Built any bridges recently for which the budget was cut halfway, you were forced to use chocolate fudge instead of cement, the location was switched every two weeks and the timescales halved, and delivered a working bridge nonetheless?

You know why REAL engineers don't have to deal with that shit? It's because the project can't get built until we put our stamp on the plans! Management's demands get a whole lot more reasonable when they can't replace you with some dumbfuck yes-man.

Oh right, it's that special definition of "corrupt" that means "it still works perfectly, but we can tell some other company modified it."

I've found that foreign western Europeans are welcomed with enthusiasm but foreign Asians with much much resentment.

Western Europeans are coming from an economy just as good as our own, so they aren't willing to work for peanuts and thus don't drive down wages like people from third-world countries do.

Asians from developed countries (e.g. Japan) would be welcomed just as warmly, for the same reason.

Let's say I have a bitstream that is *almost* bit for bit identical to an MP3, an MKV, etc. How bits have to change before it is no longer infringing? Don't start with things like, "Well, it depends how it was created and for what purpose..." Bits are bits.

This is where your post stops making any since whatsoever. The law doesn't give a shit that "bits are bits," and will not accept any technological argument in order to decide a legal issue. It's a non-sequitur, and if you try it you will fail every time.

What actually matters is if you had mens rea for copyright infringement.

And if you want to fit in with the society there, you're going to need to attend all sorts of "social functions" at expensive and trendy restaurants.

This is obviously false, since, if your previous statements are to believed, nobody else in "society" can afford to do that either.

Astronomer A: "Do you see anything in the telescope eyepiece?"

Astronomer B: "Nope. Nothing."

Astronomer A: "Yaaay! That means WE discovered Dark Matter!"

Astronomer B: "So, do we get a Nobel?"

Astronomer A: "It already came. Didn't you see it?"

Astronomer B: "Nope."

Astronomer A: "That's because it arrived in a Dark Box."

I was replying to a post about firing cops, not criminally prosecuting them. And you damn well knew it. Now fuck off.

If Nixon and LBJ run together in your mind then you're not from the US or you're too young to have been around for either.

What makes things criminal is state or federal statutes. Assuming there is such a statute making violation of the Fourth Amendment a crime, if somebody were convicted under it they would be convicted under the statute, not the amendment.

You're talking semantics about technical details that aren't important. The argument I was rebutting was the idea that Congress was somehow "not allowed" to make such a statute.

Who's left from LBJ's administration besides Bill Moyers?

simple CD/Tape(yes lol)/radio unit

Tape decks are good! Cassette line-in adapters work much better than those damn radio transmitter ones you have to use if your head unit only accepts CDs.

This is what it has come to. The cop used to be your friend, right? But now he's not. Well, the cops didn't change, we did. In the old days a copy could say "Stop or I'll shoot" and if you didn't stop, he shot you in the back... Look at "It's a Wonderful Life"

Bullshit. In the old days cops would make a reasonable effort to resolve an incident non-violently (look at the Andy Griffith Show, if you want an equally-old and equally-fictional example).

Now the cop just shoots you without even giving you a chance to react (at least if you're black).

Not sure in this case but openly and belligerently recording an officer will get you noticed and annoy them, which interferes with their duties

Any cop who can't do his damn job just because he's "annoyed" is incompetent and does not deserve to remain a cop.

It is never valid for a citizen exercising his constitutional rights to ever count as "interfering" with anything.

Violations can be tortious and civilly actionable, but not criminal.

Bullshit. Nothing in the Constitution says that violations of the Constitution can't be criminal offenses. It doesn't require them to be criminal offenses, of course, but it certainly allows it.

The only reason violating the Constitution would not be a criminal offense would be that Congress (or a state or local legislative body) did not choose to make it one.

due process = the process that has been enacted and is due to anyone accused of something, whether that be a school's "honor code" or an employer's "employee guidelines". you might not like it but that's how it works.

Wrong. There is no such thing as due process for employment. "Normal" employees are employed "at will" and can be fired at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

There is no reason whatsofuckingever why police officers should not be treated exactly the same damn way!