This line from the Bloomberg is technically inaccurate because a powered off server’s storage with its sensitive code has no power and cannot be accessed.
I'm not quite so easily convinced as these guys are. The article on BMC notes that it can be used to position an ISO (equivalent of plugging in a USB with an O/S into the server) and then turn the server on. (Or wait for it to be turned on.)
It seems to me that if one can control the BMC, the server is pwned... even if it does happen to be powered down.
Texas: Although it is lawful for you to remain silent during a traffic stop, you are required by law to truthfully identify yourself when asked to do so by an officer.
Cushing: The law does not require this.
The law may not require this. Time and again, we've seen that law officers do. If you refuse, you will be arrested.
I understand that the law is supposed to dominate. But no one will make the officers follow this law, so the practice is the rules of the road.
...chips which will have problems, and will be falsified, and so they'll demand we carry the paper as backup.
That favorite euphemism of business and government, "Serving you better," always means you're getting screwed.
No, I'm sure this perfect new facial recognition technology will somehow identify everyone dodgy as being that master terrorist Kaalim el-Niazi Nazmi al-Dib, man of a thousand faces. The fake ID (even that made by government spooks) will not work anymore and we will all be mucho safer. In TSA we trust!
A more accurate title would be:
Beatings will increase until moral improves
From Wikipedia:
Due to the acronym YOLO meaning "you only live once," Yolo County and the unincorporated community of Yolo have unusual place names.So they should not change their name.They should file for a top-level domain name. And sue Fremantlemedia for any use of those four words in any movie titles.
Never underestimate the sophistry of the gang that fostered the FCC repeal. Be prepared for SCOTUS (now operated by the same gang) to rule that the FCC was correct in its repeal...and then to rule that, somehow, the FCC can also magically overrule the states.
This would follow the old adage: What one hand giveth [to the ISPs] the other hand also giveth [to the ISPs].
...it's still plaintiffs seeking to hold social media companies directly responsible for violent acts committed by others.
No, not even nearly that direct. It's plaintiffs seeking to hold social media companies directly responsible for people theoretically enticing people who might possibly have the right ideology to be encouraged to commit violent acts, into being recruited to commit violent acts.
It's so remote it comes down to, "You're letting people of a religion I don't like discuss politics."
First, Michalski apparently consented to the search by using his face to unlock the phone. If this was as voluntary as it appears, it pretty much eliminates a Constitutional challenge.
Was it truly consent? Or just submission to authority?
When held at gunpoint by a mugger and one voluntarily gives over one's money, that does not imply consent.
If they didn't spend so much time investigating Twitter jokes, they might actually have time to find out who assassinated Marielle Franco.
The GOP depends upon people who watch political ads with wide-eyed credulous adoration.
Ah, yes, the usual b******* straw man argument about the Democrats and guns.
What the no fly lists do is crap on citizen rights.
Take these men: Their right to liberty? Crapped on. Pursuit of happiness? Crapped on. Due process? Crapped on. Redress? Crapped on. Representation? Crapped on. Ban on cruel and unusual punishment? Crapped on.
Right to life could have been crapped on, too, in that UAE prison but they survived. (I can just hear the FBI agents complaining, "Why can't we crap on that, too? It would be so much easier to get rid of this infernal court case if these men were dead.")
Even the right to bear arms...well, these men might still have that here in the US...but they couldn't get here, could they? Crapped on.
So what were the Democrats up in arms about?
Because the Republicans passed a law that barred the government from using no fly to interfere with Second Amendment rights. In essence, what that law says is, "Thou shalt respect the citizens' Second Amendment rights even if they are on the no fly list...BUT OTHERWISE WE ARE FINE WITH YOUR USE OF NO FLY TO CRAP ON EVERY OTHER CITIZEN RIGHT. Life? Liberty? All those other rights? Crap on those at will. But not our SACRED SECOND AMENDMENT COW!"
And that is what the Democrats were up in arms about.
Let's see...
Yessiree, that will teach all those bad ol' companies to not use non-disparagement clauses.
The study apparently wasn't even blind, which means the usual police/prosecutor pressure to match a suspect was lacking, and still 71% got it wrong.
In real cases, with real pressure to get a conviction, it probably would have been 100%. Can't let the "bad guys" get away.
It is not a matter of suppressing or censoring conservative agendas. The problem is that these sites persist in "promoting" liberal and Progressive agendas.
Suppose the top three hyperlinks in every Google search result were the conservative leaders: you would still find the conservatives up in arms because the remaining links present liberal/progressive positions.
Their concern is not fair presentation at all, but rather the utter silencing of "unwanted" viewpoints.
But they will tell you it is not really censorship. No, not at all.
It was written by Not Me, the same troublemaker who writes all childish excuses.
Ha, ha, very funny this trademark joke. How about we tell a good one in return? No Russian product may enjoy the protection of a trademark in the UK. Isn't that a great joke?
Budget potholes
Well, yeah, must plug those budget holes somehow. And don't plugging those budget holes "Protect Consumers" in the long run?