On the uBlock Origin subreddit, many people have posted that it doesn't seem to block these mid-roll ads. I don't know if this has been fixed yet though.
Here's a quote from two lines below the "via Zoom" line that you quoted.
But Leban, a 2020 Illinois Teacher of the Year finalist, said she does not have her own room, so state regulations bar her from taking off her mask. [Emphasis mine]
The point being, she's not in a room by herself and the state says that she should be wearing a mask as long as that's the case. All of this ignores the fact that the post also states that she's immunocompromised and was refused a completely remote position that would have obviated all of this mess.
Yeah, unfortunately, Biden has made plenty of anti-230 comments in the past. This is why we don't want something like this to happen now because he might just "overlook" reversing it if elected.
We must hope that it won't take that level of reboot since that type of reboot doesn't tend to happen without losing a war and, before the United States loses a war for its survival the government would likely attempt nuking its enemies into oblivion.
If not her dad (mentioned in the texts) then, as a criminal defendant, she's eligible for a public defender. In that case, the State of Washington is paying for her defense.
Android already allows for alternative app stores to be installed. I have the Amazon app store and the FOSS F-Droid app store (in addition to the Play Store) on my Galaxy S10+.
As an AC noted, the only part that is a horribly dangerous monopoly is the physical network. The government could simply use eminent domain to buy all of the physical networks. Or, even better, the federal government could start a new public works project aiming to build out fiber to every address in the country with the government itself owning all the fiber and leasing access to all ISP's equally. A mix of the two would also be possible. As the national network grows the government could use eminent domain to buy fiber networks belonging to the telecos.
The costs of any of these plans would be incredibly high (after adjusting for inflation they'd probably be higher than nationwide electrification, or phone service, or the interstate highway network) but, at this point, I don't think we have any better options.
Not too decent. Any law has to pass both parts of the legislature and, currently, half of that body won't pass anything that grants more power to police.
OldMugwump already pointed out the flaw with the second part of your post so I'll just focus on the first part. Already existing international laws say that no one owns space above the Kármán line. Starlink satellites are already passing over Russia, China, Iran, and just about every other country on Earth weekly at least. Why do you think Google Maps has such good satellite data on China and North Korea? Those governments certainly didn't give permission to Landsat (an American program) or Copernicus (its European counterpart) to map their countries.
Huges uses standard geosynchronous satellites. Those are 35,786 km (~22236 mi) above the surface. It takes quite a few milliseconds for light to travel from the ground to that satellite and back down to a base station connected to the wired internet that's where your latency comes from. Starlink uses satellites that are all planned to be below 1200 km (~746 mi) altitude.
Even given the fact that the network is being designed to pass signals from satellite to satellite until they reach one that's above a ground station near the destination, the latency for a 2400 km round trip is much lower than that for a 70,000 km round trip.
Can you have an enforceable contract with a non-person? In the US, the courts say, "no." That means that a non-person corporation wouldn't have to uphold its end of any agreements and I hope you can see the problems with that.
Re: Re: Re: It would be easier to just revoke the citizenship of
The problem with that approach is that we don't have federal incorporation. Every corporation registered in the United States is registered in one state or another. That makes Judicial dissolution by a court in another state or by the federal government quite difficult.
The reason that this ruling would be especially bad is that none of the others reached the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court rules that these abuses of the CFAA are allowed then that becomes the standard in the entire country overnight and we can expect this type of charge to pop up everywhere. As it currently stands, some judges see this type of charge for what it is, nonsense.
Any federal court can rule on the constitutionality of an action or law. However, as the AC noted, the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of these cases and, in most situations, if a ruling on constitutionality has occurred, the losing side will appeal until the case reaches the Supreme Court.
On the post: Twitch Experiments With Intrusive Ads That Piss Off Its Most Important Asset, Its Talent
Re: Experiment time
On the uBlock Origin subreddit, many people have posted that it doesn't seem to block these mid-roll ads. I don't know if this has been fixed yet though.
On the post: How Not To Be A School District Superintendent: The Elmhurst, IL Edition
Re: Wait,.. What?
Here's a quote from two lines below the "via Zoom" line that you quoted.
The point being, she's not in a room by herself and the state says that she should be wearing a mask as long as that's the case. All of this ignores the fact that the post also states that she's immunocompromised and was refused a completely remote position that would have obviated all of this mess.
On the post: Fight For The Future Wants To Help You Tell The FCC Where To Shove The NTIA's Anti-Section 230 Petition
Re: Re:
Yeah, unfortunately, Biden has made plenty of anti-230 comments in the past. This is why we don't want something like this to happen now because he might just "overlook" reversing it if elected.
On the post: DOJ Tries To Step In To Trump Defamation Case To Get It Dismissed; Claims His Statements About Alleged Rape Were Part Of His Presidential Duties
Re: One can only hope
We must hope that it won't take that level of reboot since that type of reboot doesn't tend to happen without losing a war and, before the United States loses a war for its survival the government would likely attempt nuking its enemies into oblivion.
On the post: Federal Court: No, You Fucking May Not Force Your Way Into A Home And Strip Search Six Very Young Children
Re:
They're being sued civilly not criminally charged. Therefore, the answer to your question is no.
On the post: When It Comes To Qualified Immunity, Where Your Rights Were Violated Matters More Than The Fact Your Rights Were Violated
Re: Re:
The couple you mentioned has been charged with felony illegal brandishing of a firearm. We'll see how that turns out in the long run.
On the post: When It Comes To Qualified Immunity, Where Your Rights Were Violated Matters More Than The Fact Your Rights Were Violated
Re: So....
A number of states (here's Colorado) have passed laws altering qualified immunity for officers within their states.
On the post: Washington Court Says First Amendment Protects Teen's Emoji-Laden Rant About Her Mother
Re: Yeah, But,
If not her dad (mentioned in the texts) then, as a criminal defendant, she's eligible for a public defender. In that case, the State of Washington is paying for her defense.
On the post: The Fortnite App Store Battle: A Real Antitrust Conundrum, Or Just A Carefully Planned Out Contract Negotiation?
Re: Re: Corporation vs Corporation
Android already allows for alternative app stores to be installed. I have the Amazon app store and the FOSS F-Droid app store (in addition to the Play Store) on my Galaxy S10+.
On the post: Michigan Supreme Court: Selling A $24,000 House (And Keeping The Proceeds) Over An $8.41 Debt Is Unlawful
Re:
First, Flint, MI is in Genesee County, not the non-existent "Flint" County. Secondly, Oakland county is quite a bit wealthier than Genesee County.
On the post: Trump, Big Telecom Continue Quest To Ban States From Protecting Broadband Consumers
Re: Curiosity
As an AC noted, the only part that is a horribly dangerous monopoly is the physical network. The government could simply use eminent domain to buy all of the physical networks. Or, even better, the federal government could start a new public works project aiming to build out fiber to every address in the country with the government itself owning all the fiber and leasing access to all ISP's equally. A mix of the two would also be possible. As the national network grows the government could use eminent domain to buy fiber networks belonging to the telecos.
The costs of any of these plans would be incredibly high (after adjusting for inflation they'd probably be higher than nationwide electrification, or phone service, or the interstate highway network) but, at this point, I don't think we have any better options.
On the post: Georgia Governor Passes Law Granting Cops Protected Status For 'Bias-Based' Crimes
Re:
Not too decent. Any law has to pass both parts of the legislature and, currently, half of that body won't pass anything that grants more power to police.
On the post: Space X's Starlink Won't Be The Broadband Disruption Play Many People Think
Re: Problems..
OldMugwump already pointed out the flaw with the second part of your post so I'll just focus on the first part. Already existing international laws say that no one owns space above the Kármán line. Starlink satellites are already passing over Russia, China, Iran, and just about every other country on Earth weekly at least. Why do you think Google Maps has such good satellite data on China and North Korea? Those governments certainly didn't give permission to Landsat (an American program) or Copernicus (its European counterpart) to map their countries.
On the post: Space X's Starlink Won't Be The Broadband Disruption Play Many People Think
Re: Re: on the other hand
Huges uses standard geosynchronous satellites. Those are 35,786 km (~22236 mi) above the surface. It takes quite a few milliseconds for light to travel from the ground to that satellite and back down to a base station connected to the wired internet that's where your latency comes from. Starlink uses satellites that are all planned to be below 1200 km (~746 mi) altitude.
Even given the fact that the network is being designed to pass signals from satellite to satellite until they reach one that's above a ground station near the destination, the latency for a 2400 km round trip is much lower than that for a 70,000 km round trip.
On the post: Space X's Starlink Won't Be The Broadband Disruption Play Many People Think
Re: Re: Shoot down satellites?
Also, if any enemy decides to kill a few, the Kessel Syndrome will bite them in the ass soon enough.
On the post: Days After FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly Suggests Trump's Section 230 Exec Order Is Unconstitutional... His Renomination To The FCC Is Withdrawn
Re: Re:
While not Texas, New York has already done this. In 1890, New York's highest court revoked the charter of the North River Sugar Refining Corporation on the grounds that it was abusing its powers as a monopoly. Judicial dissolution (the formal name for the corporate death penalty) is a power held by the states since we don't have federal chartering for corporations.
On the post: Days After FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly Suggests Trump's Section 230 Exec Order Is Unconstitutional... His Renomination To The FCC Is Withdrawn
Re: Re: Re:
Can you have an enforceable contract with a non-person? In the US, the courts say, "no." That means that a non-person corporation wouldn't have to uphold its end of any agreements and I hope you can see the problems with that.
On the post: The First Amendment Bars Regulating Political Neutrality, Even Via Section 230
Re: Re: Re: It would be easier to just revoke the citizenship of
The problem with that approach is that we don't have federal incorporation. Every corporation registered in the United States is registered in one state or another. That makes Judicial dissolution by a court in another state or by the federal government quite difficult.
On the post: EFF, Orin Kerr Ask The Supreme Court To Prevent Turning The CFAA Into A Convenient Way To Punish Site Users, Security Researchers
Re:
The reason that this ruling would be especially bad is that none of the others reached the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court rules that these abuses of the CFAA are allowed then that becomes the standard in the entire country overnight and we can expect this type of charge to pop up everywhere. As it currently stands, some judges see this type of charge for what it is, nonsense.
On the post: Universities Ask Court To Block ICE's Directive Ordering The Removal Of Foreign Students Engaged In Remote Learning
Re: Re: Re: Small detail missing:
Any federal court can rule on the constitutionality of an action or law. However, as the AC noted, the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of these cases and, in most situations, if a ruling on constitutionality has occurred, the losing side will appeal until the case reaches the Supreme Court.
Next >>