No that seems likely.
Evidence that would damn them here being in a court record makes it admissible elsewhere for a crime that isn’t even prosecuted yet.
They’re cutting off their foot to save their leg, here, since this isn’t particularly secretive, seeing how we know about it.
Companies don’t get jail time.
Sure, technically an individual could, but generally the actual destruction is an employee doing what they’re told to do. They’re somewhat complicit but the real problem is the c-suite people.
I unfortunately don’t know when this last happened or any specific details on what the penalty would be, but I feel fairly confident that this law falls under the “cost of doing business” part of illegal corporate activity. I wish it didn’t.
Nah it’s illegal to deliberately destroy data to impede investigations. You don’t need to have an open investigation for that to be the case.
It remains legal to get rid of old files to free up space or if you genuinely believe they aren’t necessary, though, so you need to prove intent.
If there’s a subpeona or something, their destruction is itself a crime, but under this law, its the intent to defraud the courts that’s illegal, and that intent is always illegal.
The law exists specifically for this situation. Purging important business documents preemptively is clearly not OK.
Citation: https://legalclarity.org/18-u-s-c-1519-destruction-alteration-or-falsification-of-records/
Well clearly the dog was religious and preferred to eat things that were free of sin.
Email group
They have actually started doing that already. At least musk has.
No, because the Texas schools don’t know what those are.
Not encrypted info, if they set it up right.
But regardless, what they want is more like an actual
Currently, companies generally want warrants to give information like that.
Warrants are hard to come by when the government simply wants to read everyone’s messages in case they’re doing criminal activity.
Even in the best case, the completely honest with no hidden motives situation, they want messages to be more, a source of probable cause for other things. Like getting a drug sniffing dog, who detects drugs, and gives cops reasonable suspicion and therefore allows them to search your car.
Worst-case, I don’t think anyone trusts the government in this day and age to not just read your messages to discriminate against you.
Plus the usual security concerns where digital backdoors are weak spots for other governments and everyone else.
And all that is the general case. this is Desantis’s Florida. It’s probably so he can tell who is gay and who isn’t so he can make them illegal.
Some companies are happy to share, though, like you said, even without warrants. Those companies generally aren’t encrypting your messages at all. This doesn’t affect them. The law would just affect those that promise security, promise encryption, etc. Those would be, with this law, not quite public, but transparent to the government and compromised to everyone else.
Probably can, there’s a speaker in there somewhere.
Court costs are different than a fine.
If a random guy sued you for a nonsense reason and you had to show up to court and pay a lawyer hundreds of dollars just to basically say “this lawsuit is frivolous and the ruling is self evident”, it’s reasonable to expect that ransom guy to pay your court costs. The alternative is being sued itself would be like a fine. If some dude with a vendetta sued me 10 times over that I’d be ruined no matter the result.
So frivolous, ungrounded lawsuits have a cost to them that actually has nothing to do with the courts getting money, it has to do with making it right that someone has wasted your own time and money.
This guy did that, and has to pay for not only his own lawyer (if he brought one, I expect he didn’t) but also the lawyer for the city/police department.
Some areas do have an actual fine for wasting the court’s time, so the lawyer thing might not be the only thing going on here, but no matter what, the guy gets to pay more for losing at court when the matter is considered obvious to everyone else and it seems he only wants to argue to avoid a perfectly legal fine.
My roommate was one of those dumbasses.
It WAS terrible he ended up in the hospital. Not even as a “let’s make sure you’re alright” kind of thing, he got saved there.
He learned his lesson though so there’s that.
His “friends” didn’t, but that whole “I was dying and it was your fault and you all were too drunk to help me” kinda ruined the friendship, too, so I don’t have to deal with them anymore, either.
Yes it has Bluetooth support and, naturally, USB C.
It’ll continue to take anything that supports those, and that’ll include the switch 1 pro controller, since it supports those for other devices.
It’s possible to not realize you’re complicit or not realize the depth of it.
When this happens like it did, you do briefly become someone who is getting blood money. She took this chance to interfere with their event.
Yeah same, OP’s was definitely a mistake. I think she’s just here for us two.
I haven’t used raidz but a quick search tells me it supports single-drive expansion.
Maybe reconfigure your raidz as a 2-drive system, then copy over all your data into it, and expand it back into a 3-drive system after.
Pretty sure it’d fry the power supply. Thats my first bet, is that it wouldn’t even get through it.
If it did pass through, it could fry your electronics. A USB killer is a short pulse, and not at all strong compared to main, so I expect that it’d act more like if a neutral was floating, than an actual surge at the voltage a USB killer usually gets to.
No idea for sure though and I’m not an electrician.
Well they make a lot of sense if you can’t trust your clients.
My high school’s computer lab were all thin clients. I was told each cost like 20$ (wouldn’t be surprised if he exaggerated the cheapness a bit), and the server was being used for more than just the thin clients, anyway.
Hes well away from all the salt on the roads, and gets an annual car wash + soak. Can’t hurt.
In addition to the joycons mentioned, they sell a standalone charger stand.
So they could sit next to the switch 2, on a dedicated stand.
No.
Of course even the president has a right to due process, but no. If the president commits treason, he doesn’t get to be immune to that. A trial is warranted and an arrest if found guilty is correct.
Yes, corruption could hypothetically rig such a trial. But a president immune from the consequences of his actions means there only needs to be one person corrupted to ruin a whole branch of government, instead of the hundreds it would take Congress to rig a trial.