21·
4 months agoPaywalled.
Cosmic Cleric
All posts/comments by me are licensed by CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, unless otherwise noted.
- 0 Posts
- 27 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 15th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
I notice you asked for an explanation and then only sort-of read the first sentence.
No, I read the whole thing, fully. I just disagreed with your analogy, thought it was a bad one, too verbose and obfuscating of the subject being talked about. Also it didn’t cover someone searching your belongings with/without your permission, the subject being talked about. Law officials have more legal leeway to detain you than they do to search your belongings without your permission, so your analogy doesn’t work (especially when you throw in beatings into it).
Also, didn’t think your last paragraph was legally accurate, but didn’t want to bother arguing the point, since ‘amendment > law > policy/rule’ is a well-known given. I’m aware of the difference. When I asked my original question, it was to confirm if the border enforcement people were actually honoring the 4th amendment, or not, whatever their thought processes were.
I did appreciate you taking the time to reply (and civilly at that) though, thank you. P.S. I hope the tone of my reply wasn’t too harsh, it wasn’t meant to be rude, just straightforward.
“May I have your permission to search through your phone?”
“Yes.”
Consent in a situation like this is difficult to establish, to the point of it being pointless.
Hard disagree.
Did they ask him if they could search and he said yes, or no? Or did they just take his device away from him and did a search without his permission?
Consenting to a search, or have one mandated by a judge’s order, is one of the fundamental pillars of citizen rights and laws in this country.
Was it a legal or illegal search? That’s not a pointless question to ask.
It’s “voluntary” in the sense that either you allow it or you don’t get into the country.
Was that explicitly said to him? Did they tell him that if he refused the inspection that he would be denied entry?
BTW, what you described is a mandatory inspection.
immigration officers at an airport searched his phone
There’s no mention in the article if this search was voluntary, or not.
Edit: For the downvoters, please point out where I was wrong; I’d honestly really like to know if it was voluntary or not.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its children.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its land.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its minerals.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its power plants.
Is Ukraine a nation, or not?
Per CNN (per US Agency for Global Media), number of regular listeners, in millions, of VoA…
- Indonesia 64.8
- Nigeria 37.4
- Mexico 37.1
- India 29.1
- Iran 12.2
- Peru 11.9
- Russia 10.1
- Ukraine 9.8
- Iraq 9.3
- Egypt 9.0
Point being FM coverage is almost universal in any area where there’s a significant number of people, not just lone homesteaders, uncontacted tribes, suchlike. Yes there may be people there that could be reached but the total number is small and if they want any news, they’re getting them from the town over once a month.
[Citation required]
There’s no need for us to keep arguing this point, I totally agree that the coverage of listeners of shortwave radio today is a lot less than what it was in the past, but my point is that it’s a lot more still than you’re imagining.
The point is rather if you’re operating an FM transmitter, you not only have the money for a satellite dish
Talking about people who listen, receive, not transmit, and who do not have ready funds available.
Also, FM reception distances is much shorter than shortwave, something you didn’t mention.
but let’s face it the amount of people that you can only reach via short wave is dwindling, they mostly switched to satellite. They rather feed into the local FM broadcast network, and of course you can stream over the internet.
You would actually be surprised how many poor regions in Central and South America as well as in Africa and Central Asia actually rely on shortwave still.
A lot of it is Christian and right-wing broadcasts, but still, it’s used more than you would think. Not everyone can afford expensive satellite rigs to receive.
15·4 months agoFrom the article …
08:47 Impossible? Wake on Bluetooth w/ the LCD Deck
RT
?
As someone who used to listen to a lot of shortwave radio, this just bums me out.
I know foreign people who listened to VoA, and now it won’t be there anymore for them.
Makes me wonder who they’ll listen to, who will fill the void, with the VoA being gone.
Does that mean we have to stop calling it swiss cheese and start calling it holes cheese, or holy cheese?
I’m capable of doing so, if I want to. But again, its not my job to enforce it, I’m just availing myself to the laws protection, like all other citizens, corporation, or individual.
maybe if everyone is telling you the same thing, it’s not us that’s wrong? food for thought.
One, not everybody is telling me the same thing. I learned to do this from someone else here on Lemmy, and I’ve had others tell me that they like that I’m doing what I’m doing, and that its ok to do.
Two, never heard anybody give a valid reason why I’m wrong, just that I’m wasting my time, or that they don’t like me doing it because it bothers them to see it, as if they want the Internet to format what they see to their personal tastes/likes.
Three, its a single line of text that appears in a smaller font at the bottom/footer of a comment. If people are really getting bent out of shape over it, then maybe they need to do some self-interspection on their end.
Four, if its not a smaller font line of text, and they seeing regular sized formatting text, then they need to talk to the developers of the client they are using, and ask them to support sub/superscript fonts. The web site client shows it just fine.
all due respect, but you are not a news entity and you will never know whether your license was honored, so i really don’t see the point. but like i said, you do you
The point is to have protection for my content. I have the same rights under the law as ANYBODY ELSE. All are capable of licensing their content on social sites that protects themselves with Safe Harbor laws.
As far as enforcement goes, that is not my job. If a law is not enforced doesn’t mean I don’t try to avail myself of the protections under the law. I don’t constantly audit my local police force to be sure that they are enforcing laws.
I want my content to be available and used by open-source organizations, and I signal that via my license. Otherwise the default licensing (show nothing) does not allow them to do so.
Finally, is it really worth your time (and all other citizens) to nag/harrass someone away from using the same laws that Corporations use to their benefit? I mean I point to an “Ask Lemmy” post often (here, let me do it again) where this has been hashed out already. You’re not saying anything new. But it seems like every individual still wants to recreate the conversation again, and again, and again, for SOME strange reason.
From the article …
… and …