Most Amazon boxes are much larger than a tray of milk bottles.
Absolutely. My point is that all of Ulbricht's lawyer's claims and theories are completely destroyed by the evidence the FBI collected.
But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
Really? The first one was terrible because nothing can live up to the expectations of angry nerds.
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
Lay off the meth, homey.
He admits to creating the site originally, but claims he sold it or gave it away before any drugs were sold. So he can't be *that* dumb.
Prior to that, the FBI took control of a forum mod's account. They asked "dread" in chat to look into something on the site that required him to log in as an admin. When they grabbed his laptop, a window with him logged into the site admin account was open. That's pretty damning evidence even without the journal.
I've been to 4chan zero times. But you have to recognize that the site has made a huge impact on internet culture.
In fact, how you will ever suspect that they scanned you so you can try to show they did?
Because they knew something that couldn't have known otherwise.
That was written by Antonin Scalia, who is usually a total douche, but occasionally gets things right.
Argument one will be that these devices are in no way in contradiction with the fourth amendment because nobody with RF-permiable walls can have a reasonable expectation of privacy
The Supreme Court already ruled that you DO have an expectation of privacy against wall-penetrating infra-red cameras. Prior to that, police helicopters would fly around looking for indoor pot growers.
The US Supreme Court did the same thing in 2001.
If you can show that the cops used one without a warrant, your case gets tossed.
The only other logical starting point for this era would be the beginning of the industrial revolution. But that happened slowly over several decades, so it's a lot more difficult.
The cops need a warrant to use these things is because of an interesting Supreme Court decision from 2001.
The traditional "liberal" and "conservative" wings fell apart and Ginsburg joined Scalia in the majority. Scalia's decision specifically addressed future technologies like this. It's strange how he's really good on privacy issues and really bad on everything else.
They're not saying that nuclear power has the only impact. Just that since 1945, our overall environmental impact has increased dramatically- with China building 800 GW of coal plants being a perfect example. While our per capita impact in many ways has decreased, the huge increase in population has caused the aggregate impact to increase greatly.
Also, while Japan and France may be scaling back their nuclear power generation, the "anti-nuclear" Obama administration has given the final approval for 4 new reactors. They're the first new ones since the 70s.