Precisely. And in a sane world (15 years ago), people would be pushing for exactly this. Monitoring should be for alerting and observing; control should be distinct, and monitoring should never require the ability to control simply because some manger heard the phrase "autorecovery." Instead, we have this. I'd like to blame the rise of k8s, which made people feel like problems didn't need to be resolved or engineered, but it's also cost and lack of foresight/battle scars.

If these were highly remote locations and getting a human to them in time to fix a problem was going to be a challenge, then maybe remote controllability would be important. But this is a damn supermarket; there's going to be somewhere there or nearby constantly. Dear Lord.

Once a brain has the opportunity to idle, it will develop further.

Happy Singularity, everyone!

Destroying something law enforcement believes is evidence in that moment is literally Obstruction of Justice, and destroying evidence is literally a crime specifically for that reason. There really isn't much grey area here.

Dude, this has been settled case law for centuries. If it weren't, literally all customs inspections at the border would be illegal under Federal law absent an individually-signed search warrant.

You're free to do whatever you want to your own data (subject to previous judicial order), but the moment a legitimate authority -- whether state or local law enforcement or a Federal agency like Customs and Border Control -- indicates that your data/property is subject to search or review, destroying such data is literal obstruction and will get you as much of a charge as if you flushed evidence away while a cop was asking for it.

If the LEO or agency is overstepping their bounds, once you've been put on notice that you're the subject of an investigation the proper remedy is judicial review and a lawsuit. You don't get to #resist, and you certainly don't get to blow up your phone just because someone taught you this One Weird Trick.

Have fun in jail, bro.

Is there anyone who is aware of concepts like Secure Flight and the No-fly List really thinking that prior flight information isn't being kept by DHS and used in evaluating future security stance?

If you fly a one-way, last minute cash ticket to Iran, be prepared for that flight data to be taken into account on future US flights. This should be obvious to everone.

Yes and no. Getting forward-depoyed engineers out to somewhere near a combat zone entails risks, but if you've got combat-ready individuals who've also got both the training *and* the authorization to do field repairs it gives a lot more flexibility to the entire system. In addition to that, there's an inescapable morale improvement when orders reflecting some semblence of reality and sanity come down from the top, and saying "yes, you can do what you need to do to get your job done with product XYZ" actually counts for a lot.

And beyond that, remember that the military is not in any way, shape, or form "all grunts." If some of those contractors want to enlist or join direct, there's a market for that too.

The principle here is simple. A journalistic outlet or blogger reported on a story and asserted that a person was involved with a terrorist organization. The university made its choice. Whether the outlet was or was not correct is a matter for the courts if the subject decides to sue for defamation or libel. AI doesn't really matter here, and plenty of anonymous reporting has indeed happened for legitimate, non-nefarious reasons.

If the subject does decide to sue the author, then discovery will turn up what it turns up.

My money, however, would be on the student lying through their teeth about their actions.

Who in their right mind approved this sentence? Why is "the virus that causes COVID-19" (and thus the global pandemic that was the most important thing since 9/11 in defining modern life) a "conservative discussion topic"? That should be an "everyone discussion topic."

You're being a bit cagey and loose with the term "immigrant" there. This covers everything from business owners to border crossers to student visa overstays to anyone else.

And yes, it's entirely reasonable for USCIS to do due diligence before giving someone the privilege of permanent residency, and certainly before becoming a US Citizen. If they came in in 2013 or 2017 and post heavily in support of Hamas on Twitter and Facebook, there's no particular reason the US *has* to provide them citizenship. And, in fact, it's debatable whether we want to keep them in the US at all even now.

Plenty of stuff out there is not appropriate for kids. Securing network via filtration is pointless on a mobile device, and kids are more than smart enough to get around various other mechanisms to access things they shouldn't be able to, including social media.

The principle has always been that something that could be secured in real life (18+ shops and events) should also be able to be secured in the cyber world, but there was never a practical way to validate it that didn't also risk exposing the token and identity of the user access it to be vulnerable to exposure. Well, we have a system now. Smart phones, like them or not, function as de-facto IDs already, and there is no rational reason for Google and Apple to be unwilling to associate the age of the cloud account holder as an AVS somehow. We have the biometrics, we have the pervasive internet, we have the standardized protocols and simple QR-encoding of relevant authentication. Banning under 16 users (for example) from Snapchat is a single, simple switch that the industry has not been willing to enable. If legislation is required to force their hand, so be it.

That "certain percentage of people" that have an "other underlying cause rather than true gender dysphoria" is around 95%. You're being a bit too glib with your analogy.

Post-pandemic we've proved WFH is viable. In an emergency. That doesn't mean it's preferable to regular office presence when it comes to productivity for the company.

Been a while since Slashdot got involved in internet drama, though.

Feels nice.

I'm glad Larry's Network Computer is finally getting another go of it. Still surprised Apple hasn't tried again.