Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:07:24 -0500 Subject: Re: El Capitan - Secure Delete Trash Option gone? Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system References: <081020151702398782%nospam@nospam.invalid> <6L6dnSjW2uJXdYvLnZ2dnUU7-f-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <111020151118337117%nospam@nospam.invalid> <111020151154044974%nospam@nospam.invalid> From: Alan Browne Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 12:07:23 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <111020151154044974%nospam@nospam.invalid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Lines: 30 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-7Xp69ruhih3pBfKKOoVjpbpCMxC/uRZiIQRQIX6dTch/g6PBb2rvfLiuv0DoAWEfTvKvMdH3kFSZUQf!WEruZpVwcjg+t2yN/QdRTQwhxp3SA76gkQTN/cbnHvybczdmiL7vwTsAGXDCFflMWy93NkKcqg== X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 3164 X-Received-Bytes: 3276 X-Received-Body-CRC: 1218273209 Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:83042 On 2015-10-11 11:54, nospam wrote: > In article , Alan Browne > wrote: > >>>> Wow, how early do you get up to spout nonsense just to try to score >>>> points?. In Boucher, yes the password was compelled on appeal by the >>>> gov't; in lavabit, yes, passwords were compelled. But, shit the truth >>>> never seems to sink in with you. >>> >>> once again, in the usa, the 5th amendment prevents a court from >>> compelling someone to disclose their password. period. end of story. >> >> In Boucher it _was_ compelled. Period. > > because they knew he had committed a crime. Was it ordered? Y or N. > >>> that does not apply to someone who has *already* incriminated >>> themselves or for a corporation, the issues in the two cases you >>> mention. >> >> I mentioned them as things that happened. Regardless of the fine points >> about them. > > the fine points are critical. you can't ignore them. You don't ignore them when you're taking the argument further.