I agree. Close your bank accounts, use check cashing services and pay everything with cash or money orders.
Done by enough people, loudly enough, would be incentive to get stodgy steak-fed Congress-clowns to fix their blunder.
Likely? No. But , I can see there will be outcry if they abuse this law publicly enough. More stupid bullshit from the "superior" overlords we elected. Wait! You elected them! I didn't vote for any Repubmocrats! You did!
You Goddamn fix it! You made the mess, now clean it up! And quit voting for the one-party system or quit complaining about the current government.

How about a modern .308 bolt-action rifle with a synthetic stock? The caliber is more than adequate; the stock won't be affected by the elements; and a bolt-action is very reliable. It's extremely simple and easy to keep clean. Almost any brand will do.

I was really unhappy with Debian's move to systemd, and the fact that once systemd is running as one's init system through a general upgrade, one cannot even go back to sysvinit..

Having heard that Slackware was resistant to systemd, I installed the latest version of Slackware on a netbook I have lying around, and while it's a fine project that clearly has its fans, it seems to require a lot of retraining for someone coming from Debian. I'd love to be able to stay on the venerable old Linux distro I have so many years of experience in.

P.S. Many US families do the same thing as Google, at a smaller scale. I personally know families in which the wife does not work and is stay-home mom because is "cheaper" vs. two working parents and kids in day care. This is because two spouses working would put them in a higher taxable income bracket which will also make them receive less or none of some tax deductions. Plus they will have to pay for day care. With the wife staying home, taxable income of just one working spouse is lower, there are higher tax deductions, and no day care costs. Tax evasion? No, simply a personal example of tax optimization.

A lot of countries do only tax on the revenues from their country. America is one of the few countries that tries to tax globally. That's why companies are leaving America.

Do you honestly believe that someone would be allowed to run for president of the USA who wasn't in big media's pocket?

I honestly believe, that if your (cynical) point of view was connected to reality, we wouldn't have seen the sort of media bias on display in the last two elections.

You gotta vote for people who will make it so

Oh, I am voting for such people alright. But the last couple of elections I was overruled by the inane majority, who consider the color of a candidate's skin more important, than his qualifications.

Our "affirmative action" President plays golf with big cable CEO(s), and the rest of his party is in the big media's pocket as well.

Meanwhile, the rank-and-file partisans are encouraged to hate the Kochs brothers...

Don't take naked pictures of yourself with an Internet-connected device. Don't transmit naked pictures of yourself through others' networks and store them on others' servers.

The victims did something stupid. Had they not done something stupid, they wouldn't be victims.

...don't blame the victim (which is generally a good policy) because their benefit/risk estimation wasn't erroneous? I don't want to blame Jennifer Lawrence (as she seems to want to blame all those cursed with natural interests) but that she would've normally seen a benefit to her actions doesn't seem to directly address blame in any sense. Perhaps this ethical argument requires a simpler "ipso facto" tacked on the end for us stupid folks which are missing the connection between benefit and blame.

Parent AC here. Your point is well-taken, but you're also overlooking something: the foreign gov't *can* authorize search ("hacking") of those servers, even if it's a US citizen. If the foreign gov't allows it, then the Constitution is irrelevant: it's as if the foreign gov't did it and handed over the data to the US.

In short, it all comes down to legal agreements between gov'ts.

Eyewitnesses testimony is not nearly as accurate as one would have hoped.

I hate to be obvious, but in the U.S. at least, all "recent" music is subject to copyright protection unless the creator specifically places it into public domain (or it is so under law, like works of U.S. gov't employees). To distribute any such music at all you need a license.