It's not elitist to choose what you want to see and what you don't. Can't be arsed to log in or take credit for what you say, then why should I be arsed to read it? That is the exact opposite of elitist, since ANYONE can have an account, so quit trying to reframe the question to something totally bogus.
Are all AC comments worthless? Maybe not - but there's too much NOISE and not enough SIGNAL. The option to hide AC comments would be a huge improvement just in eliminating troll scripts.
we saw from the failure of 3d to be a real selling point for TVs (3d or a larger screen for the same price - bigger wins)..
if you want a better more immersive experience, spend the money on better audio.
"But I'm not ignoring it, I'm enforcing it. I do not have to assist them in their search."
I think you are confusing "unreasonable search and seizure" with "any search and seizure". Swiping a finger is non-intrusive. Swabbing a cheek is non-intrusive. Maryland V King is a fairly recent example.
"Exactly. I am very disappointed that people think it's okay to compel anyone to assist in any way one's own prosecution,"
I knew the wording of this would toss up responses like yours.
This is no different than an order to produce blood/cheek swab or even passwords. The accused have the right to remain silent -- they do not have the right to ignore lawful search warrants. If you really want to keep information that the law cannot touch then either memorize it or have a trusted spouse memorize it.
So, while customers don't necessarily "have a constitutional right to know if the government has searched or seized their property", the government certainly has no constitutional right to prohibit companies from telling customers anything they want.
If you grant that the government has a legitimate national security interest in keeping the inquiries quiet, the courts will rule that the Necessary and Proper Clause authorizes the gag orders.
The problem is that Microsoft is trying to Horn in on the market it doesn't have but that's already taken over by the smartphones.
Sorry to sound confrontational, but that's bullshit. It just is. And ironically Donald Trump is the one that proves it.
No it doesn't. It just means the ultra-rich do not march in lock-step.
Did you read beyond the sentence you quoted?
The man was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he bought some buildings and his overall investments were no better than if he had randomly bought and sold them. He didn't beat the market in some way that isn't obvious due to "timing".
Worse, actually. If he'd put the money into an S&P 500 index fund he'd be much wealthier today.
Nondeterminism means never having to say you are wrong.