That restricted air space does *not* extend 25km from the White House like DJI's arbitrary no-fly zone does.

If you forgo this update, you don't get any further bug fixes, added features etc. Just like with the PS3... you could refuse the update that removed the "Other OS" feature, but that meant not getting any future updates, not being able to play future games, and not being able to watch future BluRay movies.

You disproved your own argument...

"if they haven't blocked it"

They *can* block it if they wish to... it's not being forced on anyone (albeit how to block it isn't always easy to find).

Rowsdower!!!

Aughts

And who is Kaiser Soze?

Rather than arguing about how much if any effect human garbage has on hot springs, how about teaching your son to NOT THROW GARBAGE AND STUFF INTO THE BEAUTIFUL NATURAL LANDMARK?!?!?

Another false analogy... how many gun locks have remote access capability?

The librarian analogy is false. It's already illegal to give pornography to a minor, a new funding bill wouldn't change that.

Law enforcement has already shown a propensity to do questionable things regarding cellphones. See Stingray and their attempts to search phones without warrants that led to the recent Supreme Court case. Are there existing laws that make it illegal for law enforcement to brick a phone in California? This one just doesn't say. Give them an inch they'll take a mile.

What of others? Can a carrier brick your phone for late payment? Can they brick your phone if you refuse onerous changes to their contract terms mid-contract? If not, what penalties are there for doing so? If you don't think carriers wouldn't screw people over like that, see this article:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story...

What phones from a decade ago could be remotely bricked? I know some recent phones have this capability, but I've never heard of this sort of thing prior to maybe a year ago.

What of the EFF's objections (which are basically what I've been saying)?

The usual /. refrain of correlation is not causation definately applies here. Mississippi had low test scores long before broadband Internet came along.

Okay, I tracked down the actual bill text:

SB 962

The bill says absolutely nothing about how the kill actually happens and who can do it. The EFF expressed that exact concern here:

EFF letter opposing SB 962

I meant "may not" in the first question.

Does the bill specifically say police may use the kill switch? If so, what penalties are prescribed if they do?

I can't imagine that if a law enforcement agency called, say Verizon, and said kill the phone with number 555-555-1234, that Verizon would say no to them.