This is why I always question the ellipsis when people are quoted. You never know if the part that was cut out is the part that makes the entire comment make sense. Yes, as you wrote it, that comment is not a First Amendment violation. However, if you add back in the part that you conveniently left out, then suddenly it makes sense.
"while another could be to encourage governments to adopt laws and regulations to regulate this ever-growing industry."
"How do you tell the good from the bad with ANYONE?
It seems like cops are the ones where it's OK to reduce an entire, diverse group of people to their lowest common denominator, and to be PROUD OF IT."
As you say, there are bad cops and good cops. However, if the good cops don't do anything about or cover for the bad cops, we have to recount how many good cops there are.
If the citizens cannot trust the good cops to protect them from the bad cops, then the citizens cannot trust any cop.
"In what way is unencumbered net access a "student safety" issue?"
Porn, cyber-bullying, and all the other bullshit "safety" concerns.
"Perhaps Apple needs to provide a way to separately password just accessing and using a pad/phone and making purchases"
Already does. The password to get into the tablet (if there is one) is unrelated to the password to purchase things in the store. I can see no reason why the student would need the cloud password if these tablets are suppose to be locked down anyways.
It's time for carrousel, beware the Sandman.
I thought the "Use it or lose it" doctrine only came in when the trademark is at risk of becoming generic.
That might be why this is going on. The carpet company is pissed that someone's drawing attention to something specifically designed not to be looked at.
Maybe the wallpaper people will be less litigious then the carpet manufacturers.
No, you have it wrong. OoTB is anti-Techdirt, not simply anti-sanity. If Techdirt published a story protesting kicking puppies, OoTB would run out and start kicking puppies.
"Use an old Pentium III as your router."
And we've looped back around on ourselves. If we can't trust pre-compiled software, we can't use a P3 as a router.
"All he would have needed to do was register and the would have let him do what ever."
I'm sorry. Did you just condone what happened here? All he had to do was register? I'm sorry, that's not how the inalienable right of free speech works.
I was talking to a friend of mine a few days ago on Skype. We were talking about a game, I don't even remember the game, but I remember the conversation. He was talking about torrenting it so he could play it. I responded "Why? Why would you waste the time pirating the game when it's $10 on Steam?"
I didn't say it because piracy is illegal. I didn't say it because he should support the developer. I said it for the exclusive reason that it's just easier to get it from Steam.
I can get whatever music I want from Google Music for $10 per month. I can get whatever game I want from Steam, usually for far less then elsewhere. I can watch Youtube videos for hours a day. Why is there no good place to go to get any TV shows or Movies instantly?
Netflix isn't even good for that any more. We started a "Chronno's Movie Club" kinda as a joke. I had to go threw 20 movies before one showed up on Netflix streaming.
You know you're government has gone overboard when people start listening to the conspiracy nuts more then the experts.
When I read stories like this the only thing I can think of is:
"Did they catch the Goa'uld they were looking for?"
A caffeine addiction falls under the old school definition of addiction. Caffeine is a drug like nicotine. Your body can become dependent on it and it can cause serious health issues if not handled correctly.
What you're thinking of is when someone wakes up in the morning and is all groggy before their first cup. That's not withdrawal. Caffeine withdrawal shows up a few days to a few weeks after cutting it off.
The jelly doughnut thing is right though. That's not addiction, that's more a learned response.
So this "Cyber War" the US government has been warning us about is a real thing and they are the ones waging it. Why am I not surprised?
It's only a matter of time before someone turns around and gives the schoolyard bully a black eye. I've seen it quite a few times when I was in school, and sometimes you just have to stand back and let it happen. But I say this to the rest of the world, I and most of my fellow citizens are not involved nor condone these practices. Go ahead, give the bully a black eye, just leave us out of it.
"You appear to be yet another sinner who thinks they can win some sort of debate and feel better while living in sin. Repent now."
"I cant convince anyone to have faith, no man can. That would be against God's word."
What does your book say about going against god's word? Worse then that, you're not trying to just convince someone, you're trying to force them threw insult and fear.
The cognitive dissidence you display when posting is epic. You claim that everyone who posts here is just blindly drinking the kool-aid and would believe anything. Then when there's a legitimate problem, you attack the people who point out the mistake.
What the hell is wrong with you? That's not an insult, I legitimately want to know what the hell is wrong with you.
"The only people he trusts are members of his police force."
As was pointed out, terrorists "typically display enormous patience, often waiting years until the components of their plans are perfectly aligned." How is this guy so sure that his police force hasn't been infiltrated by one of those years long plans? I mean, think about it. All of their programs are turning up nothing useful. Are the programs themselves flawed, or is someone on the inside manipulating the data?
I'm hoping that if we make these people paranoid enough, they'll push everyone away in fear and end up a lone nut job. Lone nuts are easier to deal with.
If you legitimately need the money for bus fare, it's charity. If you do it forcefully, threaten their lives and such, it's theft. If you convince them that you run their local church or something and need a donation, it's fraud.
You will have to be far more specific then just "get them to consent".
Re: Re:
If I remember correctly, there is an old vulnerability that javascript code can take advantage of in Firefox 17. Firefox 17 is the version that comes bundled in the Tor Browser with the NoScript addon disabled. The easiest way around that problem is to enable NoScript.