The question remains: if they (the greater majority) actually are out to get you, then why haven't you been gotten yet? Could it be that we tend to protect the members of the minority, instead of exterminating them all in one swell foop?
You can thank democracy for that little favor. You're welcome.
Will someone kindly point me to the appropriate section of the Constitution that says one is guaranteed the right to live without fear, of anything or anyone? Thanks.
Working off the above response about filming her, that's just the first step.
2) Find someone with a shotgun mic and record her mutterings at the same time. Who knows, she may be mouthing actionable threats.
3) As a group, the parents and their kids should walk together towards her as they leave the park, potentially "forcing" her to move aside, or to retreat in some fashion. If/when the cops might question some of those group members, "Officer, we were just taking a stroll with our children, showing them some of the sights of the neighborhood". Always being peaceful while going about their lawful occasions, you understand.
4) Compliment her yard and house, unless they are an absolute dump.
5) Best scenario: Start including her. Invite her to come to activities, albeit with both parents and kids. Keep it up, see if she relents. From the sound of it, I have to wonder if she's lonely, and being asked to act in a grandmotherly fashion might be all that's needed. But document everything, don't assume that she won't misinterpret a good will gesture, and try to take it to some kind of authorities.
Looks like YAA want to gum up the court system. (Yet Another Asshole.) Someone wants a case, and a firm decision, on this topic, but here's what the judge would be taking on... oh wait, let me use a simile:
A European is walking through the jungles of Africa one day, and is set upon and captured by some cannibals. The chief said to the man "You will die, but I will choose the manner of your death. To make my choice, you must tell us a fact. If I decide that it is true, then you will die by being burned at the stake. If I think your statement is false, then you will die by an arrow through the heart." The quick-thinking victim promptly said "I will die by an arrow through my heart".
I'm quite certain that it will take a real effort to find a judge that wants to render a decision in such case. Or if the judge has ever read Richard Marckinko's 'Rogue Warrior' series of books, he'll tell the YAA "S squared!".
When I went to law school something like 48 years ago, we didn't even think of differentiating any level of procedural justice, it was just a given that fairness and transparency were part and parcel of the process. Now, at an advanced age, I have to agree that what I got was a pie-in-the-sky view of how things should be, not how that are (and likely, not how there were at that time, either).
The article's line in question could've been more clearly written. "Conditions" doesn't really connote why there might be different levels, as the words "high" and "low" easily confer on whatever words might follow. You were much more concise with "local", etc. but now we're using high and low to denote a level of quality-of-service, not something like "formal" versus "informal" (which is how I took it in the first place).
Shame that has to happen, but it's gonna be a hard row to hoe, getting everyone on the same page.
Did anyone else pickup on the fact that a report a few months ago said that many States, particularly New York, are claiming in their accountability reports that they are offloading their searches to the Feds, naming many of these same three-letter agencies that just got through claiming the exact opposite?
Just another excuse to pull out of the bag of tricks, when "those accountability assholes come snooping around".
In a nutshell? It has exposed just how badly we have failed, as a civilization, to recognize, and remedy, a significant portion of the world's population that is willfully unenlightenable. And yes, I'm being nice and polite in my descriptions there, but I just can't muster the strength for calling a spade a spade this morning.
The only solution I can think of to remove any and all humans from any modicum of control over the 'net, but that means putting an AI in charge.... even though I can't seem to rid myself of visions of Skynet.
1) What if a woman has an abortion in another state, just a week before a previously planned move to Texas? Like as in she has already set up a household with all the trimmings that are required by law to be a resident of that state. Makes one wonder....
1a) And further to that, how do you stop the crazies who willfully fail to recognize that the law is not retroactive, and keep chanting "10,000 bucks", "10,000 bucks", "10,000 bucks"....?
2) What about military women/spouses stationed in Texas? If they're on-base, does Texas really expect this law to have full force and effect in the same manner, as if the US Military is subject to local laws of this nature?
2a) See 1a) above, vis-a-vis the crazies not understanding that the US Military trumps State law for on-base activities. I foresee a lot of damaged egos seeking private revenge when they're told "kiss that 10 grand goodbye, it ain't gonna happen"....
This is got to be the Mother Of All Cluster-Fucks!
Look for a lot of women to be moving out of the state, permanently. With or without husbands, kids, family of any kind. It would be nice to see a large enough number of them do so, to make a non-ignorable statement to the world at large.
(My proposed slogan of such a movement would be: "If you fuck with us, you can't fuck us!")
The larger the haystack, the harder it is to find a needle.
Nope. A larger haystack does not make it more difficult to find the needle, it only means that finding it will require more time. A fair bit of difference there.
The next time CDOT needs to close a road or re-route traffic, lots of people will remember this incident, ignore the official information, and get themselves and others hurt.
And very shortly after that, the lawyers will point back to this incident as a legal basis for why their clients had good cause to doubt the veracity of such warnings. The first line of attack will be: "The State's intentional failure to properly secure and maintain the motoring public's trust in road signage", or some such.
The fact that a governmental agency can be "trusted" is probably the largest concern to come out of this whole story. Thousands of drivers stating that they just successfully drove an open road should automatically trump an official's word that it's closed. The moral of the story for those map apps is: Trust.... but verify.
Why it wants to go to war with its own fans and customers in this way, meanwhile, has been an open question for years.
The question should be: Why would anyone give money to Nintendo in the first place, knowing that the company will screw the legal purchaser, and continue to screw them over and over again. And they won't even kiss the customer first....
If these freshly entitled assholes effectively take over my lawn, I'm charging them rent, and it won't be cheap.
Having the Sheriff run them off for speech I don't like, that's now gonna be a tough sell. Having them evicted for failure to pay rent, that's a slam-dunk.
On the post: Litecoin Walmart Hoax Easily Exploits A Lazy U.S. Press
Re:
The question remains: if they (the greater majority) actually are out to get you, then why haven't you been gotten yet? Could it be that we tend to protect the members of the minority, instead of exterminating them all in one swell foop?
You can thank democracy for that little favor. You're welcome.
On the post: PETA Sues NIH And HHS Directors For Blocking Comments With 'PETA' And '#StopAnimalTesting'
Re: PETA?
It is. But some people are refusing to read the memo.
On the post: Appeals Court Says The First Amendment Protects Minnesota Woman's Right To Be Super-Shitty About Nearby Islamic School
Separate from just above.....
Will someone kindly point me to the appropriate section of the Constitution that says one is guaranteed the right to live without fear, of anything or anyone? Thanks.
On the post: Appeals Court Says The First Amendment Protects Minnesota Woman's Right To Be Super-Shitty About Nearby Islamic School
Working off the above response about filming her, that's just the first step.
2) Find someone with a shotgun mic and record her mutterings at the same time. Who knows, she may be mouthing actionable threats.
3) As a group, the parents and their kids should walk together towards her as they leave the park, potentially "forcing" her to move aside, or to retreat in some fashion. If/when the cops might question some of those group members, "Officer, we were just taking a stroll with our children, showing them some of the sights of the neighborhood". Always being peaceful while going about their lawful occasions, you understand.
4) Compliment her yard and house, unless they are an absolute dump.
5) Best scenario: Start including her. Invite her to come to activities, albeit with both parents and kids. Keep it up, see if she relents. From the sound of it, I have to wonder if she's lonely, and being asked to act in a grandmotherly fashion might be all that's needed. But document everything, don't assume that she won't misinterpret a good will gesture, and try to take it to some kind of authorities.
On the post: Mistrial Declared In Backpage Founders' Trial; After DOJ Ignores Judge's Rules Regarding What It Could Present
Re: Alternatively...
Or from the *Don't make me come down there" dept.
On the post: Commentator Insists That Fact Checking Is An Attack On Free Speech
Looks like YAA want to gum up the court system. (Yet Another Asshole.) Someone wants a case, and a firm decision, on this topic, but here's what the judge would be taking on... oh wait, let me use a simile:
A European is walking through the jungles of Africa one day, and is set upon and captured by some cannibals. The chief said to the man "You will die, but I will choose the manner of your death. To make my choice, you must tell us a fact. If I decide that it is true, then you will die by being burned at the stake. If I think your statement is false, then you will die by an arrow through the heart." The quick-thinking victim promptly said "I will die by an arrow through my heart".
I'm quite certain that it will take a real effort to find a judge that wants to render a decision in such case. Or if the judge has ever read Richard Marckinko's 'Rogue Warrior' series of books, he'll tell the YAA "S squared!".
On the post: GAO's Second Report On Facial Recognition Tech Provides More Details On Federal Use Of Clearview's Unvetted AI
Re: Re:
First, thanks James.
When I went to law school something like 48 years ago, we didn't even think of differentiating any level of procedural justice, it was just a given that fairness and transparency were part and parcel of the process. Now, at an advanced age, I have to agree that what I got was a pie-in-the-sky view of how things should be, not how that are (and likely, not how there were at that time, either).
The article's line in question could've been more clearly written. "Conditions" doesn't really connote why there might be different levels, as the words "high" and "low" easily confer on whatever words might follow. You were much more concise with "local", etc. but now we're using high and low to denote a level of quality-of-service, not something like "formal" versus "informal" (which is how I took it in the first place).
Shame that has to happen, but it's gonna be a hard row to hoe, getting everyone on the same page.
On the post: GAO's Second Report On Facial Recognition Tech Provides More Details On Federal Use Of Clearview's Unvetted AI
Did anyone else pickup on the fact that a report a few months ago said that many States, particularly New York, are claiming in their accountability reports that they are offloading their searches to the Feds, naming many of these same three-letter agencies that just got through claiming the exact opposite?
Just another excuse to pull out of the bag of tricks, when "those accountability assholes come snooping around".
On the post: GAO's Second Report On Facial Recognition Tech Provides More Details On Federal Use Of Clearview's Unvetted AI
HIGH procedural justice? LOW procedural justice? Someone want to explain how procedural justice can be divided into different levels, please?
On the post: Brazilian President Bans Social Media Companies From Removing Disinformation & Abuse
What has the internet done for us?
In a nutshell? It has exposed just how badly we have failed, as a civilization, to recognize, and remedy, a significant portion of the world's population that is willfully unenlightenable. And yes, I'm being nice and polite in my descriptions there, but I just can't muster the strength for calling a spade a spade this morning.
The only solution I can think of to remove any and all humans from any modicum of control over the 'net, but that means putting an AI in charge.... even though I can't seem to rid myself of visions of Skynet.
We're in deep kimchee here folks, damnably deep.
On the post: The Role Of Confirmation Bias In Spreading Misinformation
Re: Mike Masnick himself is guilty of confirmation BIAS
To paraphrase:
Or as I like to put it: "I'm not biased, I'm just extremely allergic to willfully ignorant assholes."
On the post: New Texas Abortion Law Likely To Unleash A Torrent Of Lawsuits Against Online Education, Advocacy And Other Speech
Two more questions for the pot:
1) What if a woman has an abortion in another state, just a week before a previously planned move to Texas? Like as in she has already set up a household with all the trimmings that are required by law to be a resident of that state. Makes one wonder....
1a) And further to that, how do you stop the crazies who willfully fail to recognize that the law is not retroactive, and keep chanting "10,000 bucks", "10,000 bucks", "10,000 bucks"....?
2) What about military women/spouses stationed in Texas? If they're on-base, does Texas really expect this law to have full force and effect in the same manner, as if the US Military is subject to local laws of this nature?
2a) See 1a) above, vis-a-vis the crazies not understanding that the US Military trumps State law for on-base activities. I foresee a lot of damaged egos seeking private revenge when they're told "kiss that 10 grand goodbye, it ain't gonna happen"....
This is got to be the Mother Of All Cluster-Fucks!
On the post: New Texas Abortion Law Likely To Unleash A Torrent Of Lawsuits Against Online Education, Advocacy And Other Speech
Re: This is a bigger mess than it seems at first.
Look for a lot of women to be moving out of the state, permanently. With or without husbands, kids, family of any kind. It would be nice to see a large enough number of them do so, to make a non-ignorable statement to the world at large.
(My proposed slogan of such a movement would be: "If you fuck with us, you can't fuck us!")
On the post: Every Streaming Company Not Named Apple Receives A Lousy Grade On Privacy
Re: The Haystack Principle
Nope. A larger haystack does not make it more difficult to find the needle, it only means that finding it will require more time. A fair bit of difference there.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Congress vs Unmodded Chat/forum
To augment your statement there, ECA, let me offer up:
On the post: Colorado Transportation Officals Asked Navigation App Providers To Plant False Information. Worse, The Providers Complied.
Re: Re: Fool me once...
Assumes so many facts not in evidence... well deserving of a Troll Flag.
On the post: Colorado Transportation Officals Asked Navigation App Providers To Plant False Information. Worse, The Providers Complied.
Re: Fool me once...
And very shortly after that, the lawyers will point back to this incident as a legal basis for why their clients had good cause to doubt the veracity of such warnings. The first line of attack will be: "The State's intentional failure to properly secure and maintain the motoring public's trust in road signage", or some such.
The fact that a governmental agency can be "trusted" is probably the largest concern to come out of this whole story. Thousands of drivers stating that they just successfully drove an open road should automatically trump an official's word that it's closed. The moral of the story for those map apps is: Trust.... but verify.
On the post: Nintendo Shuts Down Another 'Smash' Tournament Due To Mod Use, With No Piracy As A Concern
Wrong question
The question should be: Why would anyone give money to Nintendo in the first place, knowing that the company will screw the legal purchaser, and continue to screw them over and over again. And they won't even kiss the customer first....
On the post: Texas Legislature Says You Can't Teach About Racism In Schools, But Social Media Sites Must Host Holocaust Denialism
Re:
I'm sure I know what you meant to say, but I'm also sure that you actually nailed it one!
On the post: Texas Legislature Says You Can't Teach About Racism In Schools, But Social Media Sites Must Host Holocaust Denialism
Re: Re: Nope
If these freshly entitled assholes effectively take over my lawn, I'm charging them rent, and it won't be cheap.
Having the Sheriff run them off for speech I don't like, that's now gonna be a tough sell. Having them evicted for failure to pay rent, that's a slam-dunk.
Next >>