the face of national law, then either replace your local politicians, or get a lawyer to follow through with a case and have the law overturned in higher court. Complaining about it gets you nowhere. If you don't like it, and can't stand waiting, MOVE, the rest of the country seems to do just fine. I'm not an expert in your local laws, but I've seen first hand federal laws trump very similar local laws.
next, whether or not a car is drivable matters nothing to the state as far as the regulation for tags, taxes, and insurance. It has a VIN number, it must be tagged, unless you get official documentation from your DMV otherwise (typically requires the car to be a classic in the process of reconstruction).
A cop may not care for a GPS history, but his SUPERVISOR will. it;s your RIGHT to request a supervisor on-site before any search (as well as a lawyer, which I'd recommend). However, if it went that far, and the cop was a real ass, and the supervisor went with it, that GPS log data would be an EASY victory in court and get you a few grand (likely many tens of thousands) on a harassment and illegal search charge, and the cop, and probably the supervisor, would be out of work. Your failure to enforce your rights is not my problem. Also, there's no "lawsuit" for the damage to your car, they simply PAY UP, as part of due process, in the form of a settlement based on your insurance companie's estimate, as this saves the trouble and expense of the suit they loose (and trust me, they pay, otherwise the insurance company has to, and THEIR lawyers WILL fight it).
A tip may be filed, however, if that's the case, your neighbor is risking long term imprisonment by filing an illegitimate tip. If it;s real, and you got caught (sounds like you did), then he was being a GOOD CITIZEN, and should be rewarded for having the courage to turn in a neighbor for breaking the law. If it was a "false tip" which as you say nothing can prevent from happening, and the cops do act (which is DUE PROCESS DEFINED), then that guy gets a nasty visit from the cops in return when they find the tip a bad one.
If your friend was never served, and have a valid address based on his currently local ID, and had a job he was paying taxes on, then it should be damned easy for even a court appointed lawyer to get your friend off. I'm sure there were mitigating circumstances (like he lied about not being served). If the DA falsified records, go prove it, it's easy to prove... Oh, that didn't happen? Probably wasn't fake. Your own story collaborates that the records needed to be corrected, and he was to be properly served. This sounds ongoing,and that he has not reappeared in court for what he was improperly summonsed for. Sounds like he has a good case for lost compensation coming to him. Hope he has a good lawyer (one that sees this process through to the point he's working exclusively free only for a cut of the settlement, assuming that's larger than a pre-negotiated amount, and if not, it;s because even his lawyer thinks he's guilty or has not case.
I've been through rough patches with the courts myself, due to paperwork issues related to switching from a local insurer to a national one (the local guy was pissed I left, and filed a "self terminated" insurance form with the DMV, who canceled my license, then i hit a check point. I got a "ticket" but was let go since I did have proof of insurance on me, though not what the DMV record showed. I had to show up in court with my insurance transfer paperwork and show proof of insurance from the date it ended, which i had. The local insurer lost his certification, spent 30 days in jail, paid my fine ($75 for not having a valid license, which I had to pay to get in re-instated while waiting for a court date), and paid my legal fees, and lot time from work (3 total days). It was a hassle, but it happens, and I'm glad they actually care to CHECK for insurance, even if there are flaws in the documentation process that let an occasion
Lockdown, still with this?
It's fracking unlocked!!!
It requires no plan
the store is OPEN TO ALL, with over 150,000 apps and growing.
The ONLY think that is locked is the OS, and they don;t like outright porn only because there's no good parental control system. (once an app is bought, it;s bought, there's no use level control yet, wait for OS 4...).
The point is NOT for this to be a full fledged PC, the point is exactly so that you DO NOT have to drag out a PC every time you want to do something quick, or stream a movie, or create a simple document, nor do you need to have your phone handy to get notifications. This is always on, and convenient.
Safari is 100% ACID 5, HTML 5 and Webkit compatible. As long as your form is not generated in Flash (it should NOT be, for a hundred security reasons), then safari can open it. I work for a MAJOR insurance provider, and we have a few tens of millions of people hitting our sites, and have thousands of web based forms, all ie6 native. Safari supports all of them. I use Safari as my primary browser (for the history search functions mostly, that's a awesome system, that and it's fast, and rarely crashes, and uses sandboxed sessions). I have no issues at all unless the site REQUIRES either flash or silverlight (and there's a silverlight plug-in for the mac already, and it;s in development for the iPad, as is office 2010...)
If you run a company, and you expect ANYONE with a Mac might access your site and need a form, then i suggest your Devs include safari in their testing (we do). The iPad also has a local file system, if you bothered to actually read the documentation out there (you CAn save and export files, how else could you EDIT them?)
Wrong. It's an "instant gratification" platform. A PC Companion. The bridge device you use to control your home theater, chat on social sites, make a phone call, respond to messages, and more (most importantly including EDIT THE QUICK DOCUMENT), WITHOUT having to turn on a PC. In addition to that, it's a a full color e-reader, surfing platform, comic book platform, media player, and car video screen (hang it from the back of your seat and let the kids watch, instead of adding a SEPARATE car movie screen).
It;s everything the iPod/iPhone isn't good at because of the small screen, it's always on receiving notifications like a phone and powers on instantly unlike a PC, and it requires no active patching regiment or security software. Finally, it shares apps with all your other Apple devices without buying additional (expensive) licenses.
Its a near perfect platform in between. Something to leave lying around that keeps you informed and communicating without having to lug around (and contactly plug in) a PC.
When i see something on TV i want to look up, I don;t want tyo wait 3 minutes for a laptop to boot, connect to the net, and finally do a search, with an iPad, I can do that, and also handle more than the occasional message (managing e-mail is as important as simply reading it, and the iPhone is a terrible e-mail management platform, but a PC is a wholly inconvenient platform, this solves BOTH issues. It;s is SO worth $600 to me...
Actually, a couple THOUSAND people touched it, at the release. Tens of thousands of developers are working with the GUI. Press was given ample opportunity to do everything other than an extended personal review (which is mostly unnecessary at this point given it;s the same OS, the only real differences are in performance and form factor, which can be analyzed in minutes).
OK, example 1, due process if followed, and yes in Bltimore, upon a tip and due process followed, they can invade if they "witness a crime in progress" which must be completely documented. They can NOT just "break in" on a tip. You have not studied that case law.
Illegal car on your property, that's all they nbeed to know. bot no, they won't enter the locked garrage on a tip alone, but that tip might get an officer to "pay attention" and if they see the garrage open, or if you drive the car, yes, they'll document it, then come back and take it.
In many states, your PROPERTY is not private, only the inside of your home is, since people like meter readers and public servants need access to your LAND. Further, a standing garrage qualifies differently in some states. They can't search it without a warrant, but they can impound a car inside of it then have evidence of. (typically, they ask to see it or see it themselves, the city really doesn't care enough to risk a lawsuit over a small municipal fine).
In SC driving without a license on your person is a $75 fine, but more importantly, they can't let you continue to drive without it unless you have other documents proving your identity, and your insurance on you, and they look up and validate your currently active license and lack of warrants against you.
Being in public is not probable cause. Getting pulled over is. eing parked in a known drug neighbood might be enough, but so long as you don;t stop there, even if a cop does pull you over, you can easily POINT AT YOUR GPS and show him you;ve been following a route, at which point, probable cause is refuted, and you can not be searched unless he finds another reason (object in plain sight, runs your tag and finds open unpaid violations, etc).
If the city disassembles your car, or causes DAMAGE to your property, without a warrant, then they ARE liable for the damage. I've seen this to on a street side, but only after they've called in a warrant, or only after they found illegal drugs in the car, or only if the person has outstanding warrants and is a know drug trafficker. You have to understand, the cop doing that teardown, first off he's not doing his "assigned" duty of pulling people over, so he had to call in that change, and get backup to tear the car down. Next, that's a risk to the city, and he's gonna have to do a LOT of paperwork later, and even more if he's wrong. If he is wrong, you got inconvenienced, and you get your car rebuilt on the city's dollar, and he'll NEVER do that again, nor will anyone in his division.
Suing a cop for illegally collecting evidence? Yea, it does work. Seen it happen. And that eviodence, as much as the court hates it, gets thrown out. I'm actually in favor of it NOT getting thrown out, so long as the cops punishment for illegal collection if at least 50% of your conviction. How many copy do you know who'd risk a year in jail to see you get 2, huh?
Get a clue? this is case law fact moron. You're the one not living in reality. I'm an Italian from a NY italian family. I've got friends and collegues and family who are lawyers, cops, firemen, and more. I;'ve SEEN this crap first hand. Cops are not evil. They have families. And they're PARANOID about people like you who take away their power to defend themselves from real criminals, and all they care about is putting away real criminals. They don't give a SHIT about joe bob who minds his business and plays nice with society. They have no reason to risk their job or freedom just to see who their friend's wife might have been seeing on the side. (they can find that out easy enough just by driving around town).
All a warrant is boils down to preapproval for evidence collection. Due process colelcts evidence, but that eveidence is subject to REVIEW post-collection, prior to being admissible in court. That's it, that's the ONLY difference.
Due Process is the documentation that exists to prove the collection itself was "reasonable"
The 5th amendment clarifies this, the 4th amendment does NOT stand alone as a single statement.
The courts, through case law, have essentially deemed certain collections of data, in certain documentable scenarios, is ALL pre-approved (aka, a warrant would ALWAYS be issued, without question, so why do it). They STILl have review of the evidence before trial, and they REVIEW the Due process reasoning, and you still have rights.
1) You can go somewhere private, and we still saw you go there.
2) This data is tower location only, not GPS coordinates, it's only accurate to parts of a MILE, not feet or meters. If it gets you within a few city blocks it's doing well....
3) lack of a warrant does NOT imply lack of Due Process. Nor does it imply lack of cost or manpower. Tracking you via cell (which is not real time, just history data btw), is more efficient yes, but still requires manpower, an active case file to bill the cost against, and a reason to do so.
See, you don;t even understand what a Warrant is, and that's your problem. When evidence comes to court, it's reviewed by a judge for admission. A warrant is simply ADVANCE APPROVAL to collect the evidence. If they follow DUE PROCESS instead, for thing's they're allowed to, the judge STILL gets to determine if it was validly collected, and rejects it if he determines a warrant should have been used. If it was simply collected WITHOUT due process, it was ILLEGALLY collected and an invasion, and the cop gets fined or fired or imprisoned depending on the severity of the invasion.
Well, if doesn't. It requires DUE PROCESS. You fail to understand the significance between that and a warrant. It;s simple.
With Due Process, certain things are approved to be done by officers and the government without prior approval or oversioght by the courts. On other things the court asks for a warrant, which simply put, is them pre-approving the collection of evidence. If you used Due process, they can choose oversight at TRIAL time and remove the evidence, if they have a warrant they pre-approved the evidence for trial, that's IT.
Due process is follower in either case. Without Due Process, it's "unreasonable" search, is automatically thrown out of court, and the person/department who conducted the search is subject to potential civil and criminal penalty.
i know a lot of cops. they all have families. NONE of them would EVER violate due process in collecting data. All it gets them is either fired, or a criminal's lawyer laughing at them in court as they leave free.
Occasionally, someone does illegally access data. it;s makes NATIONAL news, and they go to jail, locked up for years or decades with the people they put there.... That's ALLWAYS in their minds, and it's a place worse than hell for them. A cop in prison is almost a death sentence (and often is), especially since the other cops will often disrespect them as their actions make the public fear the other honest, good cops.
Well, since they have to have a person's name, and a phone account number, they'd already HAVE those leads... Also, this is TOWER location, not GPS specific data (unless they called 911). It;s only accurate to a few hundred yards. Thats WAY to big of a net. The rest, they likely have cameras, receipts, and witnesses to track SOME of the people in the areas down, the old fashioned way.
Cought in the net? "sir, our records show you were in the area, did you see anything?" "no" "Ok, if you think of something give us a call..."
"Thank you for being concerned and following up officer"
unless you walk up to your front door smoking a joint or holding an illegal firearm, what's the harm really?
It does not require a warrant. The supreme court agrees. Law agrees. The legislators that passed that law were not summarily voted out of office. The public did not revolt. A constitutional convention was not called forth by the states. Over and done.
Warrant is simply a preaffirmation of due process being followed. Due Process is never NOT required to get this data. Getting it WITHOUT due process IS illegal under "unreasonable" search. You have to take BOTH the 4th and 5th amendment together on this. The government can take you life, liberty, or posessions simply based on due process alone. The courts decided how and when a WARRANT should apply in cases where there is question of "reasonable" search. Where you already have been IN PUBLIC?, there's little unreasonable about them knowing that information. This was upheld, INCLUDING the use of an electronic device to get that information.
It;s not "nothing to hide" It's OUT IN PUBLIC. They're not recording your calls, just noting where you've been to within a few hundred yards... and only if they PAY to get that data, based on specific date ranges, and after following due process.
take this away from the cops, then the manpower to track and associate criminals goes up 10 fold. The ability to refute alibi goes away without witnesses or other evidence. (camera footage, receipts, etc)
The government could really care less about you. You nut jobs personalize it like it's a living breathing thing that thinks evil thoughts. No, it's a bunch of individual people who are each accountable, and who each risk everything if they fuck up.
yes, a few people with the right access can do the wrong thing (insurance adjusters looking up celebritie's health records for example, someone goes to jail for that in my industry on a regular basis). Howver, that's the POINT, they're accoutnable, it;s documented, they GO TO JAIL if they access it illegally.