SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Michigan Votes to Require Warrants for Police to Seize and Search Digital Devices
Michigan votes to require warrants for police to seize and search digital devices:
Voters in the US state of Michigan have decided that searches of laptop, phones, and associated electronic data will require a search warrant going forward.
Michigan Proposal 20-2 to require a search warrant to access a person's electronic data and electronic communications passed overwhelmingly, with 88.7 percent (nearly four million people) voting "yes," and only 11.3 percent voting "no."
At the same time, the proposal amends the Michigan Constitution to bring the existing protections from unlawful and unreasonable searches of homes, documents, and other personal possessions up to date, and include electronic data and communications on people's devices.
The goal of Proposal 2 was to make sure the new rules explicitly state a private citizen's electronic data is equally protected, thus removing any vagueness and various interpretations. Currently, law enforcement must have a warrant before searching a home and somebody's personal belongings, including papers and other items, but electronic versions of these stored on devices like phones and laptops are not mentioned in the language of the legal solutions that far predate the technological transformation of society.
Massachusetts Voters Approve Ballot Expanding Open Repair Data in Blow to Auto Industry
Massachusetts voters approve ballot expanding open repair data in blow to auto industry:
(Reuters) - Voters in Massachusetts on Tuesday overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure forcing automakers to provide expanded access to mechanical and electronic repair data and allow independent shops to repair increasingly sophisticated technology.
The decision delivers the first significant win in a fight over who will control the $390 billion U.S. auto data aftermarket in the digital age.
[...] "This referendum...means that despite advances in technology, owners will be able to have their repair data shared directly with their trusted independent shops," Bill Hanvey, president and CEO of the Auto Care Association said in a statement, adding the group worked with cybersecurity experts to ensure privacy during data transfers.
Under the state's ballot measure, approved by 75% of voters, on-board diagnostic and mechanical data will have to be made available via an open-platform app for 2022 vehicle models and beyond.
Four states vote to legalize marijuana.
Arizona, New Jersey, South Dakota and Montana all passed legislation Tuesday permitting the possession of weed by adults, which means 15 states have legalized recreational weed or voted to legalize it.
See more on the story here.
As a life long resident of the red state of South Dakota, I'm glad to see people who need this for medical purposes can have access and the police can spend their time on serious crimes instead of wasting it on recreational marijuana users.
Original Submission #1 Original Submission #2 Original Submission #3
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Friday November 06 2020, @07:39PM (24 children)
Selected approved ballot initiatives from here [ballotpedia.org]. More local initiatives here [ballotpedia.org].
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Friday November 06 2020, @08:11PM (10 children)
https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/state-status [nationalpopularvote.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by slinches on Friday November 06 2020, @09:45PM (9 children)
That's not going to stand up to constitutional scrutiny. The first time a state tries to force its electors to choose a candidate that didn't win their state election it will result in a lawsuit and the law will be ruled unconstitutional. Although, I think it might be interesting to see what would happen in those deep blue states if a republican wins the popular vote.
(Score: 4, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Saturday November 07 2020, @12:22AM (8 children)
Electors can vote in whatever way their state law says they can.
That's why Faithless Electors [wikipedia.org] are a thing in certain states and the Supreme Court has ruled that it's fine.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday November 07 2020, @05:25AM (7 children)
Huh? I thought I had read that the courts have ruled that faithless electors can be prosecuted by their states.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday November 07 2020, @01:49PM
They can. But in some states, it's not illegal to be a faithless elector. Also, in some other states, the penalty for being a faithless elector is only a fine, so sometimes somebody will be a faithless elector, plead guilty to the charges, and pay the fine.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Sunday November 08 2020, @04:36PM (5 children)
Even if they can prosecute faithless electors, someone voting for the candidate their state selected is not a faithless elector.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday November 08 2020, @08:30PM (4 children)
No, but I thought the implication from the post I was responding to was that it was OK for faithless electors to vote in a way different from what their state expected of them.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Monday November 09 2020, @03:20PM (3 children)
That's true, but the whole premise of the national popular vote initiative is that the states who sign on would be expecting their electors to vote for someone other than who their residents voted for. The electors would be forced to be faithless, either to the voters in the state or to the state law. Which is why I don't think it would hold up in court.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday November 09 2020, @04:51PM (2 children)
That doesn't make sense. If a state passes a law in accordance with the national popular vote initiative, then electors can't be forced to vote against state law, because the law now says they to vote according to this initiative. Obviously, this new law would supersede any old laws about binding electors to the state's own popular vote. As for the voters in the state, if this is what the state law says, the voters have no say. They elected a government (in this scenario) that passed this law, so that's the law. If they don't like it, they can elect a new state government that repeals the law.
I don't see how this could possibly be unconstitutional: the constitution doesn't say anything about how states choose electors, and in the old days, in wasn't by popular vote at all, but rather the state legislature chose the electors. States can choose electors any way they want. If the people don't like it, it's their job to elect new legislators. There's nothing that prevents a state from removing the popular vote altogether and, say, having the governor choose the electors himself.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Monday November 09 2020, @05:36PM (1 child)
Do you really think this would fly with voters?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday November 09 2020, @07:46PM
Sure, why not? If the voters vote for it, then yes, it would fly. If they vote against it, then obviously it won't fly. I guess we'll find out eventually if the voters want this or not.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Friday November 06 2020, @08:15PM (7 children)
Liberal policies win. Proof that if the DNC would allow liberals on their ballots, they would win by the same margins, none of this chronic 50-50 bullshit, which, come to think of it, is becoming just a little suspicious
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Saturday November 07 2020, @12:24AM (6 children)
The only way Biden could be doing much better right now would be to have won Florida.
Yeah, I'm sure Bernie would've done so much better with the folks that though Biden was a socialist!
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Saturday November 07 2020, @01:19AM
Mass media bullshit hysteria. A lot of those people voted for the 15 bucks an hour. All this kind of stuff makes the DNC primary look very suspicious. People who vote for liberal policy will be very happy with a liberal politician. The Party does not seem to want to offer that choice. They don't just meddle with republican primaries.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 07 2020, @01:26PM
If they hate Biden already a more socialist candidate won't do worse. And Biden is barely winning in swing states against the biggest buffoon in US history. He is winning, true. But he should be crushing. Nobody thinks he's serious about expanding ACA, raising minimum wage, implementing student loan debt relief, or expanding rent assistance. I voted for him, but I understand why he isn't trusted.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday November 07 2020, @01:55PM
From the perspective of the right-wing noise machine, *every* candidate with a (D) after their name is somewhere on the spectrum between Chairman Mao and Joseph Stalin, with Fidel Castro and Pol Pot also in the mix. It doesn't matter whether they, for instance, bent over backwards to protect capitalism from prosecution and bailed out major corporations when those major corporations broke the law and crashed the global economy.
What's changed significantly is that it's a lot harder to scare the generation that didn't grow up hiding under their desk from Reds with the idea of socialism or communism. That's why you see big age divides on how Americans react to the word "socialism".
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 07 2020, @03:41PM (1 child)
Sanders would have got the votes from people on the left who abstained from voting for Biden aka Trump lite. Biden is a solidly right-wing candidate not even center-right. He ticks all the boxes for a Republican candidate pre-Trump era, like catering to racists by voting against desegregation, catering to the rich by voting against workers rights, attacking Roe v. Wade because of his religious "values", openly against providing a civilized social safety net including being against state healthcare that every modern economy offers its citizens, and don't forget, being a war monger who was instrumental in his party's support of the illegal war of aggression against Iraq that ended / destroyed millions of lives and destabilized the entire region. It looks like he may even have a corruption scandal with the Ukraine thing, which is also a very Republican sort of thing (just look at the current Republican president-- I've lost count of the corruption scandals he has been involved in).
Bernie was problematic in several ways, but he was a million times better than Biden. He would have been the first presidential candidate, on a major party ticket, in my lifetime (I'm old), where the good outweighs the evil for a net good.
Personally, I couldn't force myself to vote for Biden even as the lesser of evils when compared to his fascist authoritarian opponent-- Biden though a lesser evil was still so very evil.
My hope, but not counting on it, is that the right-wing Democratic party leadership realize that courting the right when there is a batshit crazy far-right/fascist party competing for and winning those votes, and doing everything they can to alienate the left, is a losing proposition. And, even if only for the sake of self-preservation, they change their ways and allow the party to move left as their constituency obviously wants it to do.
I can't prove a counter factual, but I think Sanders would have trounced Trump in either of the elections.
And, any moron who thinks Biden is a socialist isn't going to vote for any Democrat even if the Democrats ran a full on fascist like the Republicans. There are no votes to lose here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 07 2020, @05:45PM
I argued with my brothers about this. Biden is terrible. But his election makes a difference for LGBTQ+ people - even if only by appointing more judges that view them as human beings - and abortion rights, and maybe most of all he hasn't openly attacked the integrity of the election process. Sanders' successor won't matter in 2024 or 2028 if votes completely stop mattering.
My metaphor for the situation is that the ship is sinking, and none of your choices will keep it afloat. But you still have an obligation to get people onto the life boats.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 09 2020, @12:02AM
And this is why I call you a Democratic partisan hack.
Bernie would do well, because he supports overwhelmingly popular policies and markets them well. I think he would win in a general election with a poorly-handled pandemic and economic depression decisively, which is where those who support fundamental change tend to do well. Bernie's biggest hurdle was always defeating the corporate Democrats in the primary and their massive corporate media propaganda apparatus, which he proved unable to do. Hopefully the next Bernie Sanders will be more vicious.
Also, Biden's vote margins in various swing states aren't that great, they lost seats in the house, and are likely to not win the senate. The people who lost their seats were overwhelmingly corporate Democrats.
Pete Buttigieg said one thing during the primaries that was interesting. He said something like, 'We shouldn't worry about what Republicans will call us, because they're always going to call us socialists no matter what we do. So we should just do what we believe in.' He was correct, and you should take his words to heart.
(Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Friday November 06 2020, @08:19PM (4 children)
Yes. For if the Americans need something foremost, it's more hallucinogen drugs. And pitbulls.
To keep the surrealism sustainable a bit longer...
The edge of 太玄 cannot be defined, for it is beyond every aspect of design
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 06 2020, @08:53PM (3 children)
Uh, weed is not a hallucinogen. A minority of people may experience some visual effects at high doses when first exposed, but not many.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 06 2020, @09:05PM (2 children)
takyon linked - Oregon legalized magic mushrooms. I'm 99% sure that was the hallucinogen being referenced.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Friday November 06 2020, @09:16PM (1 child)
Washington, D.C. effectively decriminalized the posession, use, and non-commercial cultivation and distribution of magic mushrooms, making it the lowest enforcement priority.
Oregon authorized its state health department to permit licensed therapists to administer magic mushrooms or psilocybin as a treatment.
Separately, Oregon "decriminalized" the non-commercial possession of ALL drugs, including magic mushrooms, cocaine, heroin, meth, or whatever. There is a maximum $100 fine for getting caught but it gets dropped if the violator agrees to get a "health assessment".
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 07 2020, @01:29PM
Thank you. That's informative - and awesome.