They shot first, they eroded the trust to a point where people, not criminals or terrorists or pedophiles but ordinary law abiding people have stood up and said "we don't trust the government any more, nor the systems in place to protect our privacy, and so we have to take it into our own hands."

If they're looking for a zone of lawlessness, they should check under their own feet first.

My boss was complaining about how he couldn't get some kindle book for work to be billed to his company card. The only options that come up for kindle books look to be to give it as a gift to someone else, use a gift card to buy it, or to buy it with 1 click which charges it straight to the card you have on file. I pointed out he just needed to change the 1 click card to the company card, buy it, then change the card back, but that was "too much work" (a man after me own heart).

You want <ecode>:

if (x<5) {
  printf("Works for me!\n");
}

If the argument is that I as a consumer have a right to not have my ISP discriminate against my choice of content providers then where in that argument is the limiting principle that prevents me from forcing the content providers to provide the content on a device of my choosing rather than theirs?

Clearly these are exactly identical situations despite the fact that in the network neutrality argument there is a third party (the ISP) interfering with my choice of content provider, while in your argument there is no ISP interfering in my choice of content provider. The total and complete lack of third-party interference in your case (which is entirely what network neutrality is about) is what makes it different.

Clearly it's a violation of the separation of powers. Only the judicial branch can decide reality, like the judge ruling that deepwater horizon spilled 3.19 million barrels of oil.

Dear Dimit:

Thank you for taking the time to apply to our job. Unfortunately we are not able to extend an offer of employment to you as we feel you are overqualified for this position. Thank you for your interest.

Sincerely,
HR

his next bonus will suffer resulting in him not benefiting

Unless his next quarter is a negative bonus where he has to pay his ill-gotten gains back, he gets $10000 for hitting this quarter's target and gets only $1000 next quarter. As opposed to only getting $1000 both quarters. The behavior is a no-brainer.

He could later be considered for termination if the pattern continues.

Unless he's high enough up AND his behavior drives the company into bankruptcy, then the gets a $50000 retention bonus to help ensure his leadership through these tough times.

After the fucking the internet has gotten by the NSA during this and the previous administration, I think it'd be more appropriate if Obama was to "kibbitz" with youporn stars.

What should they do with the X?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the machine gun?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the machine gun?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the $20,000?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the car?

It goes into impound until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What's that? You can't be bothered with a court case to prove that anything illegal happened? Well, fuck you.

The "drug dog alerted on his car outside the view of the dash cam"

The drug dogs will simply be re-branded as kiddy porn dogs, and your cash will have trace amounts of 10 year old on them.

Don't worry, even if you're arrested they'll make sure it's for something entirely distinct from the reason your property is seized, like resisting arrest.

One with user-writable locations not mounted noexec?

Every single hung jury that prosecutors don't retry?

"It only takes one to hang" - so the saying goes.

"The" geek? There's only one?

Hell, I'm sure you could arrange for a demonstration: get 5 people to line up. Person one (we'll call him Adam) hands a box wrapped in paper that says "To Bob" to the next person who rips off that layer of paper to show another layer "To Charlie" and hands it to the next person and so on. Then point out that the feds can't see what's in the box, and if the feds look at the box between Charlie and David they can only see that the box came from Charlie and is going to David, but they can't see that it came from Adam or is going to Emily.

Run it again with a cop standing in for Bob and David and show that by comparing notes, Bob knows they got a box from Adam and gave it to Charlie, and David knows he got a box from Charlie at the same time and gave it to Emily. Point out that Adam doesn't know who any of the people are, their computer picks people at random and sometimes the cops get lucky.

<strike>Then point out that if you're the NSA you can use PRISM to track down everyone who handled that box</strike>