Highly doubtful. Too easy to circumvent (not that current cuffs are impossible to beat)
If they wanted to get high-speed with handcuff locks, it would most likely be a physical dongle with a complete enshrouded NFC device. It would have some kind of spring-loaded trap door type mechanism. Sticking the key into the cuffs pulls back the door, NFC does it's magic and the cuffs open. Something like that
Welcome to the new paradigm. The Earth plus plastic
Honestly, while I always agreed with the premise, it seems to have taken much less time than I would have thought.
They code part has given way to monetary transactions.
Instead of typing idkfa to get all the weapons, you can buy those guns for a dollar each as DLC.
Instead of typing the Konami code to get extra lives, you have to buy them with micro-transactions.
The "code" is now your credit card number. Type that in, and get extra power.
The ruling actually spells it out "imminent threat" as a physical threat.
Digital data stored on a cell phone cannot itself be used as a weapon to harm an arresting officer or to effectuate the arrestee’s escape. Law enforcement officers remain free to examine the physical aspects of a phone to ensure that it will not be used as a weapon—say, to determine whether there is a razor blade hidden between the phone and its case. Once an officer has secured a phone and eliminated any potential physical threats, however, data on the phone can endanger no one.
Simple solution: Require every uniformed officer to wear a Go-Pro (or similar device) with very VERY strict guidelines and harsh punishment for data that "just happens to go missing."
While I'm pretty sure you're just trolling, I'll go ahead and respond. Maybe someone else will read through it and learn something.
Really? Two people working together lose their freedom of speech just because they happen to be working together? You will next suggest shutting down the NYT editorial department, I suppose?
It's funny that you mention strawman later, because that's exactly what this is. You're setting up a false argument on my behalf (that would be the "completely fabricating" part), so that you can beat that straw man down. No where did I ever say that the people working together would lose their freedom of speech. In fact, I said quite the opposite in my previous reply, and will say it again here. The people (that is, the actual human beings) still have all the rights that any individual has. They can still speak freely. Their rights are not abated in any way.
You don't own the company you work for, so this is irrelevant. The rights of the company to freedom of speech should be equivalent to the rights of the owners of the company, since the company does what they say and speaks for them.
Who cares? Private companies are owned and run by people. Those people should decide what the companies do and say. If you want the company to do or say something different, start your own business and spend your own money. What is this, communism?
Speaking of logical fallacies : That communism snark is full of Appeal to Emotion and Ad Hominem, with just a touch of Bandwagon. Or maybe communism is just a red herring
As for the rest of that comment, how does lack of ownership make my opinion irrelevant? For instance: I support Net Neutrality, should I quit my job at Comcast? I'm just a cable tech, but the Corporate guys are using the revenue I generate for the company to fight against Net Neutrality. Not their own inflated salaries. They're not opening their personal wallets to fight for something they personally believe in (which is fully within their rights) but instead, they're spending the corporate revenue that I help generate to fight on behalf of their personal issues.
And therein lies the real rub. Even if I wanted to ditch these guys and go self employed or work for a competitor, I can't. I'm a cable/wire tech, and Comcast has a lock-tight monopoly in the area. They've already leveraged corporate revenues to establish an illegal business practice (in clear violation of antitrust laws) Now they're layering illegal practices on top of illegal practices on top of illegal practices.
Truth be told though, I'd much rather attack the problem from the other side, as proposed and discussed way back in TFA. Limit the total revenue that a politician can spend on campaigns, from all sources, and more strictly monitor gifts/bribes. Not only will this solve the root problem of Corpos buying politicians by the bucket, but it will allow the politician to actually do their jobs and legislate, instead of spending their entire terms fundraising to compete with the challenger who has nothing but free time to fundraise.
Suing a corporation has nothing to do with them being people, and everything to do with them being deflector shield for the criminals in charge.
Case in point: General Motors. GM knowingly allowed a defect pass into production, and that defect killed over a dozen people. Somewhere along the line someone (Director, VP, or CEO) decided that it was cost effective to just let people die, rather than issuing a recall and fixing the defect. But that person is legally NOT culpable for negligence or any malfeasance. The corporation "GM" will get sued, will probably pay out some wrongful death suits, and back to business as usual.
That's not to say that corporations as legal targets is an entirely bad idea. Suing the corporation ensures a somewhat speedy resolution to the case for the victims. If we had to wait and dig through emails and history to see who approved the defect, nothing would ever get solved. Just look at what's going on with the IRS inquiry. "Oops, we lost that drive
Corporations are legal targets for litigation. Still doesn't make them people, persons, citizens, or any other such thing.
Pretty sure you're the one who needs to think this through. The people still have rights. The people may speak freely, donate to politics or otherwise exercise any rights enjoyed by We the People. But the corporation, the group, the amassed collection of people does not have rights. CocaCola does not get a vote in November. All of the Coca Cola employees do, sure (assuming non-felons, US citizens, etc) but the corporation is not a person.
I didn't band together with the CEO of my company to accomplish something political. I'd wager that the vast VAST majority of Americans didn't pick their current job because of the political leanings of the C-suite (if those political leanings are even allowed to leak into public knowledge)
Corporations are absolutely NOT people.
The core issue is conflating money with speech. That has always been a lie, payed for by the very rich to ensure that they maintained absolute control, and is grossly exacerbated by the more recent "corporations are people" lie.
Combine the two, and you have legalized bribery. And not just random Joe Millionaire trying to protect his own indulgences, but multi-billion dollar companies spending the money of their employees to keep entire swaths of congress in their pockets.
They really really are becoming half-ass trade schools. But not for the trade you want. Colleges are trade schools for beaurocracy.
Most degrees are less about gaining understanding and knowledge in your desired field. Instead, it's all about spending 4+ years crossing your t's and dotting your lower case j's. That's the skill employers are after. Your ability to suffer through paperwork hell.
The mouse issues in W_D get really wonky in other areas, too. The mouse is also used to, for instance, select buttons on a keypad (actually a simulated Smart Phone) which has different acceleration than outside the simulated phone.
Meatspace analogy mk2: To better represent the situation in the game, set your phone on your desk. Imaging being limited to 2 inches per second of motion while interfacing with your phone (dialing a number, or selecting an app from your home screen) but while not interfacing with the phone your limit was much different, to allow faster movement across your desk. Not only does dialing the phone become a major hassle, but as soon as you're done dialing and try to go pick up your coffee, the increased speed screws with your mental calibration. Worse yet, if you're trying to move the cursor between two non-phone items, but happen to cross the path of the phone screen
A lot of the ideas sound reasonable at first, but as soon as you get hands on and try to use the thing, it's immediately apparent that it's NOT working, not viable and needs to be redone. (similar to the Depth of Field mentioned elsewhere in these comments... sounds good on paper, looks great for screenshots or carefully planned scenarios, but in practice it's WAY more trouble than it's worth)
Basically your entire post is bullshit.
I was actually conducting an experiment to see if people would mod-up a factually incorrect post that sounded plausible.
I really hope you weren't conducing an experiment to see if people would rescind their moderation based on new information, because if you were
All I ask is a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
