I know. And many of the comments are coming from the US, so I’m trying to help American readers see what US law would dictate in a similar situation, because they might have instincts that are inconsistent with US law.
I know. And many of the comments are coming from the US, so I’m trying to help American readers see what US law would dictate in a similar situation, because they might have instincts that are inconsistent with US law.
In the US, the 4th Amendment says that’s unconstitutional. Fortunately. Too many dirty pigs out there.
In the US, the cops need RAS to handcuff you. The standard was never and is not “until they know what’s going on”. And RAS depends on the current cop knowledge. Even if they had legal grounds to break into your place, what they see in the next ten seconds is still relevant. For example, if someone said you attacked them with a knife, when the cops see no victim, knife, or blood, their legal authority ceases.
Of course it’s all highly dependent on specific details.
(On traffic stops, often they already have RAS. That’s why they pulled you over. So don’t be fooled by other comments about that topic.)
In the US, property records are public records. Easy to find someone’s address online if you know their full name and the county they own property in.
Go try it!
The legal standard in the U.S. is if there’s exigent circumstances. Detailed 911 calls are typically sufficient to meet that standard. Not always.
Right now, we cannot tell if the officers did anything unlawful. Need the call recording or call logs, plus the body cameras.
(I think the exigent circumstances standard is BS, easily abused, but that is the current law of the land.)
It would not embarrass the government. They’re lying and they know it. People who let the Nazis into Canada have long since retired or died. But their children and grandchildren are still around, as are the new generation of racists. It’s these latter groups that dislike any kind of transparency and justice. Embarrassment has nothing to do with it.
You’re even more cute, my friend.
My company will let me purchase software, but it won’t let me donate to FOSS. Budgeting says it’s “unnecessary”. So screwed up. (A tiny amount money on my end, but still, it would be nice to help out a little.)
If you really are so hopeless with computers that you can’t figure out a modern popular Linux distribution, then you should not build your own computer, because that’s much more complicated.
Who is “we”, my friend? This all depends on your research and expectations. IMO Linux works great, but you should consider it before you buy a machine. Make sure your graphics card and other hardware is going to work. When in doubt, buy from a reliable shop that preinstalls Linux for you.
I find that the default settings and programs of Debian (or whatever major distro) do 95% of what I expect and want, and maybe 5% involve some customization. In other words, it’s much simpler than getting Windows or Apple and then purchasing or downloading all the extra programs. But this depends on what you wanna do.
Certainly some are. How many is an entertaining question.
I agree with you, and another way of looking at it is that the system is working perfectly as intended. The people who are happy with it are the ones who have the power to change it, but they don’t want to, because there’s no benefit to them.
You didn’t tell us what you think the usual 9 to 5 pays. Are you asking whether a tech job pays more than minimum wage? Many of them do. Also, when you’re interviewing, and even when you’re writing a cover letter, try to avoid the term power user, and instead provide details of things that you’ve actually done. Anyone can call themselves a power user, but what does that even mean? If you say you’re a power user, if you’re lucky the interviewer will ask you for details, and if you’re unlucky they won’t, because they’ll assume you’re just grandstanding. So you’re better off providing a little extra information up front, and not gambling on them asking for it.
The alternatives are around now, and we know that many YouTube content creators are exploring other revenue streams, so it’ll be interesting to see how exodus works. Clearly YouTube is going to continue to get worse and some people are going to leave. What’s next? I’m excited.
It’s always interesting to watch companies implode. Apparently Reddit is blocking non-Google search engines from indexing them, and Twitter wants you to be logged in to view people’s profiles. Those types of moves guarantee that the platform won’t be relevant a decade from now and possibly sooner than that.
I wonder how many governments and companies will take this as a lesson on why brittle systems suck. My guess is most of them won’t… It’s popular to rely on very large third party services, which makes this type of incident inevitable.
Windows 98. In the meantime I’ve also used BSD, though not in a few decades.
If you want to suggest that 16 is a great age to allow people to start work, I don’t think you’re going to find much resistance. That’s true in the United States, and much of the world, as you remarked. But 13 is nowhere close to 16, so that’s where you’re seeing resistance here.
Another point that I thought it was obvious, but perhaps it isn’t, is how easy it is for older coworkers and bosses to manipulate children. Kids don’t have the experience, and they don’t have the experience or composure necessary to reliably walk away from bad work environments. So then, is there some totally necessary societal function that we desperately need young teenagers to feel? If there’s not, why don’t we take the risk off of them.
And finally we have to come back to the elephant in the room. In reality, people who propose allowing children to work are doing so because they don’t want to pay adults more.
And again I think it’s obvious, but maybe it’s not so obvious to others, that if the goal is to give kids a variety of experiences then there are plenty of great ways to do so. Sports, music, school, volunteering, extracurriculars, you name it. Structured environments with proper supervision, managed by people who care about the safety of those kids, and aren’t going to try to make a buck by mistreating them.
Right. Please research child labor exploitation and you will understand. It’s clearly documented. Just because you were lucky doesn’t mean others were, or will be.
You say no issues while ignoring the exploitation angle, which is historical fact. But even if it weren’t, are we so pathetic that our society somehow needs these kids to work instead of being kids? Really? We can’t do any better?
He’s such a bad liar. Immigrants who come over and have visas but not citizenship are not going to risk their immigration status by screwing with the cops. On the other hand, cops who want to mess around would and do target immigrants.
And then he’s worried about officers being doxxed. These are people with experience and training and firearms, who are more than capable of protecting themselves. I’m not too worried about their safety. But as they say, all cops are paranoid.