It’s even illegal in America

I’m not into pits, but I imagine it would taste and feel very bad to get deodorant on your tongue

It also helps that she keeps having different accounts, but they all have the word violet in them.

In general being prolific on here will get you well known. It’s a small site and frequent posters get recognized. Piss some people off or get them to doubt you are who you say you are and a lot of people will know your name

Yeah I washed down the prescribed laxative pills with it and it was fine. Until it began taking effect. On one hand it was very unpleasant. On the other hand it was the least unpleasant day for a few weeks, since the next day was major surgery on my genitals

deleted by creator

I feel like to properly convey who I was as a person my funeral should include a picture with my tits out

This is why STAR voting is better

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

That sounds really fun to do the writing for actually

The pedaling tax is getting out of hand

I’m amazed that people keep trying to make evs loud rather than marketing the quiet as a selling point. Run an ad of a man quietly slipping out to get an anniversary present after he forgot or not waking his baby or something like that. These companies are great at manufacturing desire, I believe in their ability to do it for this

I drive a tiny ICE and yeah there are some things that don’t fit in it, but I’ve shocked people with what I can fit in it. Add in a turning radius that shocked a friend and I’m firmly committed to the hatchback subcompact life. Going electric when mine dies too. Unfortunately I only get like 30 mpg

Yep, you don’t incur the wrath of their violence, you just make governing you not worth the effort

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

Y-DDD-MM

It is currently 6-004-08

Obviously that’s February 26th 2001

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.