Simple solution for Google: "We delist you unless you sign this contract giving us the right to use your headline and a short blurb from every article you post"
Actually, now that I'm thinking about that, Google's name should be the first behind this because it creates such an insane barrier to entry noone would ever be able to compete with them.
Considering the how often I hear reports of boxes of votes getting found during a recount (seems like this comes up every year), and the people working at the polling stations are just run-of-the-mill public (at my polling station, I recognised one of the staff, because she's also a waitress at a restaurant I frequent, such is life in a small-town), I don't find following up on someone saying they were tampering with votes to be that bad. This agent got a report of a crime, followed up, and checked it out.
TL;DNR: Good job FBI.
is that fiction has to make sense.
Seems not to be the case in Tenn.
I nominate you to write these things for Italy, You've already got use of the caps lock key down!
(seriously though, I do agree that there is no middle ground here.)
Are you sure binary thinking isn't on the continuum of the ills of society?
I'm sure Samsung will be happy to donate to build it.
"having a 10/22 rifle in his car could result in his summary execution by an officer that felt concerned for his safety by a firearm being in the vehicle and that a jury would acquit the officer of his homicide due to officer safety concerns"
The cop's not wrong. They seem to be able to get away with murder pretty easy.
damn telemarketers who keep calling me?
(that's only half a joke...)
I think you're confused, they are not non-terrorists once proven wrong, just not yet radicalized.
Maybe they mean in the sense of a OpAmp wired as a Schmitt Trigger?
You don't pay a tax on holding it. You do pay a tax when you "sell" it (which is to say, convert it back into recognised currency). You can hold it as long as you want, that's not what incurs a tax burden.
That conflict of interest is actually codified in the NSA charter. The NSA has two mandates, the first is to capture and analyze signals intelligence, but the second is to ensure the security of US transmissions. This has always created a conflict where the NSA would make recommendations about encryption algorithms, and noone would really know which mandate they were working from.
I believe it is referred to as a "fishing expedition." It should be denied.
It's not making them out to be scumbag thieves; being scumbag thieves is what's doing that!
It's also not just a matter of TV. To paraphrase Michael Keaton's Batman, A PS4p and an LG TV might work, but run it through a nice (but slightly dated) sound system and you get problems.
Of course you know that US courts have held that having more than one phone is an indication that you are a drug dealer.
Along with using electricity, using heat, having cash, and (in true Michael Palin style) "'e looks like one." If the cops want to say they have a reason for suspecting you of dealing drugs, they're given so much alarming leeway it really doesn't matter.
If it's subject to records requests, I see no reason it wouldn't be subject to retention laws as well. That it's not getting retained is a problem, but it's a legal problem for the person using the account.
Even you accept that copying in this instance is okay, turning around and claiming you have copyright on it is not.
There's no two bones about it; when the little people get the book tossed at them harder than rape for making an image which is vaguely similar to another, the ruling elite shouldn't get off with a slap on the wrist for it. Not the left, right, or middle.
While the OP may have written in jest, like any great joke, it hides a kernel of truth.
The question is, is that distinction one that Facebook and Google('s algorithms?) will properly make? How about other less well known satirical sites? What about satirical columns in "conventional news" sites? Back to the Onion, what about the Onion's "AV Club" (which is actually legit (entertainment) news/reviews)?
As to making every attempt to appear legit and being mistaken for legitimate news: the Onion has always had a similar format as legitimate papers, and ends up getting mistaken for one multiple times every year.