To a large extent, if you say you are a journalist, you MUST be treated as one. Leaving it up to the government, or even majority opinion, creates a danger of silencing those whose speech our entire system relies upon to function.
If mere cookies can cause enough GDPR issues in the EU to be an existential threat to entire companies, HOW can what amounts to a mandatory data breach just be business as usual?
Re: For those of you who keep defending social media censorship.
Cool. Do you realize that means that someone might be able to insert themselves into your living room to hold a political rally for a cause or candidate you hate, just because you had a block party at some point?
Given what the law seeks to do, and what it actually does, I expect the companies to just block all Texas residents rather than try (and fail) to comply with the law if the fifth circuit rules in favor of Texas and/or vacates the stay.
Can you imagine how outraged the governor of Texas would be if Texans are denied access nirely to what he is claiming are virtual town squares?
Fun fact: the US participation in Five(Four) Eyes is illegal. It always has been. Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18 USC 242) is not limited to US territory - and this is clearly deliberate, since 18 USC 241, enacted and written at the same time as 242, explicitly DOES only apply within the USA.
More people are killed every year using hands and feet than are killed with assault weapons. People get stabbed with pencils and pens all the time - to say nothing of how nasty getting stabbed with scissors is. In many places, possession of tobacco on school grounds is a misdemeanor, and few of them place an age limit on the matter.
There are LOTS of drugs and weapons in schools, in the possession of teachers, administrators and students. If making finger guns can get you expelled for bringing a weapon to school, then possession of pens and pencils is FAR more serious an offense!
This. Even if an arrest record is expunged from public records, the courts and police still have access to it and it will show up on both police background checks and lawsuit discovery.
If the Chief of Police of a given town or county values the service oath - or is simply averse to 42 USC 1983 lawsuits - they won't be hiring a cop with rights violation arrests on record. Someone suing a cop for a rights violation discovering that officer has prior arrests for such violations - possibly many of them - will have a very easy time proving a pattern of behavior not just for the officer, but the department if he's still a cop there.
And you can make an arrest with words alone - while the cops would love to have people believe a complimentary body slam or choke hold or tasing is an essential part of the arrest process, it's just not true. "I am arresting you for the federal felony rights violation I just witnessed you commit" is at least as binding in most places in the USA as a cop body slamming you, choking you out, tasing your unconscious body and handcuffing you while you're KOed, only to charge you with resisting arrest even though you were asleep when he laid hands on you.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I don't see why they don't bring a 4
Only a fool takes the cop to the department he works for if they think the entire department is corrupt. This sort of thing is what state police are for if the cop is local, the FBI if it's a state cop.
A seizure warrant signed by a judge on that cashier's check would allow them to cash it legally, unfortunately. It's not as secure as you think.
Some police departments issue debit card readers to their officers, so they can drain your bank accounts on the side of the road while they have you pulled over. Depending on how your bank handles overdrafts, this practice might drain your savings account or even retirement fund accounts too - and leave you owing the bank hundreds in overdraft fees for the 'convenience' of having your money stolen by highway bandits.
“ While it's understandable that public statements wouldn't include any accusations of wrongdoing while an investigation was underway”
No it’s not understandable at all. Just look at any of the thousands of police press releases over the last decade alone that were very specific about what was done that was wrong, naming names about who did those things. Those public statements ALWAYS come out long before the investigation is completed, when the suspect is not a cop.
The USA is the only country where highly trained law enforcement professionals are allowed to panic on duty and act crazy - but untrained citizens are required, under penalty of summary execution, to remain perfectly calm no matter how crazy the cops act or how many guns are pointed at them.
That hindering charge might be a passive-aggressive form of the resisting arrest police like to slap on even the most compliant suspects. After all, we’ve seen resisting arrest charges making it to a judge despite suspects being so compliant their only visible resistance was failure to teleport themselves into a cell with a signed confession in hand, many times before.
How, exactly, would you ‘break up’ a centralized messaging service that does exactly one thing - and only that thing - without permanently shutting it down entirely, or creating a precedent that any company with more than N number of customers is an anti-trust violation?
He’s going to make enemies of every large corporation with the latter one!
It’s not just Calvin ball, it’s retroactive Calvin ball - they’re applying the new rules to content that was posted years before the policy went into effect.
No Twitter regular has time to go back through every tweet they’ve ever sent to vet whether it violates a poorly written, highly subjective new policy.
Heck, the new policy might even require Twitter to ban its own executives or even itself from its servers, because I’m pretty sure the new policy being retroactive puts even the founders of Twitter in violation at least once!
Killing someone/something because you can’t see an immediate use for them is cartoonish supervillain-tier evil. The fact that an actual police department said they’d have to kill all their drug sniffing dogs if legalization passed reveals all sorts of psychopathic thinking on top of the supervillain thing.
They can’t re-home animals deliberately trained to be so vicious that they’d be a danger to the public? Last I checked, ANYONE training a dog like that was subject to criminal charges.
On the post: Judge Wants To Know If DOJ Ignored Its Own Journalist-Targeting Guidelines When Investigating An Infowars Host Who Raided The Capitol
Re:
To a large extent, if you say you are a journalist, you MUST be treated as one. Leaving it up to the government, or even majority opinion, creates a danger of silencing those whose speech our entire system relies upon to function.
On the post: Another Illinois Appeals Court Handles Compelled Password Production, Says There's No Fifth Amendment Issue Here
Re: Re: Admit to a crime
Yes, it would.
On the post: Proctorio's Anti-Cheating Software Exposes Students To Hackers Say Dutch Education Officials
GDPR?
If mere cookies can cause enough GDPR issues in the EU to be an existential threat to entire companies, HOW can what amounts to a mandatory data breach just be business as usual?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: For those of you who keep defending social media censorship.
Cool. Do you realize that means that someone might be able to insert themselves into your living room to hold a political rally for a cause or candidate you hate, just because you had a block party at some point?
On the post: Texas Says Its Unconstitutional Content Moderation Law Should Still Go Into Effect While We Wait For Appeal; Judge: 'No, That's Not How This Works'
Given what the law seeks to do, and what it actually does, I expect the companies to just block all Texas residents rather than try (and fail) to comply with the law if the fifth circuit rules in favor of Texas and/or vacates the stay.
Can you imagine how outraged the governor of Texas would be if Texans are denied access nirely to what he is claiming are virtual town squares?
On the post: Ninth Circuit Appeals Court May Have Raised The Bar On Notifying Defendants About Secretive Surveillance Techniques
Re:
Fun fact: the US participation in Five(Four) Eyes is illegal. It always has been. Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18 USC 242) is not limited to US territory - and this is clearly deliberate, since 18 USC 241, enacted and written at the same time as 242, explicitly DOES only apply within the USA.
On the post: Students Have Rights: Court Dumps Evidence After Cops Rely On A Month-Old Anonymous Tip To Search A Minor
Re: Re: call in tips for every single student
More people are killed every year using hands and feet than are killed with assault weapons. People get stabbed with pencils and pens all the time - to say nothing of how nasty getting stabbed with scissors is. In many places, possession of tobacco on school grounds is a misdemeanor, and few of them place an age limit on the matter.
There are LOTS of drugs and weapons in schools, in the possession of teachers, administrators and students. If making finger guns can get you expelled for bringing a weapon to school, then possession of pens and pencils is FAR more serious an offense!
On the post: Students Have Rights: Court Dumps Evidence After Cops Rely On A Month-Old Anonymous Tip To Search A Minor
Re: Re:
If I had known the law back then, I might well have tried it in elementary school - I was a little shit back then.
On the post: Students Have Rights: Court Dumps Evidence After Cops Rely On A Month-Old Anonymous Tip To Search A Minor
Re: Re: Re:
This. Even if an arrest record is expunged from public records, the courts and police still have access to it and it will show up on both police background checks and lawsuit discovery.
If the Chief of Police of a given town or county values the service oath - or is simply averse to 42 USC 1983 lawsuits - they won't be hiring a cop with rights violation arrests on record. Someone suing a cop for a rights violation discovering that officer has prior arrests for such violations - possibly many of them - will have a very easy time proving a pattern of behavior not just for the officer, but the department if he's still a cop there.
And you can make an arrest with words alone - while the cops would love to have people believe a complimentary body slam or choke hold or tasing is an essential part of the arrest process, it's just not true. "I am arresting you for the federal felony rights violation I just witnessed you commit" is at least as binding in most places in the USA as a cop body slamming you, choking you out, tasing your unconscious body and handcuffing you while you're KOed, only to charge you with resisting arrest even though you were asleep when he laid hands on you.
On the post: Oklahoma Deputies Steal $141,500 From Men Trying To Buy Land, Manage To Make $10,000 Of It Disappear
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I don't see why they don't bring a 4
Only a fool takes the cop to the department he works for if they think the entire department is corrupt. This sort of thing is what state police are for if the cop is local, the FBI if it's a state cop.
On the post: Oklahoma Deputies Steal $141,500 From Men Trying To Buy Land, Manage To Make $10,000 Of It Disappear
Re: Sucks we have to do this...
A seizure warrant signed by a judge on that cashier's check would allow them to cash it legally, unfortunately. It's not as secure as you think.
Some police departments issue debit card readers to their officers, so they can drain your bank accounts on the side of the road while they have you pulled over. Depending on how your bank handles overdrafts, this practice might drain your savings account or even retirement fund accounts too - and leave you owing the bank hundreds in overdraft fees for the 'convenience' of having your money stolen by highway bandits.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
“ While it's understandable that public statements wouldn't include any accusations of wrongdoing while an investigation was underway”
No it’s not understandable at all. Just look at any of the thousands of police press releases over the last decade alone that were very specific about what was done that was wrong, naming names about who did those things. Those public statements ALWAYS come out long before the investigation is completed, when the suspect is not a cop.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
Re: Blue Privilege
The USA is the only country where highly trained law enforcement professionals are allowed to panic on duty and act crazy - but untrained citizens are required, under penalty of summary execution, to remain perfectly calm no matter how crazy the cops act or how many guns are pointed at them.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
Re: Re: Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes
That hindering charge might be a passive-aggressive form of the resisting arrest police like to slap on even the most compliant suspects. After all, we’ve seen resisting arrest charges making it to a judge despite suspects being so compliant their only visible resistance was failure to teleport themselves into a cell with a signed confession in hand, many times before.
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: Re:
Better to be insecure than delusional. The world is not safe, insisting that it is, is a dangerous delusion.
On the post: Josh Hawley Thinks We Should Break Up Twitter Because He Doesn't Like The Company's Editorial Choices
How, exactly, would you ‘break up’ a centralized messaging service that does exactly one thing - and only that thing - without permanently shutting it down entirely, or creating a precedent that any company with more than N number of customers is an anti-trust violation?
He’s going to make enemies of every large corporation with the latter one!
On the post: Twitter Is Just The Beginning Of Jack Dorsey's Speech Revolution
Did Dorsey REALLY leave voluntarily…
…or was he kicked out by Twitter’s new retroactive media rules for posting something that was okay at the time, but isn’t now?
On the post: Twitter's New 'Private Information' Policy Takes Impossible Content Moderation Challenges To New, Ridiculous Levels
Re: It's called "Calvin ball"...
It’s not just Calvin ball, it’s retroactive Calvin ball - they’re applying the new rules to content that was posted years before the policy went into effect.
No Twitter regular has time to go back through every tweet they’ve ever sent to vet whether it violates a poorly written, highly subjective new policy.
Heck, the new policy might even require Twitter to ban its own executives or even itself from its servers, because I’m pretty sure the new policy being retroactive puts even the founders of Twitter in violation at least once!
On the post: Twitter's New 'Private Information' Policy Takes Impossible Content Moderation Challenges To New, Ridiculous Levels
Re: Count on it:
But the true stupidity will be when Twitter takes it down and locks the account of the anti-crime feoup that posted it.
On the post: Colorado Appeals Court Says A Drug Dog That Alerts On Now-Legal Weed Can't Create Probable Cause For A Search
It really says something about cops…
Killing someone/something because you can’t see an immediate use for them is cartoonish supervillain-tier evil. The fact that an actual police department said they’d have to kill all their drug sniffing dogs if legalization passed reveals all sorts of psychopathic thinking on top of the supervillain thing.
They can’t re-home animals deliberately trained to be so vicious that they’d be a danger to the public? Last I checked, ANYONE training a dog like that was subject to criminal charges.
Next >>