Buelldozer

I wonder who would be interested in ginning up big bad-faith hit jobs against good news outlets

The author of the article. It doesn’t take long to uncover their politics and they are absolutely not involved in any right wing conspiracy.

There’s nothing really wrong with substack. People just like to shit on anything that doesn’t pass whatever purity test they happen to use.

Banning TP-Link routers isn’t going to do a damn thing to solve the problem of insecure routers, SOHO or otherwise. Too many people and companies set shit up and then ignore it until it breaks and under these conditions routers are always going to become insecure given a long enough timeline.

Fire up Shodan and see how many discontinued Cisco ASAs are out there. Hell you can probably still find some Cisco PIX boxes even though they went away nearly twenty years ago! Those aren’t people doing that, those are COMPANIES.

The problem here isn’t the brand or even the silicon that brand uses. It’s with the utter lack of management (including EoL replacement) by the people using the damn things.

I’m curious how that funding worked.

In Texas in order to work government event security and do fill-in work you need to be a sworn Peace Officer in the state but in order to be a sworn officer you need to be employed by a recognized Law Enforcement Agency in the State.

So most of those Officers were only minimally present on the Duty Roster, primarily only working when another agency put out a call for Officers.

That much I know from researching it back when it was a current event. I suspect that this was primarily funded by the Officers involved paying into the scheme as they got work. As an example Officer Humpty would work an event in Dallas and the Coffee City P.D. would get paid $3,000 (pick a number) for borrowing that Officer. Coffee City would then pay Officer Humpty $2,000 (pick a number) for his work.

You could easily keep 200+ Officers busy doing events and fill-in work in Texas.

You should also know that the Coffee City, P.D. was a refuge for troubled Peace Officers, a sort of “Last Chance University” for Texas Cops. They’d get in trouble somewhere else then go to Coffee City and work there to prove that they were fine and then transfer back to a regular Police Department somewhere else.

They’d put up with the bullshit so that they could hold onto their career in Law Enforcement.

That fucking loony isn’t going to get anywhere in Canada.

That fucking loony is ALREADY in your Government.

Shit like this is actually getting passed in the US.

No, it’s not. There is literally nowhere in the United States that has passed or even nearly passed legislation requiring the registration of pregnancies.

Today Trump moved to fire all Biden era prosecutors.

Which has nothing to do with what we’re talking about.

You have your own stupid politicians. Every Nation does. We happen to have a really stupid one in charge of our Federal Government right now but that’s a separate matter than some idiot in Missouri.

So one idiot in one state proposes a bill that has no co-signors and no hearing date and that somehow represents not only the other 49 states but also the other 340,000,000 people living here?

You are coming from a .ca instance so I presume you live in Canada…where you have politicians looking to Ban Abortion and make Gay Marriage illegal.

What in the actual fuck is happening in Canada? Jesus Christ what a shit show Canada has become.

Still the contract should be void, when the legal entity ceases to exist.

How do you know that Nuvia no longer exists as a legal entity? A company can be acquired without it being dissolved (ceasing to exist).

If this is true, why then couldn’t Arm prevent Qualcomm from using a license agreement they had with a company Qualcomm bought?

All licensing agreements aren’t the same. It’s possible that the ARM agreement didn’t address transferable rights but that the Intel / AMD agreement did.

I like the answer that [email protected] gave.

It’s Schrödinger’s control: for the purpose of having executive authority over the project 2025 policy agenda he is in control, except when doing so is illegal in which case he isn’t. The status depends on who’s looking, as it is always exactly the status that evades accountability.

They aren’t imbeciles. They are pursuing their objectives in ways that are inconsistent with US Law and tradition and when they run into trouble they obfuscate as much as possible to forestall the consequences.

As an example read the court filing from Joshua Fisher (pdf warning). If you read 3 & 4 carefully you’ll come to the understanding that Musk is a SGE of the WHO with the Job Title “Senior Advisor”.

Then you run into #6 where the text turns itself inside out trying to explain that the US DOGE Service Temporary Organization is under the umbrella of the US DOGE Service which is separate from the White House Office (that employs Musk) but the US DOGE Service is still a component of the Executive…which Musk works for.

Once you are done bending your noggin’ around all of that you are probably too tired and confused to ask the most important question. If Musk isn’t in charge of DOGE then who is?

We all know it’s Musk but they can’t say that nor can answer the question with someone else’s name because then the jig would be up and they’d be hosed. They need it to be Musk for popularity reasons but they also need it to not be anyone at all so that no one can be held responsible.

They know what they’re doing. Don’t assume for a single second that they don’t. You aren’t seeing stupidity, at least not on this, you are seeing methodical, planned, and deliberate attempts to confuse the issue in order to escape consequences and oversight.

Religious nuts.

Whelp, he’s toast. The last Prez to threaten that got domed while visiting Texas.

“Outlawry” was applied to people who refused to submit to the legal process in the US.

The concept of an “outlaw” goes at least as far back as ancient Rome and was used in England until something like 1869. It held on in Scotland as part of Civil Law until somewhere in the 1940s. It was also present in France, Germany, and several Nordic countries.

This isn’t just a US thing.

there is no legal process to submit to because they aren’t subject to US law to begin with.

Yes…because they are “Outside the Law”. An Outlaw is neither subject to nor protected by the law.

It’s that last part that so many people in here are missing. If the Elongated Muskrat were declared an “outlaw” you could kick in his front door, drag him out of bed, load him onto a catapult and fire him into the sun and the legal apparatus would not, nay could not, do anything about it.

People need to understand how deeply that “no legal process to submit to” goes. The “outlaw” isn’t subject to the law but neither is anyone else as it relates to them.

My understanding is that outlaws were still subject to the law in the UK …

English Common Law had the “writ of outlawry” and the subject was deprived of all legal rights, being outside the “law”, but others could kill him on sight as if he were a wolf or other wild animal.

There’s a pretty good Wikipedia Article for this.

If so, any white supremacist or government agency could commit any atrocity and not get convicted, because the victim wasn’t protected by any laws.

Ding ding ding! You got it!

Sure, and also no one to protect them if / when they’re caught.

If these people are not under the jurisdiction of the US then we have no legal right to deport them as they aren’t subject to our laws.

No.

Outlaws, people literally outside the law, have no legal protections at all. Taken to its limit this means that deportation is not necessary as they could simply be executed where they are found.

This is why being declared an outlaw was such a big fucking deal back when that word wasn’t just a synonym for “criminal”. You could be executed in broad daylight by the first person that found you and there would be no repercussions.

Well then by that logic all illegal immigrants arent under any US jurisdiction.

Honestly that is the original meaning of the word “outlaw”; iIt literally meant someone who was outside the law. Today we most use it as a synonym for “criminal” or “law breaker” but at the time the Constitution was written or at the time the 14th Amendment was ratified most people would have understood it with its original meaning.

“Outlaws” were neither subject to nor protected by the law. They had no legal status nor standing in the law.

It denotes me as an admin. I wish it wouldn’t.

I’ve been enjoying Jeff Geerling’s ongoing experiments with his 10" Raspberry Pi mini rack.

It doesn’t work for me since all of my network equipment is 19" and there’s no point in having two racks but having a 10" standard is still a great idea!

Despite the headline USAID wasn’t investigating Musk or Starlink. It was investigating how Ukraine was using the Starlink terminals that USAID gave them and how USAID itself was overseeing Ukraine’s use.

Basically the headline is completely misrepresenting what was happening.