It gets slightly better. This is probably the worst possible time to have done exactly that - being caught red handed right as the judge is wising up to the BS that they've been pulling. While FISC may be a rubber stamp in general, I have a feeling they are not toothless.
Our US judicial system is mostly clueless. They think google is evil and show little to zero technical aptitude or understanding of what is happening.
How many judiciaries have actually understood the technology at large for 2014? This can probably be counted with both hands, even if we're including the part of scotus that vaguely understands technology.
What impresses me the most about this is that you can replace NSA with almost anything here and there's no way it doesn't sound like a complete and total unsubstantiated waste. In addition to being completely intangible regarding something that shouldn't be 100% intangible - security in any form is not nebulous.
I get the point of the post here, and I agree that it's stupid of a company to do (gamestop potentially) - but I don't know if I would say that the ad was banned as it implies different things as opposed to the advertising company who banned it.
My first thought when I read this was that some random obscure US law was being used to prevent political games or equivalent, based on the title.
Who is this crazy guy? Oh, the son of Richard Posner? I guess bad apples don't fall far from the tree, so to speak. Why he got his son into law is anyone's guess, but clearly not the right decision.
How much does this guy pay to clean up his wikipedia profile? It seems like a lot of money, given how magically non-controversial it is (in comparison to his claims). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Posner