211–220 of 308 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can also press the lock button five times to make it refuse to unlock without a valid passcode.
Just tried that (iPhone 8) and it did reject my fingerprint but only after issuing a loud WHOOP WHOOP “Emergency SOS” and 3 second countdown to make an emergency call (presumably 911). Hardly a stealth move to pull at the border!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still, at least on paper, freer than many/most other Western countries in most ways AFAIK. I agree that this is a very absurd counterexample, however.
I find that people with lower incomes are free-er in other Western countries. They can go about their lives without worrying about healthcare, parents can bond and breastfeed for a year without stressing about work, families can go on vacations for multiple weeks, people aren’t as afraid of being abused or killed by police, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freedom of expression has a much stronger protection status in the US than in the UK. That is one example.
If that is just one example, what is another one?
Securing a single phone is a half measure at best, and your phone might get seized. Also, CBP, TSA and colleagues will do what they can to fuck you extra hard when sensing resistance to their ramming their noses up your cavities. The only true remedy is to get the US back on track with being a democracy and respecting the Constitution again.
Sadly, a lot of people will read this and think, “I’ll just vote for my favorite party”. But the laws that need to change have already survived the two most popular parties being in control.
We citizens need to do better than just vote the party.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me as a European "gun laws were pretty restrictive in UK" for me means freedom more than access to guns does. I quite value the freedom of not having to worry about guns.
That's a very convoluted definition of freedom. I think there are many other things to call that ("sensible" or "sane" come to mind...) but it's objectively less free, legally/on paper as I stated.
If my freedom to text and drive impacts the right to life and freedom of those around me, it’s imperative to restrict that one freedom so the freedom of the society remains.
> If you lose access to your laptop or pairing record then you will also be locked out of connecting to your phone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
land of the so-called free.
It's still, at least on paper, freer than many/most other Western countries in most ways AFAIK. I agree that this is a very absurd counterexample, however.
I've long had the impression that people tend to define it in a way that values things they get in their home country, and devalues the things they don't. For example, an American is going to define "freedom of speech" in a way that ensures the government itself has almost no ability to limit things like political lobbying, because political lobbying, being a way to advance an opinion, is sacrosanct. A Canadian is more likely to want to define it in a way that allows for limiting the ability of people with lots and lots of money to drown out the voices of people of more modest financial means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last time I looked it up, law enforcement would treat white women the most lenient, followed by black women. White men are treated a bit worse than black women and of course, black men were treated harsher than the other groups.
Was that controlled? That is, did they measure only illegitimate detainments? Because I'm sure crime rates vary by demographic.
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-pu...
It seems controlled for the same crimes.