Would a properly installed firewall stop someone from accessing this via the IP?

Seems to me that is what firewalls are supposed to do - stop random people from accessing IP addresses on your network.

From my minimal web search it appears to me that:
1) the Plaintiff, Global Plasma Solutions appears to make an inferior product and make ridiculous claims for it.
2) The defendant, media company Elsevier published a poor quality review that made ridiculous and unsupported claim about the quality of the review.

In other words, two a-holes fighting.

Technically you are allowed to lie to MOST cops.

But there is a law that makes it illegal (5 years punishment) to lie to certain federal officials, as you referenced.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...

This definitely applies to the FBI (lots of cases) and I think it applies to Border agents, but I am not as sure about that. So yes, the border agents that questions him should be able to charge him for lying.

EXCEPT:
The border agents claimed he was not entitled to a lawyer because he was legally not in the US until after he passed customs. He repeatedly asked for one.

If the court holds this to be true (unlikely) than he could argue he was not in their jurisdiction when they questioned him.

If the court says it was not true, then the courts will state anything he said cannot be used as evidence after he asked for a lawyer, including any lies he stated.

If that was what happened, you would be correct. But it is NOT what happened.He did not just try to refuse a search. He also specifically asked for a lawyer. While inside the physical US.

The border patrol stated and said that legally he was not inside the US and therefore did not have the right to a lawyer. They denied him one.

Which means either:

1) (Stupid argument in response to their stupid claim) They are correct and he was not inside the USA so the they did not have jurisdiction which means they cannot charge him with a crime for anything he did. US codes do not apply.

2) (Real argument) They denied him a lawyer when he was asked for one during a search, which means it was an ILLEGAL search and he had the legal right to destroy the evidence as they had no legal right to get it.

This is the actual argument his lawyer is already making.

This is a study of people born in a set time period at a set location.

There were LOTS of things happening at that time. Yes sugar was rationed, but there were also a lot less chemicals being made, some new chemicals started up, jet travel became common, the men had come home, but some did not. New medicines appeared. New foods became common besides sugar.

The writers of this study picked one of thousands of potential explanations and ascribed it as the cure. They have NO EVIDENCE at all that reduced sugar was the cause.

This is the WORST possible example bad studies. It's like I looked at one of the cancer maps people make, pick a school in the center and blamed the Principal of the school for intentionally giving cancer to his students.

This study indicates Britain's of a certain age have health benefits. It does NOT indicate sugar had anything to do with it.

Thus getting back the money Trump extorted for his librabry.

" Half of those using them said they could not make ends meet otherwise, according to the latest edition of a survey that LendingTree, a loan marketplace, has compiled for years."

If you are using any loan to 'make ends meet' you are not making ends meet, you are merely delaying bankruptcy.

They specifically mentioned Flex, Zip and Affirm, which can easily reach 20% and even 36%. Basically credit card rates.

It is possible to pay these rates for a short term emergency and then take years to pay it off.

Food, rent, etc. are things you need to buy every week, not an emergency. If you cannot afford it this week, you will never be able to do it. Instead you keep getting more and more debt at these rates until you reach the credit limit, then go bankrupt.

The subject said "same problem".

The problem is that the equipment either
a) solves a problem by spending more than it is worth or
b) does not solve the problem and costs a ton.

That applies to Flock cameras - they cost too much for what they do.

Yes, just buy my pet rock / invermectin / Ponzi Scheme and it will cure what ails ya!

No I won't be specific about how it works, cause I do not know!

Sure I will give you a Guarantee - but don't expect your money back.

One of the issues with traffic enforcement cameras (speeding, red light) is that they can either:

a) Do the claimed job: reduce infractions (less speeding, less running red lights)

b) Fulfill predictions and pay for themselves. Note, I did not say be profitable, I said pay for themselves. Usually they end up costing the city more money then the cost to install/maintain. At best a company is paid to manage them and they make money but not the city.

They cannot do both. If they reduce the infractions, then the tickets drop and it is not profitable. If enough tickets are paid, then that means infractions remain constant.

For this reason a lot of the time, towns just end the contract.

You have repeated the failed arguments of idiots that are killing tens of thousands of people. Everything you said has at least a kernel of truth, but smart people ignore those excuses and fix the problem.

Yes just giving them AC will not fix the problem they have to install it and use it and not go out in 90 F+ degree temperature. The cultural change is part of the fix.

YOU DEFINITELY NEED AC Fans, water, shade are not enough. The same house designs that keep the heat in during winter keep the air conditioning in during summer. Yes you may need to redesign flexible AC's for the older houses. Not impossible to do.

The fans etc. were enough 50 years ago. 30 years ago the deaths from heat starting rising and We already knew about Global Warming You are basically claiming to be caught by surprise from the most famous trend in the last 50 years.

It is NOT a few days each year - that was what it was 30 years ago. Now it is 2 months per year.

The belief that you 'do not need AC' is part of the same stupid culture that has people go out in the sun. You are not part of the solution, you are a moron that thinks "it is not that bad of a problem, we do not need to use the same techniques of people from the equator use." Given the death rate, YES YOU NEED TO USE THOSE TECHNIQUES.

The problem is not measured in days you need AC, it is measured in Tens of Thousands dead. You get more than 50,000 dead it does not matter if they all die on one day, 10 days, or 30 days. That many dead = a problem.

Part of the solution may very well be a constant barrage of radio, TV, and internet propaganda with a Heat Index telling idiots that today is the day you turn on your AC and stay inside. But you need those AC's to exist in order to do this. Trying to do it with fans will fail. The people will think "I am not comfortable, I will go to the beach." Make them comfortable, not just liveable.

Note, I live in the NYC area. I use an AC in my bedroom but a ceiling fan in my living room. The fan works great as long as the temperature is under 90, then I go read in my bedroom. Because I am not stupid enough to think "Well, the fan keeps me alive but uncomfortable, so I do not need the AC." I want to enjoy my life not suffer through it.

1) Until recently = past 30 years. That is, the number of heat deaths has doubled over the past 30 years. So NO this is not a recent problem, it existed 30 years ago. Yes it has gotten worse. So what, when you have ten of thousands of deaths in 1990s, then you fix the problem so it does not reach hundreds of thousands.
2) Yes, Europe is to the north. So what. Montreal has air conditioners. NYC has air conditioners and it is the same latitude as Madrid, Naples and Istanbul.
  In those cities new buildings have AC, but not old ones. Retrofit it you fools.

You have explained the inept reasons why Europeans have not fixed the problem, proving they are foolish. Those are not good reasons. ore Europeans died this year from the lack of AC than Americans were killed by guns. Americans have their head up the ass on guns, Europe refuses to:

1) Redesign AC's to fit the tiny windows in Europe.
2) Make them easy to install and remove.
3) Create a culture where AC is expected and people do NOT go out when the temperature is above 90 F /32 C Instead stay in air conditioned areas.

It does not take 5 years to do this. This should have been done 10 years ago. The fact that morons keep saying "We are colder and do not need it" when that has not been true for 30 years is not an excuse.
Saying "We only need it for a few days" does not matter when people are dying.
Saying "It is hotter today than ever before" is MORONIC given that we all know Climate Change is happening. Yes it is is hotter. Next year will be worse. FIX THE PROBLEM NOW.

One racoon created 'more than a thousand power outages'??

This needs to be turned into a movie. I am OK with it being a disney cartoon, but I need to see this, preferably live action.