Maybe it's just my paranoia, but it seems to me that the reason they (ie. law enforcement) are not concerned about non-criminals in the database is that there is an unspoken assumption that sooner or later everyone will be a criminal.
I can't see why this would be a problem. Who hasn't readily opened their window at a stoplight to allow someone with a "Paid Voluntary Survey" sign to stick something in their mouth?
I'm less than impressed with Mr McKinley's "accomplishment". Without a Ph.D. or python scripts, I met a woman online, went on a date with her, moved in with her, married her and we're celebrating our 18th anniversary together this year. YMMV
I didn't read all the comments, but wanted to point out that the DA's statement doesn't necessarily mean that the officer feared for the officer's safety. It could also have meant that the officer feared for the kid's safety--say he was running blindly towards a road or something.
Admittedly, tasing him was probably not a great choice. I just wanted to point out that the DA's statement was not clear.
Not that it matters much, but it kind of sounds like the gym is not saying that they took out the extra money to see if this was a real account, but that they didn't think it was real, so they just put in whatever amount.
The first option is a ridiculous verification; the second is just operator error.
I consider what Snowden did to be correct. This was a corrupt system (that many, including myself, predicted when these laws were first passed--and I'm not even all that bright) and it needed to be pushed out into the light.
BUT, with that said, Snowden is absolutely not following in the trail of Thoreau, King or Gandhi. Those men were using civil disobedience to bring light to the wrongs. One of the tenets of civil disobedience is to accept the punishment in order to demonstrate that corrupt nature of the power.
I applaud Snowden's leaks, and I do not at all blame him for fleeing (I most certainly would have done so, had I been able to perform the leaks in the first place), but he is no more Gandhi than he is the Queen of England.
To be fair--the game is title "_______ 2013". You already owned "______ 2012" and "_______ 2011". I don't see how the claim that "_____2014" was coming out holds any kind of gravitas.
Aren't these guys spies? Isn't the whole point of being a spy to lie? Why would anyone have trusted them in the first place?
And as far as "not doing anything about the lying"--what could they possibly do? I mean, how do you prove that you aren't lying?
Note that I am not defending the NSA by any stretch. I just always assumed they were doing this kind of thing. What surprises me about it is that they were so stupid as to allow an IT contractor to gain access, and that they are so very bad at covering this kind of stuff up. I mean, if they can't keep this kind of stuff from our politicians, they must just be spewing information at foreign operatives.
I agree with Jay here. As great as it would be for them to jump on this, Sony has a long, storied and steady history for designing fantastic hardware and then going out of their way to fuck with the consumer.
Where would they have been had the minidisc not had self-destructing songs?
Where would they have been had players been able to burn their own PSP UMDs?
Hell, these guys won't even let the PS3 controllers charge from a basic USB wall wart.
So, however awesome it would be, I'm nearly certain that Sony will find some way to screw this up.
Maybe it's just my paranoia, but it seems to me that the reason they (ie. law enforcement) are not concerned about non-criminals in the database is that there is an unspoken assumption that sooner or later everyone will be a criminal.
I can't see why this would be a problem. Who hasn't readily opened their window at a stoplight to allow someone with a "Paid Voluntary Survey" sign to stick something in their mouth?
I'm less than impressed with Mr McKinley's "accomplishment". Without a Ph.D. or python scripts, I met a woman online, went on a date with her, moved in with her, married her and we're celebrating our 18th anniversary together this year. YMMV
Is this a joke post?
I'm fairly sure that, even at the age of 5, I would have vomited on my mother if she had ever said that to me.
I didn't read all the comments, but wanted to point out that the DA's statement doesn't necessarily mean that the officer feared for the officer's safety. It could also have meant that the officer feared for the kid's safety--say he was running blindly towards a road or something.
Admittedly, tasing him was probably not a great choice. I just wanted to point out that the DA's statement was not clear.
Re:
At the very least, they all sound like possible employers/love interests for Superman or Spiderman.
Re:
Does Hansmeier suffer from the same delusional self-appreciation as Steele?
I assumed he saw the rising costs they were being assigned and was trying to raise some cash in the only way he knew how--extortion.
I'm pretty sure Ford released the Nucleon--they just called it the "Pinto".
Not that it matters much, but it kind of sounds like the gym is not saying that they took out the extra money to see if this was a real account, but that they didn't think it was real, so they just put in whatever amount.
The first option is a ridiculous verification; the second is just operator error.
"Mother-in-law surprise."
Worst. Sex move. Ever.
I would love to see this reasoning applied to Dr. Who...
Re: Why Are You in My Room, Big Brother?
Oddly, that seems like one of the least frightening answers to that question.
Well, not exactly.
I consider what Snowden did to be correct. This was a corrupt system (that many, including myself, predicted when these laws were first passed--and I'm not even all that bright) and it needed to be pushed out into the light.
BUT, with that said, Snowden is absolutely not following in the trail of Thoreau, King or Gandhi. Those men were using civil disobedience to bring light to the wrongs. One of the tenets of civil disobedience is to accept the punishment in order to demonstrate that corrupt nature of the power.
I applaud Snowden's leaks, and I do not at all blame him for fleeing (I most certainly would have done so, had I been able to perform the leaks in the first place), but he is no more Gandhi than he is the Queen of England.
To be fair--the game is title "_______ 2013". You already owned "______ 2012" and "_______ 2011". I don't see how the claim that "_____2014" was coming out holds any kind of gravitas.
Uhhhh....
Aren't these guys spies? Isn't the whole point of being a spy to lie? Why would anyone have trusted them in the first place?
And as far as "not doing anything about the lying"--what could they possibly do? I mean, how do you prove that you aren't lying?
Note that I am not defending the NSA by any stretch. I just always assumed they were doing this kind of thing. What surprises me about it is that they were so stupid as to allow an IT contractor to gain access, and that they are so very bad at covering this kind of stuff up. I mean, if they can't keep this kind of stuff from our politicians, they must just be spewing information at foreign operatives.
Re: Not quite right...
I agree with Jay here. As great as it would be for them to jump on this, Sony has a long, storied and steady history for designing fantastic hardware and then going out of their way to fuck with the consumer.
Where would they have been had the minidisc not had self-destructing songs?
Where would they have been had players been able to burn their own PSP UMDs?
Hell, these guys won't even let the PS3 controllers charge from a basic USB wall wart.
So, however awesome it would be, I'm nearly certain that Sony will find some way to screw this up.
Re: Face palm
Dear god don't facepalm! They might charge you with assault and battery on yourself!
Maybe it's just me, but I really want to know what Julie Love does for a living.
This is all I think about whenever I read posts about "Salt Marsh":
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=45492