"Customers who declined to pay lost access to the mobile app (even for local use), along with all automations and the hub's local API integrations, leaving only basic on-device (physical) control."
If the company simply cease to exist then the firmware which took away local access would never have been pushed out to the devices.
I got nothing new clever to add to the discussion I just wanted to say that I hate it when I find myself defending the constitutional rights of probable scumbags.
"I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Deer Dan, non-free sex is called prostitution and is generally illegal, also its customary in our culture for people to routinely gift beer to people they like.
All joking aside while I find the monetization of fundamental legal rights ... I also understand the need for standards and the need for those working on standards to have an income.
And the frustration felt when everyone freely complains what's wrong with the current way of doing things, but no one is proposing a realistic alternative.
I suggest unwinding by handing out with the sorts of people that gift each other with free beer.
Their point of view is simple, the law is just like most things in life ... you get what you pay for.
I personally would like to be able to afford the 4th amendment "plus package" where my car, clothes, address indicate that I just might be able to afford a quality lawyer.
Right now I'm on the 4th amendment "basic plan", so its unwise to use phrases like "Am I being detained?", "I don't consent to this search.", "slip the warrant under the door".
Still its better than 4th amendment "lite plan", that's where the police can publically strip search you while trying to earn their amateur proctology merit badge.
People with an agenda probably reported it as child porn. In that case the Facebook will take it down automatically without human intervention.
What they need to do is simply add harsh penalties to people who abuse the reporting system. Ban their accounts, and then issue an even longer ban over their ability to report content.
Add an appeal process, where a human gets to view the content but add an even longer ban if the appeal is denied.
Have a moderation system where a randomly selected "jury" of facebook users get to decide about the accuracy of the claim.
They don't have the man power to review things. There ways to solve that problem.
Re Bankrupcy
"Customers who declined to pay lost access to the mobile app (even for local use), along with all automations and the hub's local API integrations, leaving only basic on-device (physical) control." If the company simply cease to exist then the firmware which took away local access would never have been pushed out to the devices.
Re: Re: obligation?
1) The laws of physics require that only one broadcaster can use the same spectrum in or near the same area without interference.
2) The authority comes from the Radio Act of 1927. Among other things it established that frequencies could not be owned only licensed.
3) One of the criteria the FCC must use when conducting granting a Broadcast License is whether or not the it will serve the public interest.
Among other things this prevents companies from purchasing leases on the frequencies required by electronic devices like WiFi Routers and what not.
Re: I find this case troubling.
I meant "nothing new AND clever".
I find this case troubling.
I got nothing new clever to add to the discussion I just wanted to say that I hate it when I find myself defending the constitutional rights of probable scumbags.
FBI Oath ...
FBI Oath ...
"I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Extreme pain makes it hard to think clearly, what's the lawyers excuse?
Subject say all that needs to be said.
Deer Dan ...
Deer Dan, non-free sex is called prostitution and is generally illegal, also its customary in our culture for people to routinely gift beer to people they like.
All joking aside while I find the monetization of fundamental legal rights ... I also understand the need for standards and the need for those working on standards to have an income.
And the frustration felt when everyone freely complains what's wrong with the current way of doing things, but no one is proposing a realistic alternative.
I suggest unwinding by handing out with the sorts of people that gift each other with free beer.
I completely understand their position.
Their point of view is simple, the law is just like most things in life ... you get what you pay for.
I personally would like to be able to afford the 4th amendment "plus package" where my car, clothes, address indicate that I just might be able to afford a quality lawyer.
Right now I'm on the 4th amendment "basic plan", so its unwise to use phrases like "Am I being detained?", "I don't consent to this search.", "slip the warrant under the door".
Still its better than 4th amendment "lite plan", that's where the police can publically strip search you while trying to earn their amateur proctology merit badge.
Adopt penalties for false reporting.
People with an agenda probably reported it as child porn. In that case the Facebook will take it down automatically without human intervention.
What they need to do is simply add harsh penalties to people who abuse the reporting system. Ban their accounts, and then issue an even longer ban over their ability to report content.
Add an appeal process, where a human gets to view the content but add an even longer ban if the appeal is denied.
Have a moderation system where a randomly selected "jury" of facebook users get to decide about the accuracy of the claim.
They don't have the man power to review things. There ways to solve that problem.
Not as bad as I expected.
The information was his decades old application to join the secret service and the fact that he didn't get the job.