Regret to inform you that is not absolute. Damn near every school - public and private - and every college in my neighborhood has policies established with due process that the school can discipline a student for misconduct
It's pretty well established, by SCOTUS no less, that schools receiving public tax dollars cannot discipline students for exercising their free speech rights while off-campus unless it somehow causes a "substantial disruption" of the school environment. I do not believe this tweet caused any sort of disruption, except for that manufactured by the school administrators themselves.
Students DO NOT give up their First Amendment rights just because they were forced to sign a Conduct Code in order to attend a school.
Some teenaged boy posts a comment that alludes to his making out with a teacher, which was a lie, and you guys are blaming the school for his suspension and blaming the police chief for investigating the incident?
I'm not blaming anyone other than Sagehorn for the contents of the tweet, which could possibly (remotely possible, IMHO) raise to defamation.
I am however blaming the school and the police chief for exacerbating an issue which really has nothing to do with them at all.
It's his parents who decided to escalate this rather than punish their son, meet with the school, and apologize on behalf of their son.
Wait, helping your child defend himself against a perceived injustice by the school is "escalating" the issue? In what world?
Also, I'm curious as to why to think the parents should apologize for the actions of their son? In most instances parents are not legally responsible for the actions of their children. I've never seen any case in which a court found parents negligent for failing to supervise their kids’ computer use.
If anything, the only thing this will accomplish is that any sworn testimony can be used in Sagehorn's criminal trial...
What criminal trial? What exactly do you think Sagehorn could be charged with? Nothing Sagehorn tweeted could even be remotely considered a threat here. All I see is the possibility of a defamation suit brought by the teacher and defamation is a civil issue, not criminal.
Fair enough. I'm using it in the context of this article, ie: snapping a selfie of your ballot. I don't think that any sort of "official validation" is a good idea at all. That would only lead to abuse.
PS: Thanks, I needed my something new to learn today and I was forced to look up "multivalent". That's a good word. I'll have to add it to my repertoire.
This might seem like a simplistic question, but, WHY shouldn't that be allowed? I get that the system absolutely needs the ability to be anonymous, but why shouldn't a voter be able to disclose and/or prove how they voted, if they so desire?
The secrecy of the ballot is a public right, not a private choice, as voters choosing to waive secrety compromises the integrity of the ballot.
Are you saying that the common practice of conducting exit polls somehow compromises the integrity of the ballot?
The choice to reveal whom you voted for is most certainly a private right and isn't prohibited whatsoever. For example, I can tell you that in '92 I voted for Ross Perot.
Not if your landlord threatens to make you homeless unless you take the picture to prove you voted for him.
How is this not handled under existing laws, such as 18 U.S. Code § 594 and/or the ton of other existing state and local laws dealing with the same thing?
How is this trespassing at all? Where I live, if you operate an establishment that is open to the public, like a restaurant or a store, it can only be trespassing if the establishment owner or their representative has asked you to leave and you refuse to do so.
Did the McDonald's manager or employees ask the reporters to leave? If it was just the police telling them to leave I don't see how that could be considered trespassing at all.
In no way at all is the striking of this law a "good thing".
Could you please explain how striking down a statute that violates the highest law of our land isn't a good thing?
I certainly hope that you don't feel that the Constitution only protects speech you agree with. If that's the case, your comment shouldn't be protected either, since I disagree with it.
Because of memory limitations, and cassette tape storage, most hobbyist machines of the time did not support an assembler, let alone a compiler, though some has built in basic interpreters. Ah, the joys of entering machine code by hand, or typing in a basic program.
Lol. In my youth I attempted to write a Pac-Man style game using the BASIC on a TRS-80. I ran out of memory pretty quickly.
Re: Why do Apple, Spotify, and Pandora even exist? -- Because get high profits being a gatekeeper.
Why do Apple, Spotify, and Pandora even exist? -- Because get high profits being a gatekeeper.
Don't confuse gatekeepers with enablers. As companies age, they tend to slide from the enabler side to the gatekeeper side of the scale. I would classify Spotify, and Pandora on the enabler side still, but Apple has slide quite bit over into the gatekeeper side.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How about evidence from computers that are wide open
If everyone were to suddenly switch to Linux as their primary operating system, I very much doubt we'd see any reduction in home computer hacking, botnets or otherwise.
I would agree with that statement, but in addition to outside threats, I also am concerned about nefarious activity and tracking that is possible using a closed-source OS controlled by a profit-driven corporation. I'm not, by any means, saying that open-source is impervious to similar activity, just that it's inherently more resistant to it.
Update: And... the article has been republished at the Washington Post's site with a note claiming that it was accidentally published without fully going through its editing process.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How about evidence from computers that are wide open
I just read the update to that article where they break down the numbers for a few of the Linux distros and the numbers are higher than I supposed they would be, but still less than that of the combined Windows number. Especially in the high severity numbers.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re: Re:
It's pretty well established, by SCOTUS no less, that schools receiving public tax dollars cannot discipline students for exercising their free speech rights while off-campus unless it somehow causes a "substantial disruption" of the school environment. I do not believe this tweet caused any sort of disruption, except for that manufactured by the school administrators themselves.
Students DO NOT give up their First Amendment rights just because they were forced to sign a Conduct Code in order to attend a school.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-j-solove/school-discipline-free-speech_b_877203.html
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
I'm not blaming anyone other than Sagehorn for the contents of the tweet, which could possibly (remotely possible, IMHO) raise to defamation.
I am however blaming the school and the police chief for exacerbating an issue which really has nothing to do with them at all.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re:
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/10/15/parents-may-be-liable-for-what-their-kids-post-on-facebo ok-court-rules/
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re: Re:
Interesting. I wasn't aware that "criminal defamation" existed.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
Wait, helping your child defend himself against a perceived injustice by the school is "escalating" the issue? In what world?
Also, I'm curious as to why to think the parents should apologize for the actions of their son? In most instances parents are not legally responsible for the actions of their children. I've never seen any case in which a court found parents negligent for failing to supervise their kids’ computer use.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
What criminal trial? What exactly do you think Sagehorn could be charged with? Nothing Sagehorn tweeted could even be remotely considered a threat here. All I see is the possibility of a defamation suit brought by the teacher and defamation is a civil issue, not criminal.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
Student Conduct Codes do not apply outside of school hours while not on school grounds when you are not using any school property.
That's not rocket science.
On the post: New Hampshire Law Banning Ballot Selfies Struck Down As Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Fair enough. I'm using it in the context of this article, ie: snapping a selfie of your ballot. I don't think that any sort of "official validation" is a good idea at all. That would only lead to abuse.
PS: Thanks, I needed my something new to learn today and I was forced to look up "multivalent". That's a good word. I'll have to add it to my repertoire.
On the post: New Hampshire Law Banning Ballot Selfies Struck Down As Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This might seem like a simplistic question, but, WHY shouldn't that be allowed? I get that the system absolutely needs the ability to be anonymous, but why shouldn't a voter be able to disclose and/or prove how they voted, if they so desire?
On the post: New Hampshire Law Banning Ballot Selfies Struck Down As Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re:
Are you saying that the common practice of conducting exit polls somehow compromises the integrity of the ballot?
The choice to reveal whom you voted for is most certainly a private right and isn't prohibited whatsoever. For example, I can tell you that in '92 I voted for Ross Perot.
On the post: New Hampshire Law Banning Ballot Selfies Struck Down As Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re:
How is this not handled under existing laws, such as 18 U.S. Code § 594 and/or the ton of other existing state and local laws dealing with the same thing?
On the post: Russia Threatens To Ban All Of Reddit Because Of A Single, Unspecified Drug-Related Thread
Typo?
Russia is a company????
On the post: St. Louis County Charges Journalists Who Covered Ferguson Protests With Trespassing
Trespassing?
Did the McDonald's manager or employees ask the reporters to leave? If it was just the police telling them to leave I don't see how that could be considered trespassing at all.
On the post: Massachusetts Supreme Court Strikes Down Unconstitutional Law Restricting Political Speech
Re:
Could you please explain how striking down a statute that violates the highest law of our land isn't a good thing?
I certainly hope that you don't feel that the Constitution only protects speech you agree with. If that's the case, your comment shouldn't be protected either, since I disagree with it.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: August 2nd - 8th
Re: Re:
Lol. In my youth I attempted to write a Pac-Man style game using the BASIC on a TRS-80. I ran out of memory pretty quickly.
On the post: Taylor Swift's Streaming Rant Nearly Identical To Garth Brooks' Used CD Rant
Re: Why do Apple, Spotify, and Pandora even exist? -- Because get high profits being a gatekeeper.
Don't confuse gatekeepers with enablers. As companies age, they tend to slide from the enabler side to the gatekeeper side of the scale. I would classify Spotify, and Pandora on the enabler side still, but Apple has slide quite bit over into the gatekeeper side.
On the post: Feds Hand Out Funds To Be Used For 'Traffic Safety;' Local Agencies Buy License Plate Readers Instead
Re:
I highly doubt that. Multiple studies have shown that red light cameras actually increase accidents.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060405/1345216.shtml
On the post: Judge Kozinski: There's Very Little Justice In Our So-Called 'Justice System'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How about evidence from computers that are wide open
I would agree with that statement, but in addition to outside threats, I also am concerned about nefarious activity and tracking that is possible using a closed-source OS controlled by a profit-driven corporation. I'm not, by any means, saying that open-source is impervious to similar activity, just that it's inherently more resistant to it.
On the post: Washington Post Publishes... And Then Unpublishes... Opinion Piece By Ex-Intelligence Industry Brass, In Favor Of Strong Encryption
"editing"? I think you spelled "vetting" wrong.
On the post: Judge Kozinski: There's Very Little Justice In Our So-Called 'Justice System'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How about evidence from computers that are wide open
Next >>