No need to bring Miranda into it. Before you are arrested, anything you say can be used against you, even if you have not been Mirandized. It is only after arrest that Miranda is an issue.

> And then the public defender you're assigned because you can't afford a decent lawyer

Hold on just a second. There are many fine public defenders who happen to be far better than just "decent". They will not, however, be able to dedicate much time to your case. THAT is the issue with many PD's. Not that they suck or are not "decent" but that they are over worked.

> I'm fine with (cops lying to people)

If you or I lie to a cop, we can get charged with obstruction of justice. If they lie to us, they can get a commonadation.

And you're "fine" with that.

Some days it's easier to be a misanthrope than others. This is one of those days. Fuck you.

Oh look! An advertisement from 1906 calling copyright infringers "pirates".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Using teh term "pirates" to refer to copyright infringers is nothing new.

Bitching about it, however, is.

> I'm running a browser in a VM... What malware?

Your faith in the security of VM sandboxes is misplaced.

It is trivial to write a program which can detect if it is in a VM. And then, attack the hypervisor and escape the protected environment. As virtualization has become more common, such malware has gone from academic exercises to real-world exploits.

http://www.symantec.com/avcent...

My favorite line:

Finally, the most interesting attack that malicious code can perform against a virtual machine emulator is to escape from its protected environment.

With virtualization becoming more and more common

The use of the word "pirate" to denote a copyright infringer is not a Microsoft invention.

Check out this advertisement from 1906:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

> I was most recently using Debian, but my computer got messed up after I did an update and that SystemD thing got installed.

Debian stable still uses initd. The only way you get systemd is by running unstable.

Saying that radio images translated so we can view them in at a freqency visible to us are not "real" is like saying images produced using night vision goggles are not real.

The waves involved in this issue are not part of the observable spectrum for humans. Converting them to visible frequencies for our observation does not make them any less "real" except to the pedantic or to those of us who go as far as to say that observable science can't prove anything.

> Why not image the center of a galaxy that's plane is perpendicular to us?

Another factor: on that video I linked, the scale on those images is 10 light days. I don't think modern astronomy can resolve individual stars on that fine a scale, which would be required to produce the same effect while viewing another galaxy.

That's another thing that makes that image amazing to me... how close those stars are. 10 light days is nothing, cosmically speaking.

Years. That is a time lapse loop, and the current year is in the upper left corner.

> There's roughly 25,000 light years of dust and stars to see through.

You're right... it would be impossible to view those stars using the optical spectrum. However, the scientists in this case, and for the multi-year time-lapse loop I linked to used radio waves which were unaffected by dust. One might think that interposing stars would block out the view (after all, the view is sideways through the "platter" of the galaxy) but given the far separation of the stars, the view is not blocked even at such vast distances.

I initially shared your incredulity, and I did the research, and that is indeed a radio image of the actual stars at the center of our galaxy.

Correction: It's called "Sagittarius A*" And NASA does not qualify it using terms such as "might be a black hole" or "theorised to be a black hole." They simply call it a "supermassive black hole"

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pa...

> the EHT team is ultimately after to prove the existence of black holes."

It's already been proven. There is a black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, and it's been named "Sagitarius A"

Using infrared telesopes, you can "see" stars orbiting the black hole at the center of the galaxy. Orbits of about 28 stars have been observed and using math, the mass of the stars and the required mass of the black hole has been calculated. Only a black hole can account for the kinds of orbits you see those stars doing.

It is a sight to behold and at first I could not believe it. Watching the stars at the frickin center of the galaxy orbit a black hole is a stunning sight once you truly grok what you are seeing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Realize that this video is not an artist's intepretation, but is actual imagery of stars orbiting something of immense mass, something which can only be a black hole.

See, for e.g.:

"What is a "runaway" grand jury?" http://campus.udayton.edu/~gra...

Most grand juries are lapdogs of the prosecutor, it is true. When they go off on their own, they are called "runaway grand jurys" and courts and prosecutors don't want them to know it is possible. Much like jury nullification... no court will instruct a jury that they can nullify, similarly, no court is going to tell a grand jury they can subpoena on their own without the prosecutor saying OK.

But it is rare for a grand jury to go off on their own these days. This was not always the case. Historically, grand juries were independent of the prosecutors. But these days, it is a rare thing, and the Ferguson grand jury probably played the lap dog.