Officially (nowadays) I believe it stands for "Customs and Border Protection", although IIRC they were originally the "Customs and Border Patrol".
They've been in the news often enough and recently enough that I wouldn't think it really necessary to give the expansion of the initialism - unless you know of another entity whose name is abbreviated the same way, which might result in uncertainty about which is meant?
Re: Re: Re: Re: 2FA info is a *confidential* secret
Easy solution: just maintain two phone numbers, and use one of them only for sign-up texts like that, never for anything else!
...of course, that means paying for the additional phone and number, which not everyone will be able to afford to do... and it's likely that whoever you give the number to for a sign-up text will also store it in case they need to contact you later... but who ever said the solution was perfect?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing an ongoing opportunity
By the definition which I think is being used, a "leecher" on a torrent isn't "someone who's downloading from the torrent", but "someone who uploads less than they download".
The etiquette of torrent participation, back when I was doing it (at which point I think Netflix was still limited to DVDs-by-mail), was to keep the torrent running until your share ratio - the amount you'd uploaded divided by the amount you'd downloaded - was at least 1. People who didn't do that were referred to as "leechers".
Those first several points fall under what is known as "conservation of characters", or a similar phrase; it isn't meant to indicate that things are actually like that, it's just a way to let the show present all the interesting parts without needing to either expect the audience to be familiar with a dizzying array of regular cast members (how many would be needed, to do everything shown as part of the investigation in a typical "CSI" episode?) or actually hire and pay enough people to fill all those roles on a regular basis.
The bad-lab-procedure point is considerably less defensible, and I don't generally bother to try.
That seems to me as if it should lead you to distrust the antivirus company in question, not Chrome. It's not like it's Chrome's fault - or Google's, unless they had some sort of arrangement with the other company involved - that that antivirus company decided to install Chrome on an automatic update without prompting for confirmation; Chrome doesn't have any say in that decision.
I can't speak to the other breakage you're talking about, except to say that I've never heard of it happening to anyone else. I handle software deployment in my workplace, including deployment of Chrome, and we've never had any of those problems so far as I'm aware.
(It's probably worth noting that we also don't use explicit junctions, but I suspect that very few people do, beyond whatever may be put in place by the installers of various programs; Windows' "junctions" aren't a well-known or terribly accessible feature, and if you make use of them on a conscious and intentional level, you are almost certainly a significant outlier.)
No - the question whose answer they're saying hasn't been shown to have been clearly established isn't "does the Fourth Amendment exist?", but "do the actions involved in this case violate the Fourth Amendment?".
Add that to the principle of "if you could reasonably have believed that what you were doing didn't violate the law, you can't be held liable for it" - which doesn't apply to most citizens, but does to law enforcement, under the name of the "good faith" doctrine - and you get the situation we see.
Speaking as someone who, based on (things I've read about) Kavanaugh's writings and rulings and so forth to date, believes that he would likely make rulings on some issues - prominently, net neutrality - which I would find abhorrent:
Undocumented, unverified accusations should not be enough to destroy a public figure, or anyone else.
However, I fail to see how being denied elevation to the Supreme Court constitutes destruction. As far as recall having seen, no one is even proposing that Kavanaugh be removed from his current position as a federal judge - just that he not be elevated to the highest court in the land.
Also, the solution to undocumented, unverified accusations is to investigate those accusations, and thereby build up documentation one way or another, until you have enough to determine that A: the accusations are accurate, B: they are not, or C: it is no longer possible to determine whether or not they are accurate.
That would involve delaying Kavanaugh's confirmation, rather than trying to rush it through on a partisan basis; presumption of innocence does not mean refusing to investigate allegations of guilt.
Trying to insist on elevating him without knowing all the facts seems, to me, like a significantly worse abandonment of "decency and justice" - and, for that matter, of the Senate's responsibilities under the Constitution - than anything being done against him.
His position appears to be "the monopolies are the irreducible root of problem, so any attempt to address the problem which does not involve attempting to eliminate the monopolies is a worthless distraction, and should not be given any time or effort at all".
If that premise is accepted, the fact that the network-neutrality regulations were not designed, intended, or supposed to deal with the monopolies is itself a condemnation of those regulations.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: school Bully with Badge & Gun
I was homeschooled for several years - at first by my parents' choice, then I decided to try public school for a while, then I changed my mind and was homeschooled again up till I completed my GED.
Although my parents are religious (my father was a pastor, till he retired this January), the reason they went with homeschooling for me and my siblings was not over religious objections to what is taught in the public schools; none of our homeschool curriculum was religious in any meaningful way, and in fact we used official public-school textbooks for a lot of it. Rather, it was over philosophical objections to how the schools treat and teach their students - regimentation, sit-down-be-quiet-don't-fidget, et cetera; it's been long enough since I talked about it with them that I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the specific concerns involved - and over concerns about the type of mindset that type of approach would be likely to produce, if it even worked for me (and my siblings) to learn at all.
The tradeoff, as far as I can see, is that my social skills - while I'm friendly enough, and don't tend to feel uncomfortable talking to people, even to strangers in public - leave something to be desired, and my social life is not far from nonexistent. I suspect that at least part of that is just a matter of my own personality, however, and that I'd likely have developed in this direction to some extent no matter how I'd been educated.
If two asexual gay people enter into a committed romantic relationship with one another and never once have any kind of sex, what have those people done wrong in the eyes of God?
Okay, I have a parse error here, and I think it comes down to incompatible definitions. What definition of "asexual" are you using?
As I understand the terms, "asexual" means "not sexually attracted to anyone or anything" (and/or "possessed of no sex drive or other sexual impulses whatsoever", which I think would be a superset of the other), and "gay" as applied to sexuality means "sexually attracted to persons of the same gender".
Since being simultaneously attracted to the same gender and to no one at all would be contradictory and therefore impossible, I infer that you must be using a different definition, but I don't know what it might be.
(I could maybe grope in the direction of something by looking at terms like "homoromantic", as distinct from "homosexual", since the two don't always coincide - but I'm not at all sure that what I'd arrive at would be the right answer, and at the very least the former of those two, alone, is not what I think of when I encounter the word "gay".)
"stick it where it hurts" colloquially equates to "shove it up your ass", which is a subset of "engage in a sexual act with it" - with a dollop of the sexual act in question being one that is considered shameful by society.
Even easier just to paste it into the body of the email ;)
That only works if you're either using HTML or otherwise "rich-text" E-mail, or have an E-mail client that's smart enough to detect the paste and turn it into an attachment (including turning the raw image data into a suitable file format, rather than just attaching whatever form your OS happens to use for PrintScreen output).
The former is an abomination that should never have been created and should never be used; E-mail is and should always remain plain text with optional attachments, full stop. (Yes, clearly, this is personal - and significantly minority - opinion...)
As far as I'm aware, I've never actually run across an E-mail client that supported the latter, except perhaps as a special case of supporting the former.
At my workplace, even the people who do understand Ctrl+PrintScreen tend to send the resulting picture along by pasting it into a Word document and attaching that document to an E-mail.
It should be nearly as easy to paste it into MS Paint, save it, and attach the result - but of course they aren't used to using MS Paint, and they are used to using MS Word.
The way I usually describe it - inspired by thinking about your stereotypical detective, a-la Sherlock Holmes, seeking out and analyzing facts in order to arrive at the truth - is that "facts are about observation; truth is about understanding".
Of course, a truth - once understood - can, at least in some cases, become a fact to be used in the search for further truth; and if the understanding was incorrect, then you can wind up going down a false path, and get further and further away from reality.
But the basic idea still seems fairly cogent, to me.
On the post: DHS Watchdog Says CBP's Drone Program Is An Insecure, Possibly Rights-Violating Mess
Re: CBP and abbreviations
They've been in the news often enough and recently enough that I wouldn't think it really necessary to give the expansion of the initialism - unless you know of another entity whose name is abbreviated the same way, which might result in uncertainty about which is meant?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: How sad it is...
The word "troll" in this context has nothing to do with mythical creatures. I explained this at more length back in January, albeit with an embarrassing typo or two.
On the post: Everything Wrong In One Story: Data Silos, Privacy, And Algorithmic Blocking
Re: Re: Algo is to blame
On the post: Study Shows Facebook's Still Miles Away From Taking Privacy, Transparency Seriously
Re: Re: Re: Re: 2FA info is a *confidential* secret
...of course, that means paying for the additional phone and number, which not everyone will be able to afford to do... and it's likely that whoever you give the number to for a sign-up text will also store it in case they need to contact you later... but who ever said the solution was perfect?
On the post: Thanks To Streaming Fragmentation, Bittorrent Traffic Is Suddenly Rising In Traffic Share
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing an ongoing opportunity
The etiquette of torrent participation, back when I was doing it (at which point I think Netflix was still limited to DVDs-by-mail), was to keep the torrent running until your share ratio - the amount you'd uploaded divided by the amount you'd downloaded - was at least 1. People who didn't do that were referred to as "leechers".
On the post: Study Buried For Four Years Shows Crime Lab DNA Testing Is Severely Flawed
Re: Re:
Those first several points fall under what is known as "conservation of characters", or a similar phrase; it isn't meant to indicate that things are actually like that, it's just a way to let the show present all the interesting parts without needing to either expect the audience to be familiar with a dizzying array of regular cast members (how many would be needed, to do everything shown as part of the investigation in a typical "CSI" episode?) or actually hire and pay enough people to fill all those roles on a regular basis.
The bad-lab-procedure point is considerably less defensible, and I don't generally bother to try.
On the post: Louisiana's Attorney General Wants To Break Up Google Over 'Bias'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can't speak to the other breakage you're talking about, except to say that I've never heard of it happening to anyone else. I handle software deployment in my workplace, including deployment of Chrome, and we've never had any of those problems so far as I'm aware.
(It's probably worth noting that we also don't use explicit junctions, but I suspect that very few people do, beyond whatever may be put in place by the installers of various programs; Windows' "junctions" aren't a well-known or terribly accessible feature, and if you make use of them on a conscious and intentional level, you are almost certainly a significant outlier.)
On the post: After Fielding Third Case On Point, Court Finally Decides Curtilage-Violating 'Knock And Talks' Are Clearly Unconstitutional
Re: clearly settled law
Add that to the principle of "if you could reasonably have believed that what you were doing didn't violate the law, you can't be held liable for it" - which doesn't apply to most citizens, but does to law enforcement, under the name of the "good faith" doctrine - and you get the situation we see.
On the post: Louisiana's Attorney General Wants To Break Up Google Over 'Bias'
Re: Another Example of Shameful LIberals
Speaking as someone who, based on (things I've read about) Kavanaugh's writings and rulings and so forth to date, believes that he would likely make rulings on some issues - prominently, net neutrality - which I would find abhorrent:
Undocumented, unverified accusations should not be enough to destroy a public figure, or anyone else.
However, I fail to see how being denied elevation to the Supreme Court constitutes destruction. As far as recall having seen, no one is even proposing that Kavanaugh be removed from his current position as a federal judge - just that he not be elevated to the highest court in the land.
Also, the solution to undocumented, unverified accusations is to investigate those accusations, and thereby build up documentation one way or another, until you have enough to determine that A: the accusations are accurate, B: they are not, or C: it is no longer possible to determine whether or not they are accurate.
That would involve delaying Kavanaugh's confirmation, rather than trying to rush it through on a partisan basis; presumption of innocence does not mean refusing to investigate allegations of guilt.
Trying to insist on elevating him without knowing all the facts seems, to me, like a significantly worse abandonment of "decency and justice" - and, for that matter, of the Senate's responsibilities under the Constitution - than anything being done against him.
On the post: Even Wall Street Is Nervous About Comcast's Latest Bid To Grow Bigger For Bigger's Sake
Re:
If that premise is accepted, the fact that the network-neutrality regulations were not designed, intended, or supposed to deal with the monopolies is itself a condemnation of those regulations.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: [OT] Terms for sexualities
Or more charitably, to obliquely point out the misspelling, in a possibly-humorous way.
But yes, to the extent that there was a joke involved, he was intended to be the butt of it.
(...and now I'm wondering if he'll manage to miss, and take offense at, that idiom as well.)
On the post: Ninth Circuit Says No, You Fucking May Not Arrest A Bunch Of Middle School Students To 'Prove A Point'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: school Bully with Badge & Gun
I was homeschooled for several years - at first by my parents' choice, then I decided to try public school for a while, then I changed my mind and was homeschooled again up till I completed my GED.
Although my parents are religious (my father was a pastor, till he retired this January), the reason they went with homeschooling for me and my siblings was not over religious objections to what is taught in the public schools; none of our homeschool curriculum was religious in any meaningful way, and in fact we used official public-school textbooks for a lot of it. Rather, it was over philosophical objections to how the schools treat and teach their students - regimentation, sit-down-be-quiet-don't-fidget, et cetera; it's been long enough since I talked about it with them that I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the specific concerns involved - and over concerns about the type of mindset that type of approach would be likely to produce, if it even worked for me (and my siblings) to learn at all.
The tradeoff, as far as I can see, is that my social skills - while I'm friendly enough, and don't tend to feel uncomfortable talking to people, even to strangers in public - leave something to be desired, and my social life is not far from nonexistent. I suspect that at least part of that is just a matter of my own personality, however, and that I'd likely have developed in this direction to some extent no matter how I'd been educated.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: [OT] Terms for sexualities
(Hint: look up "tenant".)
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: [OT] Terms for sexualities
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: [OT] Terms for sexualities
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
[OT] Terms for sexualities
Okay, I have a parse error here, and I think it comes down to incompatible definitions. What definition of "asexual" are you using?
As I understand the terms, "asexual" means "not sexually attracted to anyone or anything" (and/or "possessed of no sex drive or other sexual impulses whatsoever", which I think would be a superset of the other), and "gay" as applied to sexuality means "sexually attracted to persons of the same gender".
Since being simultaneously attracted to the same gender and to no one at all would be contradictory and therefore impossible, I infer that you must be using a different definition, but I don't know what it might be.
(I could maybe grope in the direction of something by looking at terms like "homoromantic", as distinct from "homosexual", since the two don't always coincide - but I'm not at all sure that what I'd arrive at would be the right answer, and at the very least the former of those two, alone, is not what I think of when I encounter the word "gay".)
On the post: Elon Musk May Have Talked His Way Into A Pretty Serious Defamation Lawsuit
Re:
On the post: State Cops Accidentally Out Their Surveillance Of Anti-Police Groups With Browser Screenshot
Re: Re: Re: Re: Pointing a phone at the monitor
That only works if you're either using HTML or otherwise "rich-text" E-mail, or have an E-mail client that's smart enough to detect the paste and turn it into an attachment (including turning the raw image data into a suitable file format, rather than just attaching whatever form your OS happens to use for PrintScreen output).
The former is an abomination that should never have been created and should never be used; E-mail is and should always remain plain text with optional attachments, full stop. (Yes, clearly, this is personal - and significantly minority - opinion...)
As far as I'm aware, I've never actually run across an E-mail client that supported the latter, except perhaps as a special case of supporting the former.
On the post: State Cops Accidentally Out Their Surveillance Of Anti-Police Groups With Browser Screenshot
Re: Re: Pointing a phone at the monitor
It should be nearly as easy to paste it into MS Paint, save it, and attach the result - but of course they aren't used to using MS Paint, and they are used to using MS Word.
On the post: Court Orders FCC To Hand Over Data On Bogus Net Neutrality Comments
Re:
Of course, a truth - once understood - can, at least in some cases, become a fact to be used in the search for further truth; and if the understanding was incorrect, then you can wind up going down a false path, and get further and further away from reality.
But the basic idea still seems fairly cogent, to me.
Next >>