For the government to now claim that probable cause can be established without the defendant seeing the evidence is quite literally overturning centuries of jurisprudence.

The way you state it make it sound as if that is something they would not do.
In that case, you are mistaken. They gladly and happily will do that and much, much more as long as you allow them to do so,

Watch any show about raising kids or puppies. If you do not hold down your foot, they will go a bit further each time. In the beginning you have power over kids. Unless you don't handle them correctly. They they will get power over you. Each time you give in, they will ask a bit more the next time.

Sure, they will yell and give you a headache for a while, but when you keep your ground, they will respect you and follow your rules.

At this moment the public is not willing to take a stand because they do not like it when the kid whines, so they will just give it what it wants. Great short term solution. Lousy long term one.

They ask me such things all the time and I always refuse. Never had to explain myself, nor was I treated differently from other customers.

The conversations in the last 10-15 years are as follows:
"Do you have a ?"
-No
"Would you like one?"
-No, thank you.
"OK. The total is ...."

The reason these companies want those cards is not to track your each and every step and know to advertise the morning after pill, when you forgot to buy condoms. The real reason is customer binding.

They know that if you have a savings card, you will be more loyal to them then when you are not.

This works for enough people to make it profitable. One of the places where I worked that used this system, I saw people spending 10EUR more as with the competition, so they would get their star, uh, points with the worth of 10 cents if that.

Once people have a savings card, they often even stop to look at the competition, because in their mind, they save with their points and disregard the fact that they spend more.

You will most likely go to another place in a heartbeat and THAT is what they want to prevent.

Also do not forget that this is talking about large numbers of customers. Once you start caring for each individual customer, you are either very exclusive and expensive or very bankrupt.

Reminds me of two American girls where saying 'I love your English accent." They were nice looking and obviously flirting with the guy. He responded:
"Accent? That is how you are SUPPOSED to speak it."

Keep pointing at them and telling how they are spying on us. That way it keeps the attention away how we are also spying on us and them.

Nuke the entire planet from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

It is even harder for the medical sector. How can they say we need medicine for paranoia? After all, we ARE being followed.

Perhaps that is why we are not allowed soft drugs. It does not make us paranoia. It makes us see the truth.

I don't think it is going too far to call them sentient

So is sentient important or how close they are to us? Perhaps you mean both.
So if we get proof that they are NOT sentient, then we can go on using them as test subjects?

If you want to protect them, tell it how it is: they LOOK too much like us on the outside. I am sure you are well aware that pigs are also often used, because they resemble people in many ways, yet they do not look like us (and they produce bacon) so that is less problematic for many.

As long as you are aware that it is a social issue, fight your battle that way. Making it a technical one (They are sentient. They are our closest relative.) will make you vulnerable to attacks on that part that you might loose and with that your whole battle.

It is evolution, not intelligent design. This means that there is no plan. Only afterward can you say why something did happen.

Because that is the standard where he lives? Programmers should write programs that consider reality. Reality should not change because you are unable to program

They could have gone with just 419 and 421 and leave out the box number altogether. There are even places that have NO house number and that often is a problem as well.

Sure, people will then enter a 1, but in reality it is sloppy coding that causes people to enter the wrong data.

I know it's difficult to wrap your head around

For me it isn't. I have not had contact with transgenders (as far as I know) but I have with people who did not confirm with the standard that the majority of people have.

e.g. a friend of mine came out to me as being lesbian and she was clearly disappointed in my reaction. I said something like "So?" or "Good for you.".

So just because the majority does not accept it right away, do not assume that nobody can. For me it is not difficult at all. The fact that you think that only people who went to the same situation can understand it, is YOUR problem. You make it difficult to be understood, because you assume that nobody understands you.

I do not make the difference between people, so why do you do it?

How would you like to hit a TSA checkpoint and almost be denied in the ability to pass beyond the checkpoint to catch your flight because[...]

Almost? You are so cute,

Signed: Omar Muhammed

In Belgium you must be male or female. You still get maternity leave as a male.

You do make a good point in that it is society. So it is just a social issue that has nothing to do with changes that need to be done in a database.

Leaving out the gender will not take away the discrimination. Women or men will still be discriminated against. People will identify them by their first name. Take that away? Then they will be discriminated against when they walk into the building.

So I would say that anybody should be able to identify him/her/itself as they please and to stop the discrimination part. No discrimination on gender, age, color of their skin, religion, country of birth, country of origin, profession, ...

Optional is not an option in Belgium due to the law.

Where I work, we have customers and send those customers letters. The majority of our clients wants to get the "Dear Mr. John Doe" as start.

When we get the customer, we put the data in the database when we get official proof.

OTOH sometimes things change. Their address changes. Then we just do that change in our database, as soon as we get official proof.
If they change their name, we change their name in the database when we get official proof.

And when they change their gender, we change it as soon as we get official proof.

I see nothing that is to be ashamed about, nor anything that should be explained. Just show me your that your old ID needs an update and we do it as required by law.

From a social point, it might be hard for some, but I am sure, this is the easy part for those who have done the gender change. At least in Belgium where I live it is not that difficult. I have explained what they needed to do to several already and if anything I hear almost disappointment of how this is just like a change of address to me.

From a technical side I see absolutely no problem. If the law adds options next to M and F, we just add them. At this moment the law requires people to be either male or female. Change the law and we will add T for Transgender, H for Hermaphrodite, N for None, U for Unknown and what not. Obviously you will need to change the output of the letters we send as well.

For others with an old database, it might be a challenge to even add a third option if they have it in binary in their system. e.g. 0 for male and 1 for female. Or if it is in digits and there will be more then 10 options. e.g. now 0 is unknown, 1 is male and 2 is female.

So to me this whole issue is a non-issue.

In Belgium you can still send a telegram.
So no idea where this idea comes from that it isn't available anywhere anymore. If Belgium has it and even has International AND Intercontinental prices, there must be at least two other countries that have it.

We can. Look at all the food that is thrown away. Then there is the inefficient way of transferring calories by passing tit through animals first.

Then there is the enormous over consumption of the western world.

So I am sure if you look at how many calories we would need and how many we would be able to produce, it would be possible. To make the maximum amount of people possible, you would need to restrict consumption per person.

So more a question of 'do we want it'? The answer is probably no as it would mean to give up everything for the group. Not the best of human features.