In terms of software, yes. But HA can be run on nearly anything—there’s no need to buy their hardware to use it.

the tool, called EpsteIn—as in, a mash up of Epstein and LinkedIn

A better mashup might have been “SteptIn”.

Having a world map that has pins on it based on location EXIF data in photos

Don’t you get that in NC already, if you go to Maps > My Photos ?

It’s not that the watch is an added vulnerability (there’s no info accessible via the watch once the phone is locked)—it’s just a missed opportunity.

One shortcoming of lockdown mode, as far as I can tell: you can pair your phone and watch so locking your phone will lock your watch as well, but you can’t do the reverse. It seems more likely that a hostile party would get access to your phone first while you still (temporarily) have control of your watch, so being able to lock your phone from your watch would be extremely useful. (Or for that matter, set lockdown mode to trigger automatically if your watch is removed or your watch and phone move to different locations.)

Yes, but did the Court pay money to turn the words of its decision into legally-significant speech?

Because otherwise, it seems a bit self-refuting.

Because that’s an explicit threat. Spraying water is—at least on the face of it—a step below throwing rotten fruit or creme pies or fake blood: you can always claim it was meant to be symbolic.

Edit for clarification: The point is, you can deliberately make it as non-threatening as possible, and it may be obvious to everyone that it’s not a threat—but if there’s a protocol to always check anyway, you’re shutting the speaker down by exploiting the protocol rather than the threat.

The same way Holder responded to the Occupy Wall Street mass protests over his failure to prosecute the banks responsible for the 2008 financial crisis?

I’m not talking about this event in particular, I’m talking about the assumptions you have to make when responding to events like this. Because your response will influence what others do in the future.

Yeah… but on the other hand I can see this becoming a common tactic to prevent people from speaking: spray them with water so they have to leave the event to get checked out, while the perpetrator faces relatively light charges because it wasn’t actually dangerous.

MAGA hats will be part of the official uniforms.

deleted by creator

Let me guess—they’re going to prevent the US athletes from returning home unless they’re white and/or win medals.

QR codes can contain other types of information aside from URLs (whose content can be altered remotely by the host). For instance, they can contain vCard data, where the subject’s name and business info are hard-coded into the pattern itself, with no remote connection needed (intended for sharing contact info without internet access). That format might be more appropriate for this case.

Except that I doubt Trump would ever actually talk to a janitor.

Reminds me of Sorrento-Gillis from The Expanse:

He doesn’t care about treason—that’s just him parroting you because you talked to him last. If he spoke to a janitor he’d be passionately declaiming about a fucking mop!

In the late nineties, I thought the availability of online knowledge would make universities obsolete.

I’m not sure threatening performers with million-dollar lawsuits is the best way to attract new performers to your venue.

I dunno—on the one hand, I can see where data consent that’s folded into a long user agreement might get overlooked and approved without thinking, and a second verification would be helpful; but on the other hand, the more times users are asked for consent, the more likely they are to agree reflexively to everything.

It seems like a user-configurable setting would be the best solution.

strung together two comments Trump made more than 54 minutes apart

Isn’t that about the normal interval it takes for him to progress from one coherent thought to the next?