"Nothing said by this company or others explains why it’s necessary to continue to engage in pervasive surveillance of students when most of them will be attending classes in person?" The future is surveillance and surveillance is the future. Might as well get the kiddies used to living under the eye of Big Brother.
Let me get this straight: you got a match on the baby's DNA, to DNA from the crime scene? Well, it's obvious: the baby did it, not me. Certainly there is a resonable doubt. You got two matches to the crime scene, me and the baby. It's obvious that when you said the chances of s omeone else matching were 1 in 13 million, you were lying. Even if the baby didn't do it, how many more matches are there in this city? Two out of 13 million is twice as many matches as you claimed. How many is it really? Twenty in 13 million? More?
Being on the roof counts as escape...but how does one get off of the roof?
My comprehension is just fine. Let mey play the paragraph back to you, paraphrased:
The Uvalde school has too many lockdown drills BECAUSE the border with Mexico is 100 miles away.As written, the paragraph amounts to prejudice: There are lockdowns because there are scary Mexicans nearby. How about a connective fact or two, to justify the assertions?
When a majority of school lockdowns address no real threat to school safety, the tendency to view the procedure as an annoyance (if not possibly optional) increases. That’s what appears to be the case in Uvalde, Texas, which is about an hour north of the Mexican border. (That would also explain the overabundance of Border Patrol and state police officers at the scene of the shooting.)What an astounding sequitur in this paragraph. Could you add another paragraph explaining how the lockdowns explain the price of tea in China?
Ummmm...yeah. I should have put quotes around "worthless prose" to clarify that it was all these "fixers'" who think it is worthless. Or maybe they don't think it's worthless, but they can't be bothered to learn the spirit of it either.
Two thirds of states? Wow. It's good to know there are enough states that hate the First Amendment, to get together and amend that worthless prose right out of the Constitution.
Frankly, I don'tunderstand why anyone would buy from a robo-caller. Robo-calling is illegal. Why would anyone expect a quality product from a company that starts the business relationship by breaking the law? I mean, think about it: you're buying a home security system from a scofflaw...does that sound smart? Maybe we coould discourage idiots from buying by imposing a 25% use tax on the buyer.
No one could come up with a good excuse for Creative Commons itself. "...Anyone? Anyone? Come on, China, get that hand up there. No? Crud!"
This is being over-thought, in my opinon. Wikimedia is, perhaps, the largest proponent of Creative Commons. Which pretty much makes them WIPO public enemy #1. So... "Anyone got an excuse we can use to exclude Wikimedia? Anyone? Anyone?"
It's just the usual: go after the easy wins, to show you're doing something. Think about it: Who would steal fast food?
They don't need certitude. They just need a face they can throw in jail. (Or shoot to kill, whatever.) The rest of the time, they can use it to hunt down all those anti-cop protest types. As well as other critics of police and government authority. That's the most important thing anyway, right?
You have a strong belief in your moral superiority, which you are attempting to force us to adopt. It seems to me you are virtue signalling.
I get all that. It still doesn't change that the settlements are routinely used to dodge responsibility - especially since the wrongdoers suffer no direct penalty. To wit--- Did the police suffer personal financial loss? No, the taxpayers will pay. Did the police have to get up in front of a courtroom full of people and - red-faced with embarrassment - admit that they did wrong? No, they thumbed their noses at the victim and felt vindicated. Do the police have to change their policies so that they might not do this same thing again in the future? Let us consult the rules posted on every station wall:
“And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.” Guessing Stone is learning about that first hand.
"The end goal is always-on surveillance of students, with the stated goal being[...]The end goal is always-on surveillance (period)
The question is why anyone in the FBI thought camouflage gear would be useful or necessary in a situation like this.Hey, when you have the party of the YEAR and just EVERYONE is invited, you gotta have a THEME! Some people think in terms of NFT Party Birds. These guys thought, "Yeah! Cool Camouflage. Woooooo!"
This type of abuse has been a given since the government started NSL's back when. It would not surprise me if there are more forged orders than real ones. Such abuse was so obvious a possibility that I think the goverenment made these laws to support the business model.
Sad truth
The sad truth is, if it's written by a Republican, or their ilk, and it's getting moderated, it is repugnant to almost everyone who is civilized. They want us to be forced to swim in that repugnance, to become like them, in their image. Nothing less will do...and they're not going away until they get what they want.