I hope you someday grow up and learn the definitions of - and differences between - the words "public" and "private", and what a person can reasonably expect in regards to their presence and actions while in either situation. And for the record, I don't engage in conversations that I want to keep private while in publi…

Making demands / ultimatums has nothing to do with the issue of privacy. A person has no reasonable expectation of privacy when in public (with the exception of public restrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, voting booths, etc.). When you are in public, you are not in a private space.

The question of "privacy" doesn't apply when one is out in public.

In what way is this guy an "actual platypus" or "change(d) from a human to one of nature's biggest mysteries"?

" At least with phones and cameras it's obvious when someone is trying to record you." - It's very easy to record someone with a smartphone and have it look like you are simply texting or browsing the web / using a kindle-type app.

Again, there is a difference between calling the police on and prosecuting a kid for having plans to do something. I was simply pointing that out, as it seemed you were using the terms interchangeably in replying to (and agreeing with) the OP.

No, not at all - Mark Shrayber's bad. Your comment is totally valid, and asks a good question in regards to how it is written here. Shrayber simply doesn't know the difference between "sentence" and "conviction" - or between "reduced" and "overturned". The way it is written, this guy is sentenced to spending his time…

There's a difference between calling the police on a kid if you find school-massacre plans in his notebook and actually prosecuting the kid for it.

Yes, I know what conspiracy is, and that it is a crime to engage in conspiracy to commit a crime. Just because someone can receive a sentence equal to that of the crime which they conspired to commit does not mean they are actually prosecuted for the crime they did not actually commit. Prosecution and sentencing are…

I asked because your comment read as you thinking someone with any of those plans would be prosecuted for the actual crime ("to the full extent") for which they only had plans and had not committed.

One of the two convictions was overturned. The writer here simply doesn't know what words mean.

...prosecuted "to the full extent" for what?

"... has had his sentence reduced to "illegally accessing a police database"..." - That's not a sentence, that's a conviction. And the conviction wasn't "reduced", it was overturned. He was convicted of two crimes; conspiring to kidnap women, and illegally accessing a police database. One was overturned, the other was…

No, it's not assisted suicide.

A rude suggestion.

If someone wants money for their work, they should not agree to an unpaid internship - it's their choice. It's a pretty simple concept. Every recent college grad is a "self-entitled, coddled brat" only to the extent that every recent college grad is denied "fair" wages for entry-level positions with no experience. I…

If someone agrees to take an unpaid internship, that is their choice - and if they do not think that experience is fair compensation, they should choose otherwise. Factoring in potential earnings against the cost of tuition is the responsibility of the person pursuing further education. A person's student loan debt is…

You were responding to someone stating that, in this case, was criticizing the idea that experience was of any value in addition to fair payment for the work they do. It is - because it is additional to the payment to which they agreed, as stated by the person that TheDrDonna was replying to. If she wasn't underpaid…

Parents can sign contracts on their child's behalf. The value of the work she did is not based on the earnings of the movie, as her being in it (voicing a total of three lines) is not a draw for audiences.

She agreed to the compensation, so we can only assume that she (and her parents) found it fair.