You're right. Official US government spokesmen are not a credible source. I'm sorry you missed that the comment was more of a statement about our government officials and stupid pronouncements of cause than an actual assignment of such.

I could have used the example of the riots over a newspaper cartoon.

Yes, because it takes millions of "bomb strapping terrorists" to blow up a bus load of civilians or a local school. Everyone knows that a successful terrorist attack takes millions of perpetrators.

Try "one". All it would take is one McVeigh-style ANFO device parked outside a big city theater to create a panic, helpfully propagated by the news media, just as they helpfully propagated the news about the millions of armed, I mean, ONE armed nut who took hostages at a Lindt store in Oz.

No movie theater manager wants to be the "one" that the "one" shows up at.

And if you doubt that a "movie" can trigger a violent reaction from political reactionaries, look no further than the Benghazi attacks that were caused by a movie.

SMTP doesn't have headers. SMTP is a protocol for message transport.

There is likewise no "From:" envelope address. There is an envelope-sender (the argument to the SMTP "MAIL FROM" command) which is often inserted into a "Return-Path" header in the message, and is used in the mailbox separator "From" line in mbox email storage.

The "From:" header is a header, not something in the body of the message. As a header, it is subject to rewriting by transport agents.

The MUA has access to all headers in an email, including "Return-Path". It is usually never shown to the user, but a good MUA will have an option to show raw email, including headers. Why? For just this reason.

Well, there you go. I did say a GOOD MUA ...

There are several issues at play here:

1. Employees at a company that manages a huge part of the control of the Internet can't detect phishing email by looking at the address replies will go to.

2. The email system at said company creates email replies based on information that is supposed to be used ONLY for the transport system to report delivery issues.

3. The offline verification process intended to stop such fraud worked, which makes this a non-story from the beginning.

The parent, who is responsible in general for a child.

Totalitarianism has a pretty strong negative track record in that respect, too.

Posting a picture of someone who is drunk is not the same as "posting [while] drunk". This prompt will not stop the latter.

And who is responsible when people who have reasons you approve of for not getting vaccinated kill or cripple other people? (Claiming that children who aren't vaccinated are doing either one is simply ridiculous, but that's what you get from AC oftentimes.) That child who is allergic to the vaccine has just as much chance of spreading the diseases as one who isn't vaccinated for other reasons. And one who has a compromised immune system and can't be vaccinated is more likely to get that disease and spread it. Should those children be removed from the general population to protect the rest of us? Aren't they killing or crippling others?

And then what happens when the government decides that other things are required? E.g., lot of people are highly allergic to peanuts, so shouldn't peanuts be outright banned to protect them? If you have a Reeses PB Cup in your pocket, you are killing or crippling other people, you know...

The issue is not as black and white as it is being made out to be by some people. It is an indirect risk (like second hand smoke), and the risk is a problem only because a lot of people are exercising the freedom.

Because it would be hard to argue that the area under your spare tire in the trunk is in your "immediate control" and thus subject to search based on your arrest. And even for areas that might be argued are under your immediate control, waiting to search until they have a warrant means there would be no "but you didn't have a warrant" defense at trial.

You might as well face it, if they arrest you in your car and impound it, they'll get the warrants they ask for.

Fourth Amendment? Other than 1) what is in plain sight, or 2) within reach and might hide a weapon.

That's pretty much the same thing the old curmudgeons say about you, you know?

This bed is too hard, this bed is too soft, this bed is just right. Yes, it's overkill for trivial tasks, it's underkill for high-powered computational tasks. It's just right for lots of things in between. I've got one running a Winlink RMS gateway using a Pi-TNC for radio to internet communications, and another as the gateway computer (just inside the router) for a data collection network to provide ntp, smtp, snmp, logging, etc services on the network. I had a second one on the same network to control two cameras that needed serial commands. And another that does nothing but collect temperature data and put it on the net.

And sometimes just being able to program in a real programming language is valuable. Like the serial command to cameras program that I was able to write and debug on a desktop and then port with only trivial changes to the Pi when it came time to put the final network together.

6. Pull the "hard disk" off the Pi and stick it in a card reader on any other computer, edit the files you need to and put the disk back.

7. Use the native DHCP client on the Pi to let it get an address from your existing DHCP server and ssh into it.

And yet, this reports the abuse of ham radio by the Indianapolis, IN, USA police department. You can read about FCC actions, for example, this one, which is typical of the kinds of illegal use commercial operations make of ham radio.

There are those who would claim that your listening announcement IS calling CQ. I hold the opinion that "it's nice that you're listening, if you wanted to talk to someone you'd say that."

Are you in the US? If so, yes, you can. You are not encrypting it for the purposes of obfuscating the meaning.

That says neither that it is needed nor that it was intended for that purpose.

Here. While it includes an HF component, the local transport is almost exclusively via packet.

Because the hospitals are eventually going to ask for it.

"Health and welfare" is not medical information covered by HIPAA.

You've already lost that battle. You should keep up with the changes to the regulations.

Well, I dunno. You've said a lot of things that are wrong. They may have been correct in the past, but times have changed. Just your statement that "encryption is not legal", for starters. Your ignorance of Winlink. That you think there is some limit on government employee's use of ham radio. And that you seem to think that "health and welfare" traffic is what HIPAA is about.

It's called "RAYNET" and it is very similar to ARES in the US. Support for emergency services like hospitals and government agencies. Hospitals, at least in this area, get a lot of support from ARES. Hospitals tend to deal with medical data.