captainlezbian

It’s also great for parties. It’s inoffensive, anyone who’s good for pizza can default to it. It’s often the only meatless option ordered (though I prefer something with as many veggies as I can get)

Another plane is then directed into her path

Fortunately I don’t need to fly anywhere anytime soon

Pagans, queers, fandoms, mental illness communities, fans of purple… 10/10 exactly the sort of stuff that should be there

“No mass surveillance.” I’d suggest the alliteration of “cop cameras” but non-ai bodycams are good, or they would be if cops weren’t able to fuck with them

If airplanes had a 1/3 chance of crashing for the first several years of commercial aviation, I don’t think many folks would be all too open to being told “you don’t hate airplanes, you hate crashing, we can fly safely too”

And you gotta keep in mind that big tech wants to be the government

We need to switch to being vocally anti ALPR and mass surveillance

And here I was confused why coulombs were being used as a charging rate…

We need to abandon the “use a letter for this unit/property” crap and accept that the alchemists and accountants had it right.

Yeah atomic weight of 3 vs 11. Lithium is the lightest solid at stp

Yeah batteries have been one of the main areas where the real technological advances have been happening in the past decade. That and photovoltaics

This is why STAR voting is better

More like 4th the “come back with a fucking warrant” amendment

In this case it pertains to how the app spent years cultivating an atmosphere indicating discretion. That’s why last time I thought about it (a decade ago) it was mostly popular for sending nudes.

My position here is that the government has been pressuring private companies to give them all the warrantless data they want. And I think they shouldn’t be allowed to ask. Hell I think they should need a warrant to view surveillance data unless someone in the incident consents or the owner of the data is the accuser.

Now I acknowledge that those two paragraphs allow this situation. But I also think that we shouldn’t be holding a reasonable expectation of privacy to what a privacy advocate thinks, it should be what an ordinary citizen and user of a service thinks. In that case, either I’m old and out of touch since my sending tit pics over Snapchat days are long past (I am) and this woman had an atypical expectation of privacy. Or Snapchat isn’t properly expressing to users the degree of surveillance they’re under and this should be taken as private communication and Snapchat should be forced to either change their surveillance levels or work to ensure that the average user understands the level of surveillance they’re under.

So yeah I think this is mostly a consumer rights issue, but it’s also an issue of the government keeps asking for data on private citizens that they shouldn’t be allowed to collect themselves and I don’t think they should even be allowed to ask

Yeah, part of what I appreciate about him is that he does consistently acknowledge when he fucks up and tries to change.

Nope, at least not in North America, and it sounds extremely Oceanian, so I’d be surprised if it’s used in the UK

It was a power pretty heavily implied not to belong to the government. And given thet the 9th says that rights exist beyond those explicitly stated, it should be pretty clear.

Anyways we must make the implied right to privacy explicit

Exactly! The joke is fucked up, and yet we deserve the right to reasonable privacy in spaces where we’re told we can expect reasonable privacy (and the right to have spaces with reasonable privacy). Consent for mass surveillance and tyranny is built from situations like this where the question can be shifted to being about what was done under the presumption of privacy rather than the fact that it was violated.

We’re supposed to not find out that the joke was made in private and judge her based on how she acts outside of private

Well we need to ban that