221–230 of 330 posts
We should seriously start looking for heroes elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No we aren't. I don't have to buy a phone. Yes, the apps make the border easier for Covid, but don't be ridiculous. I can fallback to filling out a piece of paper. Furthermore, I can buy an [PinePhone, Librem 5, etc] phone and "fully control" that. As for c) that's been part of life since the government got the right to tap your phone or telegraph. Right now there are troubling signs for the direction of American dem…
If you find yourself in a state of emergency, you might be out of luck if you don't own a SIM card registered to your own name, plugged into a modem which you cannot fully control by law. BTW, if you want to make a call over the telephone network, neither the PinePhone nor the Librem 5 carry a modem you can control. In both cases, the modem is a black box with non-free firmware that you're probably not even allowed t…
It's the idea of an actual smartphone not just maybe, hypothetically but "right now becoming" a legal requirement that seems to be -- more than a bit of stretch, here,
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So then what's the law referenced in 'A' that requires me to buy and carry around a smartphone?
It's a looking-forward statement... projecting current trends 5-10 years in the future. More likely will be a de-facto requirement to participate in society rather than a law. As I mentioned in another comment, many private companies are already requiring it.
Anyone can make "forward looking statements". If they're going to be useful and not dismissed as hysterical fear-mongering, then it helps if they're actually credible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, so not in the present tense, like the commenter indicated. And not like actually "legally".
Yes, first line says this: We are right now in the process of… "Legally" part looks like a stretch goal to me, however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the UK, you can have it posted to you, so you don't need a printer.
Does this work for a 'permit to enter' which is only valid 24hrs?
Are there places which are legally required to only accept test result certificates?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are you sure? Yes, absolutely sure. > To get a mortgage I said: >> make your mortgage or car payment Making payment on existing loan != taking out a new loan. > they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash. If you mean literal physical cash: the main reason for this is that no one involved in the transaction is interested in taking on the risk of carrying briefcases full of cash across town. If…
> Lenders won't lend you money with a down payment of unknown provenance That's actually incorrect, to my understanding. If you have 100k in your bank account for a year, the lender doesn't care when you pay your down payment out of that regardless of where it came from. They object when there's a recent transfer/deposit of that money because it could indicate an undocumented loan, throwing off the debt to income cal…
> They object when there's a recent transfer/deposit of that money because it could indicate an undocumented loan, throwing off the debt to income calculations.
Right. It's not some authoritarian plot. They just wanna make sure you're not a fibbing about your net worth before handing you a giant stack of their money. If you can prove the money is yours then they're fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you try running banking apps on the PinePhone? My bank has made it (almost) impossible to make payments without a phone, btw. Either you need to receive SMS messages or use their proprietary app. I could receive SMS messages without a phone but I would expect this to be a solution that eventually gives me more trouble than it's worth.
> My bank has made it (almost) impossible to make payments without a phone, btw My bank has several buildings full of people, all within driving distance of my house. Any of those people will happily accept a stack of paper bills. If you don't want to use digital forms of payment, why on earth are you using a bank that doesn't have physical branches located near your home?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP stated, verbatim, that smartphones are "becoming legally required". I understand the slippery slope argument, even if I think it's kind of alarmist, but... I mean, come on. Present tense?!?! We are sooooo far off from a legal mandate to carry a smartphone that I'm not even sure how to politely react to this statement. > it's not unreasonable to think we might end up in a situation like this. This is perhaps a good…
It doesn't have to be written law passed by a government for something to be "legally required". Just like the government doesn't have to pass laws or implement systems for surveillance when they can just rely on FANG to do all the data collection for them.
People who believe that smartphones are "legally required" in the US certainly do have a firm grip on "reality".
Am I doing this double quote thing right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Remember Russia has been the undisputed world champion of dezinformatsiya for centuries My friend, you seem to have mispelled United States of America
Sure, correlates nicely (NOT) with the Russians having a word for it before it appeared in French or English [0] [0] https://www.etymonline.com/word/disinformation
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, first line says this: We are right now in the process of… "Legally" part looks like a stretch goal to me, however.
In modern republics there is the practise of turning custom into law[0] by the generalized social manifestation of said custom, without said law having been enacted by a legislative body such as congress. All it takes is one judge setting the precedent. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_law
But precedents that simply overturn other laws -- or as applies to the matter at hand, in the United States at least: the 4th Amendment - no.