Comment Re:You cannot demand more from the Republican part (Score 1) 60
Democrats are not "prioritizing trans athletes". It is Republicans who talk about them all the time, incessently. You are example #1.
Democrats are not "prioritizing trans athletes". It is Republicans who talk about them all the time, incessently. You are example #1.
The estimates of the number of children who died due to cuts in USAID is in the tens of thousands. Still terrible, but you don't serve any constructive purpose by exaggerating by several orders of magnitude.
In 2001 supposedly it really was "human error". Some humans told Hal 9000 to lie to the astronauts and not reveal that an alien artifact had been found on the moon. And that was a mistake as they probably either knew or could test what would happen to Hal.
This is remarkably similar to things going wrong with AI now, actually.
Person, the reason the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... -- has the NULL HYPOTHESIS as "no correlation", is because OF THAT. Your senses LIE!!!!
Fucking take your left and right hand, and 3 buckets if water of different temperatures. Let's say ONE is HOT, ONE is COLD, and the final is LUKEWARM/GOLDILOCKS.
Put your left hand and right hand into C and H, respectively. Wait. Minute.
Put both in the lukewarm.
Do your hands agree on temperature?
No. Fucking pay attention to your mental biases. That's why science is a DISCIPLINE OF MIND.
FFS.
"This ALPR mass surveillance â" the indiscriminate, continuous collection and retention of location data on every driver, regardless of suspicion â" should not exist. But because it does..."
Because of all those who predate upon those with lack of critical thinking skills.
"Wake up to reality" is the double-think that they say is dumb when they pejoratively call people "woke."
"Woke" is just a word for "slave that doesn't know its place."
But the purpose of the stop was not enforcement of the vehicle code.
"When there is not probable cause to believe that a driver is violating any one of the multitude of applicable traffic and equipment regulations 24 -- or other articulable basis amounting to reasonable suspicion that the driver is unlicensed or his vehicle unregistered -- we cannot conceive of any legitimate basis upon which a patrolman could decide that stopping a particular driver for a spot check would be more productive than stopping any other driver." Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 661, 99 S. Ct. 1391, 1400 (1979)
In California, as I suspect in most states, the driver is required to produce a license and registration when being pulled over for a traffic stop.
California Vehicle Code 12951(b) states: "The driver of a motor vehicle shall present his or her license for examination upon demand of a peace officer enforcing the provisions of this code."
Since the vehicle was not involved, the stop would not require a license to of produced. Of course, the cop would lie and make up a reason.
You are conflating a consensual encounter with a detention.
Part of the job of the police is to prevent crime. They don't have to wait for the angry ex-boyfriend stalker to hurt someone, they can have a conversation before that to prevent things from going too far. It absolutely is not. Courts have ruled again and again that the police have no duty to protect. No, you falsely conflate the officers actual intentions with the cover your ass policies that exist for when they do not show up in time.
No, when they decide not to show up or release someone that they should have detained.
If you are not suspected of a criminal act, the police have no business detaining you, full stop. Absolutely untrue, if there is a public safety concern no specific crime is necessary to have an interview.
Read Terry v. Ohio | 392 U.S. 1 (1968) and Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada (2004) 542 U.S. 177
I have reported crimes, but LAPD refused to make arrests.
I had a cop argue with me and tell me that I was not authorized to have an arrest made because I was a building manager. I had to explain real property law to him.
In many states, there is no requirement to show ID unless arrested. In other cases, there still has to be reasonable suspicion (the Terry standard).
Detaining someone for 1 second without reasonable suspicion violates the 4th amendment. Pulling someone over is not a consentual encounter, but the officer is probably trained to turn it into one. Extending the stop is unconstitutional. See Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348, 135 S. Ct. 1609, 191 L. Ed. 2d 492 (2015),. I suspect that even a diminimus extension would be unconstitutional. So, a false report could be argued a civil wrong, even when causing a deminimus delay.
The "might be armed?" might not be a crime. The defense would argue that there is a possibility and argue that it might not meet the standard of reasonable doubt. But in a civil case, it could meet the preponderance of the evidence.
How much would you like to bet that Flock's lawyers told them what exactly to say when calling the police?
Actually probably not the chip is larger, but the lens is larger. The aperture allows it to be less blurry in bright light.
The chip is larger so it collects more light and thus improves low-light photography, but this would make bright-light photography worse (by reducing depth of field). The aperture fixes this for bright light, thus allowing the better low-light performance.
The examples comparing prices are all comparing them to battery-backed systems that can continuously produce the rated power. The solar panels or wind turbines will be capable of far higher peak power that is used to charge the batteries. I have no idea whether any numbers being quoted here are accurate, but the posters are absolutely describing "base power" when quoting their prices.
The flow chart is a most thoroughly oversold piece of program documentation. -- Frederick Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"