To add to this spending some time in custody is inconvenient, but losing your rights being convicted of something you didn’t even do is more inconvenient. You think you know what to say until you say the wrong thing and start digging a hole.
This is good to know, but adds an additional step to simply requiring a passcode to unlock on screen lock.
Just the act of refusing makes the act of seizing your phone legal or not. If you legally give them your phone by your own will, they are able to use all evidence they find in the courts. If you deny to give them your phone, and they seize it anyways and access it you have a valid path to throw the evidence they discover out as an illegal search and seizure of your property. I’m not a lawyer but that is the general thought process on denying them access to your property.
Edit: Just want to say this mostly pretains to United States law and similar legal structures. This advice is not applicable everywhere and you should research your countries rights and legal protections.
I personally rather trust that my device isn’t able to be unlocked without my permission, rather than hope I am able to do some action to disable it in certain situations. The availability of such features is nice, but I would assume I would be incapable of performing such actions in the moment.
My other thought is, how guilty is one perceived if they immediately attempt to lock their phones in such a matter, by a jury of their peers? I rather go the deniability route of I didn’t want to share my passcode vs I locked my phone down cause the cops were grabbing me.
To add to this, don’t use bio-metrics to lock your devices. Cops will “accidentally” use these to unlock devices when they are forcibly seized.
I would agree on the investigation ensuring everything was done diligently and to protocol. I don’t think it’s some international political issue that the US is waging on it, just that they are an individual traveling to be euthanized it might be seen as murder in the individuals native courts. The United States still having issues letting people go state to state for treatment, let alone internationally, causes me pause in such situations.
I’ll be the first to admit I have no real knowledge on the laws that apply here but the United States has been known to inject themselves into other nations matters regularly. This is again just opinion and no way substantiated by anything tangible.
Edit: To add to this, this MSN article seems to give additional information. Specifically, the following quotes:
The American woman who became the first person to take her own life in the new “suicide pod” in Switzerland was given a chilling command by the morbid machine before she took her last breaths.
“If you want to die, press this button,” the machine said, according to the AFP.
So most likely this is due to being the first incident of voluntary euthanasia being legally done in Switzerland, and ensuring the legality of such procedures via precedent for future such cases.
The quotation marks did most of the lifting there, and it’s more of an anecdote of their own projections against themselves. They assume these “welfare queens” are driving around in high end cars and living luxurious lifestyles on the governments dollar, while they are the ones doing such. Sorry if there was any confusion. I agree with all the statements you have stated against Brett Farve though, they are the scum of the system they wish to project onto others.
From the article:
Police in the canton of Schaffhausen, in northern Switzerland, confirmed the arrests, while the public prosecutors’ office confirmed it had opened an investigation into suspected incitement and aiding and abetting of suicide.
The person who died was reportedly a 64-year-old American woman. Switzerland is one of the few countries in the world where assisted suicide is legal, under certain conditions.
But the article does state that the interior minister does question the morality and legality of the device:
Switzerland’s interior minister, Élisabeth Baume-Schneider, questioned the moral and legal status of the Sarco Pod, a device that is designed to allow a person inside to push a button that injects nitrogen gas into the sealed chamber.
It’s hard to say why the arrests happened without more details, but I’d suspect the nationality of the individual may play a role.
Despite texts that show Favre sought to keep his receipt of the funds confidential, Favre has said he didn’t know the money came from federal funds intended for poor people. He’s paid the money back, but he’s being sued by the state of Mississippi for hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest that accrued on the money he received. Favre hasn’t been accused of any criminal wrongdoing.
Source: (Yahoo News)
So they could easily of have funded this themselves, but just rather steal public funds because “free money”? Sounds like a so called “welfare queen” to me.
Most oil is not economically salvaged due to the low cost of extraction from wells. At best they’ll try to burn it off, at worst they just won’t give a shit.
I think the point would to be make them like cigarette warning labels. At the moment the text can be hidden on a bottle or can in tiny text. It needs to be a big ugly white box with a black border and large text that gets people’s attention.
Semi-cold? That’s extra, you’ll be lucky to afford it. The affordable water been sitting out on the pavement for a few weeks.
Is it price gouging if there is a heat advisory is my question, and how enforceable is that. For water it’s just cruel, especially in places with little access to drinkable tap water.
This is what happens when you try to extract more and more value off the top of labor, without any added value other than line must go up. When suppressing wages is the only way to improve corporate profits, profits are capped and stockholders hate this. This is in theory suppose to encourage innovation to increase efficency (without just resorting to skeleton crews or pressuring labor for more output). Monopolies stop innovating due to market control and look at other methods of increasing profits with leverage rather than market competitiveness.
Sadly it wasn’t a bid to open source the AI, rather than a bid for payment.
My question would be, why do you need a more powerful server? Are you monitoring your load and seeing it’s overloaded often? Are you just looking to be able to hook more drives to it? Do you need to re-encode video on the fly for other devices? Giving some more details would help someone to give a more insightful answer. I personally am using a Raspberry Pi 4, Chromebox w/ an i7, an old HP rack server, and an old desktop PC for my self hosting needs, as this is cheaper than buying all new hardware (though the electricity bill isn’t the greatest haha, but oh well). If you are just looking for more storage, using the USB 3.0 slots on the Raspberry Pi 4b you can add a couple extra SSDs using a NVMe to USB 3.0 enclosure. For most purposes the speeds will be fine for most applications.
As for SSD vs HDD, SSD hands down. The only reason you’d pick an HDD is if your trying to get more storage cheaper and don’t mind a higher rate of failure. If your data is at all valuable, and it almost always is, redundancy should be added as well.
And as for running Linux, if it can’t run Linux I wouldn’t want to own it.
Edit: Fixed typo
This might help, sorry if it doesn’t, but here is a link to CloudFlares 5xx error code page on error 521. If you’ve done everything in the resolution list your ISP might be actively blocking you from hosting websites, as it is generally against the ISPs ToS to do such on residential service lines. This is why I personally rent a VPS and have a wireguard VPN setup to host from the VPN, which is basically just a roll your own version of Tailscale using any VPS provider. This way you don’t need to expose anything via your ISPs router/WAN and they can’t see what you are sending or which ports you are sending on (other than the encrypted VPN traffic to your VPS of course).
A blockchain is just an verifiable chain of transactions using cryptography and some agreed upon protocol. Each “block” in the chain is a block of data that follows a format specified by the protocol. The protocol also decides who can push blocks and how to verify a block is valid. The advantages it has comes from the fact the protocol can describe a method of giving authority across a pool of untrusted third parties, while still making sure none of them can cheat. Currently the most popular forms are Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS).
Bitcoin for example is just an outgoing transaction to a specific crypto key (which is similar to a checking account) as a reward for “mining” the block, followed by a list of transactions going from a specific account to another account. These are verified by needing a special chunk of data that turns the overall hash of the entire block to a binary chunk containing a number of 0 bits in front, which makes it hard to compute and a race to get the right input data. This way of establishing an authority is called Proof of Work, and whoever is first and gets their block across the network faster wins. Other cryptocurrencies like Ethereum use Proof of Stake where you “stake” currency you’ve already acquired as a promise that you won’t cheat, and if someone can prove you cheated your stake is lost.
The problem it solves is not needing a trusted third party to handle this process, such as a government agency or an organization. Everyone can verify the integrity of a blockchain by using the protocol and going over each block, making sure the data follows the rules. This blockchain is distributed so everyone can make sure they are on the same chain, else it’s considered a “forked” chain and will migrate back to the point of consensus. This can be useful for situations where the incentive to cheat the system for monetary or political gain outweigh the cost of running a distributed ledger. It can also be useful when you don’t want anyone selectively removing past data as the chain of verifiability will be broken. The only issue with this is you need some way to reach a consensus of who gets to make each block in the chain, as someone need to be the authority for that instant in time. This is where the requirement of Proof of Work (PoS) or Proof of Stake (PoS) come in. Without these or another system that distributes the authority to create blocks, you lose the power of the blockchain.
Examples I’ve heard of are tracking shipments or parts (similar to how the FAA already mandates part traceability) and medical records. This way lots of organizations can publish records relating to these to a central system that isn’t under any single entities control, and can’t change their records to suit their needs.
These systems are not fool proof though, PoW has the ability to be abused using a 51% attack and PoS requires some form of punishment for trying to cheat the system (in cryptocurrency you “stake” currency and lose it if you try to cheat the system). Both of these run into issues when there is no incentive to invest resources into the system, a lack of distribution across independent parties, or one party has sufficient power to gain a majority control of the network.
Overall you are right to be skeptical of cryptocurrency, it’s been a long time since I participated due to the waves of scam coins and general focus on illegal activities such as gambling. The lack of central authorities also perpetuates the problem of cryptoscams, as anyone can start one and there are limited controls over stopping such scams. This is not dissimilar to previous investment scams though, it’s just the modern iteration of such scams. The real question is does it solve a real problem, as Bitcoin did in the sense it helps facilitate transactions outside of government controls. You might not agree with that but it does give it an intrinsic value to a large number of people looking to move currency without as much paperwork. Now if it makes it worth $68.5k USD (at current prices) is a different story, different people have different use cases and I only highlighted one of those.
I use my own router with DD-WRT in-between the ISPs router/modem and my LAN, and use a different subnet. I haven’t had any issues with this myself, and my router just sees the ISP router/modem as the WAN.
It’s is M.2, but not the M/B+M key most M2 SSDs use but rather a A+E meant for WIFI/Bluetooth. According to this video it’s essentially 2 PCI Express x1 lanes and USB 2.0. The video goes on to explain some possible alternative uses:
So while does this slot has it’s uses, it’s not meant to be used for M.2 drives but rather WIFI.