3 ms·
Or to how unexceptionally average most of the judges actually are. If you're willing to entertain these are skilled brilliant jurists with some kind of mystica
by kristopolous 2y ago
Or to how unexceptionally average most of the judges actually are.
If you're willing to entertain these are skilled brilliant jurists with some kind of mystical levels of elucidation, maybe they're actually just people who failed upward into a job with a fancy robe
- stavros 2y agoThe difficulty of understanding a text isn't proportional to how skilled the person is at their job (I think it's inversely proportional, if anything), but to how familiar a field is. It doesn't take a good developer to describe a system in a way that nobody can understand it. It does take a great one to describe a system in a way that a layman can understand it.
- kristopolous 2y agoIf you've been around the valley long enough to hear pitches, you've surely met some remarkable bullshitters who can convincingly describe with clarity and crispness something that is actually nonsense and simply is not real. There's a group of attorneys that host a podcast on SCOTUS that present a pretty convincing case for this interpretation, at least to me. Here's the most recent episode https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/5-4/id1497785843?i=1000660149431 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/5-4/id1497785843?i=100... or https://player.fm/series/series-2622019/garland-v-cargill https://player.fm/series/series-2622019/garland-v-cargill