CosmicCleric

From the article ...

On March 23rd, as Mr Imamoglu was being moved to a maximum-security prison on the city’s outskirts, the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) staged a primary election to confirm him as its candidate in the next presidential elections, scheduled for 2028. It was open to all voters, not just CHP members. The party said 15m Turks took part.

... and ...

Meral, a housewife, joined the protests with her daughter, a university student. “This is not about Imamoglu or the CHP,” she says. “This is because our right to vote and to be elected is being taken away.”

Paywalled.

That question/point is answered in the link that I supplied above.

There also a comment from a mod in there that you should read.

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

Activision User Research Union-CWA is the first group of video game user researchers to form a union

So what exactly about their users do they research?

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

Some info about that ...

https://lemmy.world/post/26711096/15639879

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

Man, this current age of AI really sucks.

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

From the article ...

GNOME sysadmin Bart Piotrowski shared on Mastodon that only about 3.2 percent of requests (2,690 out of 84,056) passed their challenge system, suggesting the vast majority of traffic was automated.

I notice you asked for an explanation and then only sort-of read the first sentence.

No, I read the whole thing, fully. I just disagreed with your analogy, thought it was a bad one, too verbose and obfuscating of the subject being talked about. Also it didn't cover someone searching your belongings with/without your permission, the subject being talked about. Law officials have more legal leeway to detain you than they do to search your belongings without your permission, so your analogy doesn't work (especially when you throw in beatings into it).

Also, didn't think your last paragraph was legally accurate, but didn't want to bother arguing the point, since 'amendment > law > policy/rule' is a well-known given. I'm aware of the difference. When I asked my original question, it was to confirm if the border enforcement people were actually honoring the 4th amendment, or not, whatever their thought processes were.

I did appreciate you taking the time to reply (and civilly at that) though, thank you. P.S. I hope the tone of my reply wasn't too harsh, it wasn't meant to be rude, just straightforward.

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

You say the same thing to everyone else who’s responding with comments in this post?

Please show me in the summary for the article that this post was about where it states that?

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

"May I have your permission to search through your phone?"

"Yes."

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~