> When we cooperate with law enforcement, we do not do so blindly. We review their activities, both for abuse of power and to make sure proper processes are followed to protect our members’ rights. Such things are vanishingly rare, not (as they are sometimes depicted) the default. So if you’re expecting that we will automatically say, “Shove it, coppah!” anytime the police come calling about your site, we’re not the right service for you.
They're going to capitulate to law enforcement without a court order if they don't like your politics... or if it's inconvenient for them.
> When we cooperate with law enforcement, we do not do so blindly. We review their activities, both for abuse of power and to make sure proper processes are followed to protect our members’ rights. Such things are vanishingly rare, not (as they are sometimes depicted) the default. So if you’re expecting that we will automatically say, “Shove it, coppah!” anytime the police come calling about your site, we’re not the right service for you.
They're going to capitulate to law enforcement without a court order if they don't like your politics... or if it's inconvenient for them.
Part 1: Modify the KV type
Part 2: Add the Read-Only Transaction Type
Part 3: Add the Read-Write Transaction Type
12.4 The Free List
12.5 Closing Remarks
Wonder if - lacking an order top stop from the FCC - I could occupy a frequency and ultimately claim squatters rights or adverse posession on the frequency if someone eventually licenses it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=37375866
I didn't violate any HNNews rules and would appreciate you unflagging it so people can see my comment and rebuttals.