If you think the goal is to make parole a more viable option, the false negative and false positive rate makes no sense.
But if you think the goal is to fill as many cells as possible, as often as possible, as long as possible, then an app that puts people who obey the rules back in cells is working as intended.
There are people who are not just okay with being jack-booted as the sword swings both ways, they fantasize about it.
Some people are so deeply uncomfortable with the idea of freedom, that they don't need to seek permission (nor does anyone else) that they do whatever they can to make sure that freedom goes away.
On the other hand, if cops don't need a warrant, nobody else does either. Put a camera with super high resolution on top of a building and point it at them. They'll hate it, but what can they do?
It's the warrant that makes an invasion of privacy lawful when it otherwise would not be. The only times cops don't need a warrant is when what they're doing isn't unlawful.
Something I've never understood about that whole thing - if the Constitution doesn't apply and all statutes are authorized by the Constitution, how can there be any laws at all in that zone?
Um, no. Unless you want to try to claim that white people are allowed to threaten random people with guns and fight police without consequences, the laws that Alton Sterling was shot over aren't racist.
Re: As a software developer, do I have 'standing' to sue?
You could always try suing for declaratory judgment of non-infringement.
Of course, you might also be able to simply ignore bad patents issued after the SCOTUS ruling - if the Court says USPTO cannot grant certain types of patents, did they REALLY grant one or just imagine it?
An impeachment is like a grand jury indictment, with the House of Representatives acting in place of a grand jury. It all sounds scary and legalistic, but it's not really any different from a county DA filing charges - just being charged is nowhere near the same as being convicted.
The Senate are the judge and jury. And they acquitted Trump.
A corrections officer does not have the authority to impose a gag order, only a legislature or judge can do that. Nobody is required to obey an illegal order.
Oh, I have no doubt he hit what he was aiming at, since I doubt he thought much beyond the windshield in front of him. Would have served him right if someone in the car ahead had returned fire though.
It's the party line of the police unions that the only reason cops ever commit wrongdoing is because of a flaw in their training, therefore the remedy is to simply give them more training.
Never mind that non-cops also have gaps in their training, that can cause them to do illegal things in error. The system has no problems convicting them as the vicious criminals they 'are'.
The judge doesn't have to. Judges have absolute immunity to civil lawsuits. Not because the law says they do, but because other judges will simply refuse to hear the case.
It's especially ludicrous when you consider that the law regarding negligent discharge of a firearm is the same for deputies as it is for any other citizen. Police only get excused when they fire their guns under the necessity doctrine, and shooting into a crowd was not necessary.
On the post: Prisons Replace Ankle Bracelets With An Expensive Smartphone App That Doesn't Work
Not a bug but a feature
If you think the goal is to make parole a more viable option, the false negative and false positive rate makes no sense.
But if you think the goal is to fill as many cells as possible, as often as possible, as long as possible, then an app that puts people who obey the rules back in cells is working as intended.
On the post: Prisons Replace Ankle Bracelets With An Expensive Smartphone App That Doesn't Work
Re: Re:
Which will be positive proof you are up to no good, individually traceable to you, and they'll put you in a cell for it.
If everyone is required to wear a radio transmitter, the fact that yours doesn't work will be easily detected and all they need to put you in prison.
On the post: How Can Anyone Argue With A Straight Face That China's Approach To Speech Online Is Better Than The US's During A Pandemic
Re: easy answer
There are people who are not just okay with being jack-booted as the sword swings both ways, they fantasize about it.
Some people are so deeply uncomfortable with the idea of freedom, that they don't need to seek permission (nor does anyone else) that they do whatever they can to make sure that freedom goes away.
On the post: Federal Court Says Baltimore PD's High-Powered Aerial Surveillance Program Doesn't Violate The Constitution
Re: Pixel Schmixel
On the other hand, if cops don't need a warrant, nobody else does either. Put a camera with super high resolution on top of a building and point it at them. They'll hate it, but what can they do?
It's the warrant that makes an invasion of privacy lawful when it otherwise would not be. The only times cops don't need a warrant is when what they're doing isn't unlawful.
On the post: Federal Court Says Baltimore PD's High-Powered Aerial Surveillance Program Doesn't Violate The Constitution
Re:
Something I've never understood about that whole thing - if the Constitution doesn't apply and all statutes are authorized by the Constitution, how can there be any laws at all in that zone?
On the post: Disney Says If You Tweet #MayThe4th At It, You're Agreeing To A Disney Terms Of Use (You're Not)
Re:
Funny you say that...
https://www.amazon.com/Darth-Vader-Mickey-Mouse-Weekends/dp/B000MPONWY
On the post: Disney Says If You Tweet #MayThe4th At It, You're Agreeing To A Disney Terms Of Use (You're Not)
Re:
The way the USPTO likes to grant patents on things that cannot be patented, you might well be able to.
On the post: Disney Says If You Tweet #MayThe4th At It, You're Agreeing To A Disney Terms Of Use (You're Not)
Re:
You've just summarized government licensing laws.
On the post: The Supreme Court Needs To Reverse The Fifth Circuit's Awful Ruling In The DeRay McKesson Case
Re:
Um, no. Unless you want to try to claim that white people are allowed to threaten random people with guns and fight police without consequences, the laws that Alton Sterling was shot over aren't racist.
On the post: The Supreme Court Needs To Reverse The Fifth Circuit's Awful Ruling In The DeRay McKesson Case
Re:
That's what the equal protection clause of the Constitution demands, but somehow the courts don't see it that way.
On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents
Re: As a software developer, do I have 'standing' to sue?
You could always try suing for declaratory judgment of non-infringement.
Of course, you might also be able to simply ignore bad patents issued after the SCOTUS ruling - if the Court says USPTO cannot grant certain types of patents, did they REALLY grant one or just imagine it?
On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents
Re: Re: Abuse of power
An impeachment is like a grand jury indictment, with the House of Representatives acting in place of a grand jury. It all sounds scary and legalistic, but it's not really any different from a county DA filing charges - just being charged is nowhere near the same as being convicted.
The Senate are the judge and jury. And they acquitted Trump.
On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents
Re: Constitutional crisis in the making
Technically, we don't need to get the USPTO to obey the court. After the ruling, all the patents they issue that violate the order are illegal.
You can't successfully sue someone for doing something a supreme court ruling says isn't against the law.
On the post: New Jersey Corrections Officials (Temporarily) Banned Released Prisoners From Talking To Journalists
Non-judicial is non-enforceable
A corrections officer does not have the authority to impose a gag order, only a legislature or judge can do that. Nobody is required to obey an illegal order.
On the post: The System Works: Deputy Who Randomly Fired His Gun Through His Windshield Into Rush Hour Traffic Fined $2
Re: HOw many counts here..
Oh, I have no doubt he hit what he was aiming at, since I doubt he thought much beyond the windshield in front of him. Would have served him right if someone in the car ahead had returned fire though.
On the post: The System Works: Deputy Who Randomly Fired His Gun Through His Windshield Into Rush Hour Traffic Fined $2
Re: Re: $2
As well as cruel to make him pay for the ammo he expends. smh
On the post: The System Works: Deputy Who Randomly Fired His Gun Through His Windshield Into Rush Hour Traffic Fined $2
Re:
It's the party line of the police unions that the only reason cops ever commit wrongdoing is because of a flaw in their training, therefore the remedy is to simply give them more training.
Never mind that non-cops also have gaps in their training, that can cause them to do illegal things in error. The system has no problems convicting them as the vicious criminals they 'are'.
On the post: The System Works: Deputy Who Randomly Fired His Gun Through His Windshield Into Rush Hour Traffic Fined $2
Re:
The judge doesn't have to. Judges have absolute immunity to civil lawsuits. Not because the law says they do, but because other judges will simply refuse to hear the case.
Corruption at its finest, enshrined in case law.
On the post: The System Works: Deputy Who Randomly Fired His Gun Through His Windshield Into Rush Hour Traffic Fined $2
Re: Re: Red flag
It's especially ludicrous when you consider that the law regarding negligent discharge of a firearm is the same for deputies as it is for any other citizen. Police only get excused when they fire their guns under the necessity doctrine, and shooting into a crowd was not necessary.
On the post: Canadian Publishing Group Says France Has The Right Idea, Presses For Its Own Google Tax
Re:
Unfortunately, that sounds like a great way to end up buggered by a government bureaucracy.
Next >>