anti_dan
13hr ago
In what way did it pass the Turning test? It does write news articles very similar to a standard journalist. But that is because those people are not very smart, and are writing a formulaic thing.
anti_dan
5d ago
Why dont schools just change the time they open? Businesses ditto? It seems the retarded thing is 9-5 being so rigid.
anti_dan
6d ago
I will confess myself as a completely confused person when this comes up. The switch never affects me and the different times dont seem too different. My mother strongly prefers permanent DST and so do animals of the farm type, so why not do that? I guess?
anti_dan
9d ago
I'm almost sad that nobody has 'called me out' on this given my consistent pounding of the need for accountability among the elites. My closing remark on that comment is:
But this assassin is an elite. The target was a working man who was surprisingly exceptional.
anti_dan
9d ago
Its probably more likely she is going to college because she is better off. Education provided her, an outlier in the community, a convenient way to move out of town, but so too would have a job posting asking for a high school graduate with good grades and a can do attitude in a world where universities remained finishing schools for the elite.
anti_dan
9d ago
The gap is even more extreme for experienced lawyers where some of the biglaw partners are pulling in $10+ million a year, while a lot of solos are grinding away still only pocketing that $75k with 10 years of experience, a lot of people stuck in document review seemingly for life, etc. For experienced people there is a middle class usually composed of people who work in government compliance or as in house counsel. From time to time some ex-states attorneys (or similar) will go and form a firm in search of more compensation. Sometimes this is a success, but more often they return to government work because criminal clients dont often make good payors.
What befuddles me is why clients ever agreed to this trend in biglaw. This increased compensation is reflected in increased fees basically at a 1:1 ratio, and I'm not really aware of much data that says biglaw firms are all that good at actually, you know, winning. In most cases I've ever been a part of the lawyers make little difference in the outcome of the case. I can't really think of one civil suit where if side A had John Roberts in his prime, and the other had a 50th percentile graduate from an okay state school like Indiana or Samford. Big lititgation is BIG in that it requires a lot of man-hours. But the expensive firms outsource that anyways!
anti_dan
9d ago
Attacks like these are typically orthogonal to the actual reason for not liking a nominee, which is often something unpopular to say. With Hegseth its that he wants the military to be more effective, less woke, and less wasteful. That upsets people in DC, but is popular with the voters. Being an alcoholic means nothing in DC, but it still carries some weight with voters.
anti_dan
10d ago
That's less jury nullification and more just how juries work. A NY jury is going to convict a white supremacist of murder of he's credibly accused of eating at Katz's while a patron nearby chokes on pastrami.
anti_dan
11d ago
It is a question of selection IMO. The issue of using like-like samples here is it eliminates the bad outliers. And bad outliers do have significant effects (I think its a bit more shaky on the great vs. average side). If you are a girl and never have a husband, but instead have 3 baby-daddies, and some of your other boyfriends do what they do (molest the kids) its going to be a real negative compared to if you had locked down man 1, even with his flaws (usually). But so few of those women do lock down man one, and even fewer really are on anyone's radar.
anti_dan
11d ago
I dont see how this is a case of jury nullification. From a reading of the medical records, its pretty hard to see that the state even carried its burden of proof on the most basic of questions: That but-for Penny's actions, Neely would still have been alive at the end of the encounter. That is even before the prosecution's difficult case in proving criminal recklessness and/or negligence given the chaotic situation and that the actual witnesses on the scene were pretty evenly split.
anti_dan
14d ago
This seems like the old, tired, western leftist playbook by now. Russia is both feckless and a bogeyman simultaneously. They both subvert democracy, almost prophetically, every time some left wing party loses an election, but also will soon be beaten by NATO's wallet and the long arc of history.
anti_dan
15d ago
Why would this discredit this kind of hoax? The people hoaxed in this instance have approximately zero relevance, and getting published in that publication will probably be a point against you getting tenure at a major university. Such is not true for the previously hoaxed places.
They didnt conduct a similar experiment in the least.
anti_dan
15d ago
Thanks for the explanation. Do cases have to percolate up to the SCOTUS for them to overturn the previous ruling, or does any of of the federal branches have the power to launch the review of existing cases?
For landmark cases, they would have to individually percolate up to SCOTUS for a reversal. That or constitutional amendments, which would then have their own cases develop. Either way it would be decades, if ever, for even a dedicated push to get close to your system.
Let me explain a reform that might not sound radical to you, but would be considered quite radical (and opposed with billions of dollars of legal advocacy). Some state like Texas passes a law that says: 1) If a trial date has been set and the state answers ready for trial, any delay by defendant cannot cause the trial to commence more than 30 days from that date; AND 2) If the defense answers not ready 2 times, they are not entitled to a 3rd continuance barring hospitalization (and insert other reasonable things here like the person has been on trial in another jurisdiction etc).
That law would be immediately struck down by the current set of rulings, and would have to go to SCOTUS to get approved/denied. They would likely deny it. It seems modest, but it is not.
anti_dan
17d ago
Even a public defender trying his middle in the system described (finances aside) would not agree to the system proposed. On call PDs dont currently exist. Their job is, on average, super easy, but from time to time they can actually do good and get an innocent person acquitted, and that takes a lot of time. Maybe some woman's wife is dead and he hated her, but establishing the alibi takes months. This is uncommon, but exists.
anti_dan
17d ago
The Constitution itself is quite brief. The hundreds of cases of binding precedent about it, not so much.
One simple example is that the right to a speedy trial is held by the defendant, not the state.
Another is that the defendant is entitled to all relevant information the state has (this is called Brady generally) and adequate time to review it. In most cases, adequate time is determined by defense counsel (rare exceptions are made such as in the Trump NY case, and when defense appears to be delaying intentionally).
In the state I reside, the process you describe wherein everything is taking 1 or 2 days is a condensed version of what currently takes somewhere between 2 and 30 days. No defense lawyer would ever agree to this mini-jury approving an actual guilty, so you are actually complicating the processes known as information (mini pre-trial before a judge) and indictment (mini pre-trial before a grand jury).
Defense is always going to want the full discovery and ability for a full trial. They want to strike jurors who have been robbed in a robbery case (another constitutional case ruling), racists who hate all , etc.
Most defendants are guilty. The Constitution has a presumption of innocence. The interplay of these two is deeply ingrained in the system and would require more than laws to change.
anti_dan
18d ago
I'd respect it if he did it the same day Don Jr. got arrested.
The behavior here is just gross in its attempted manipulation of the American people.
anti_dan
18d ago
The uproar about Hunter Biden always felt farcical. From Clinton's emails to Mar a lago documents.
Hunter Biden wasn't farcical inherently, the DOJ's handling of his cases were. They decided to go for the least important crimes he committed, the gun, the taxes, and ignore FARA and anything else that put the microscope anywhere near Joe (see also the total lack of investigation into the classified documents found in Joe's garage, basement, and Chinese-funded university office). Hunter has never been about Hunter any more than busting any street dealer for dope is about that dealer. The target of a legitimate investigation is the Biden crime family whos head and chief operating officer was, for most of the most know relevant potential crimes, vice-president Joe Biden. Joe ran an open air corruption market getting his failson sinecures in return for official government acts, as well as his brother, and his wife.
anti_dan
18d ago
Biden might be mad at Kamala and Democrats, but he certainly is not working with Trump, particularly on J6. I think Biden has truly internalized a lot of the propaganda and thinks Trump is a Putin puppet who tried to overthrow democracy on J6. Just like with the fake DUI claim he made about his dead wife, there are many Bidenisms that are no longer lies for him. As George Costanza would say, its not a lie if you believe it.
anti_dan
18d ago
I would think no defense counsel would agree to basically any of your plan.
anti_dan
18d ago
By the time they guy is arrested and booked our officer and store clerk are probably on hour 10 of their shift. You want them to hang out for another 2 for some sort of preliminary hearing, then another 3 for a jury trial (where are these jurors coming from, and who is doing voir dire by the way?).
anti_dan
20d ago
Yeah. All the prison reform projects I even fisk run into the issue that the primary purpose of prison is incapacitation.
The other issue with prison reform is that all these problems are correlated. If your prisons are expensive, it is because progressive activists have won a lot of victories, why do you think policing and the courts aren't similarly being tied up by progressive activists?
I remember learning about Tubman in middle school. Now, the textbooks probably weren't as progressive as they are now, but I clocked her as clearly a murderer. I don't know if this is now consensus, or if something else is, but the case presented to me by the text at the time was TRYING to portray her as some sort of liberator, but to me she was clearly a terrorist and murderer. And I am from a northern state. The story really never adds up aside from the homicides.
More options
Context Copy link