I fail to see, that this is a problem. The website is just showing user entered text in a position that clearly shows user-entered text. E.g. in the MS-Website it is quoted and below it says "n of m search results".
Depending on character limits the content could be pushed down out of sight. It doesn't appear to allow newline characters or HTML from my testing so the low hanging fruit is gone.
Yes, but isn't the current situation based on a technicality then? Assuming that reaching that when anyone reaches US law enforcement gets everything in the constitution applied to them and then must be let into the country because they only want freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. I guess the workaround for this would be to have outposts in other countries where non-US law enforcement personnel is denying entry - this would be ok, as the constitution doesn't yet apply.
Or, I wonder if the the people for whom denying entry was wrong don't base their decision on a technicality, but would actually prefer foreign political activists to enter the country. I wonder if this is tied to the foreigner's specific agenda, or would they also like the opposing side to be let in. To me, this sounds either a way to get supporters for their own opinion, or, on the latter case, recipe to increase chaos.
What could the technicality possibly be? They explicitly said they deported him due to his speech! This is like the most egregious possible violation of the First Amendment. The police literally — in the fashion of a cartoon villain revealing their dastardly plot — copped to breaking the law.
What the police did here doesn't hold up to even the most stringent possible definition of "freedom of speech", and it's also obviously unconstitutional. And there are still people trying to defend it. I'm honestly a little flabbergasted.
As I read it, he was trying to enter the US from elsewhere and was denied entry at the border. Perhaps his student visa had been cancelled due to clearly getting involved with unrelated stuff.
I say "I wonder", "perhaps" etc to simply be polite, tease out the content of your argument, and also due to the person we are talking about not providing the legal reason given to him of why he was denied entry.
He literally didn't, he just quoted what the police said. But I assume his visa was cancelled and thus he was denied entry. Is this legal, or would you say that anyone already in US soil should be let in, regardless of visa status, if they want to assemble (the constitutional right)?
I think there is a massive difference in compile times between idiomatic C and C++, so its problematic to be lumping them together. But there is also some selection bias since large projects tend to migrate from C to C++.
I often hear that claim, but for me it was always the opposite. Firefox being fast while Chrome being a slow monster and memory hog. Also when I was using an RPi2b full-time, Firefox was working even though sometimes annoying, while Chrome was a no-go and would led to the OS being unusable.
reply