Subject: Re: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model InExistence
Full headers:
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 14:44:44 -0500
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <>
References: <O3ulC.173256$mJ1.28255@fx13.fr7>
<> <280220181127370843%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <wyleuwp5xa6o$.90v1b8hoxxtu$>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3454935562
X-Received-Bytes: 3374
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/2/2018 6:04 PM, ultred ragnusen wrote:
> Wolffan<> wrote:
>> Fraud is deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful
>> gain, or to deprive a victim of a legal right.
> The readers will note that nospam has been told many times that fraud
> contains /multiple/ elements, /all/ of which must be present for it to be
> considered fraud.
> (1) A material representation was made;
> (2) the representation was false;
> (3) the speaker knew it was false;
> (4) the speaker intended the other party should act upon it;
> (5) the party acted in reliance on the representation;
> (6) the party thereby suffered injury.
> Simply changing your IMEI isn't and never was fraud, and, even in the UK,
> where it is an illegal act, it's only symbolic in that the law is almost
> completely never enforced in the dozen years it has been in existence (and
> it was never intended to be enforced because it was clearly stated to
> simply "send a message" by the originators themselves).

In the US, it may very well be fraud, however, I will not go into the 
details, as to why, because that is off topic.
As I said earlier, get back to photography. I suspect that the The vast 
majority here do not want to listen to you commenting on what kind of a 
person nospam, or anyone else is. That applies to nospam's responses 
claiming what kind of a person you, are.

> Nonetheless, nospam, because of the strange way his mind works, has no
> concept of privacy, where he thinks every action anyone takes is to cause
> someone harm and yet - when Apple causes harm - he defends Apple's actions
> with his very life.
> Odd chap that nospam seems to be.