Except my file server is on a dedicated network not connected to the internet.
Hope you remember to grab all the files you might need before you leave.
the second year each has a 50% chance of being the record, the third year every measurement has a 1/3 chance, etc.
No lol, get a book on probability, I recommend this one.
inferring motive is not an observation.
The problem with their logic is, of course, that the police aren't forcing anyone to buy an Alexa device.
o.0 That's not a problem with their logic - that's something utterly irrelevant that you've pulled out of thin air.
If I choose to purchase a device that, by design, records everything I say, then I've voluntarily sacrificed my right to privacy in exchange for the benefits afforded by the device.
That's an assertion on your part, not a fact.
It's not the police's fault that I've done so, and they're entirely within their rights to seek a warrant for the information that I've served up on a platter.
Yes... and no. The police certainly are within their rights to seek a warrant to obtain information so long as is it relative to the case. They may not however use warrants to conduct fishing expeditions on the off-chance that information might be found that might be relevant to the case. Though they phrase it in First Amendment terms, that's the heart of Amazon's argument - they police have not established that the recordings are material to the case, and thus have no legal right to make a blanket request for private information.
And what are you teaching them? To distrust current scientific consensus in favour of a feeling?
Hopefully not. Hopefully you'll teach them how to think for themselves. To look at the evidence, and not blindly follow. That way leads to insanity.
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no substitute for a good blaster at your side. - Han Solo