JI00912

16 ms·

31.
by JI00912 5y ago
Who knows. They could just have missed a letter from the court.
32.
by JI00912 5y ago
A fine is a criminal sanction and this is apparently a civil case which means they were awarded compensation (and not a fine). Precedent is only set by the supreme court and in principle only in matters regarding interpretation of law. In t
33.
by JI00912 5y ago
> And yet, they are also true if they are statement of fact: The whole point of lying by omission is that the statement is true -- even when what is communicated isn't.
34.
by JI00912 5y ago
> invariably all of them have figured out non-punitive methods of crime reduction that are far more effective than jail Well.. large segments of our populations commit very little crime. But when crime is committed, the police and the ju
35.
by JI00912 5y ago
Lies of omission are lies just as much as lies of commission because they communicate something that is incorrect.
36.
by JI00912 5y ago
Well the detection algorithm for that would simply be a function that always returns `true`. There might be a small percentage of false positives, but pretty much negligable.
37.
by JI00912 5y ago
Almost every major change is made by convincing others to act because there is only so much one person can do. The probability that ano88888 is positioned in such a way as to start a car company is pretty close to zip.
38.
by JI00912 5y ago
> The move comes on the heels of Israel’s deadly bombing campaign in Gaza... Of course some 100+ rockets were also launched indiscriminately against Israeli civilians. That apparently is no concern for the Apple Muslim Association. Conde
39.
by JI00912 5y ago
Indeed the government has incentives to spend time, money and energy on campaigning. Unfortunately running things is a different matter.
40.
by JI00912 5y ago
Removing the incentive to make profit does not create incentives to improve efficiency and service. The government has no such incentives.
41.
by JI00912 5y ago
> awarding the multi-year contract to the elected government is strictly better than to a private company where there's little/much more indirect incentive to do anything in the interest of the consumer. Well... the incentives
42.
by JI00912 5y ago
> Ummm... that's what I said. That's my point. It's become normalized for corporations to not take responsibility. This is something completely different and unrelated... 1) All bank robbers wear clothes. 2) beckman466 wea
43.
by JI00912 5y ago
> This argument is just “everyone does it.” No it isn't. That's not the argument at all. You're just projecting whatever you want to say on what you're reading.
44.
by JI00912 5y ago
> Obviously taxes on revenue would not need to be as high as on profit to generate the same tax income No income has been generated by a business running at a loss. You had a number of things. Now you have less. Nothing was generated. Y
45.
by JI00912 5y ago
If Uber lost 4.5 billion, that also means they spent at least that much money. That's a lot of people who were able to sell good and services. That's actually a good thing. And while spending this money, Uber provided a useful ser
46.
by JI00912 5y ago
If you make 100$ and spend 150$, you have revenue of 100$, no profit and a debt of 50$. So you'd have to pay taxes on the 100$ from your -50$.
47.
by JI00912 5y ago
> Well considering they are usually used by corporations/capitalist firms to avoid all kinds of responsibilities to society, I seriously question your lack of critique here. No they're usually used by basically all companies th
48.
by JI00912 5y ago
I think we just witnessed a murder.
49.
by JI00912 5y ago
> Monopolies are inherently harmful to the customer. A monopoly implies lack of competition. Depends why there is a lack of competition. Are there barriers of entry to the market? Were they put up by the company? Or do they just have suc
50.
by JI00912 5y ago
> IMO, we need some way to declare a company "Big" and apply special rules to them. Careful though. A monopoly may abuse its position, which is bad, but a big company may be big because they are good and people use them, which
51.
by JI00912 5y ago
Good.
52.
by JI00912 5y ago
Did he though?
53.
by JI00912 5y ago
> if your idea for a yacht is luxury and privacy, why would you ever buy a sailing yacht? It isn't.
54.
by JI00912 5y ago
Facts exist. Fact checkers don't. It would be great if they did. We could just do away with science and ask a fact checker. But they don't exist.
55.
by JI00912 5y ago
Nah.
56.
by JI00912 5y ago
I don't know. Did they? Clickbaity titles.....
57.
by JI00912 5y ago
Not at all. We might for example see recidivism drop off after a few convictions. That would be the case if prison could reeducate people.
58.
by JI00912 5y ago
I'm saying that once someone has a couple of convictions, the change that they will commit crime again is about 100%, which sadly goes against the nice idea that people in our prisons "return as reasonably normal members of the so
59.
by JI00912 5y ago
> before having any sense of what a proper dose might be Did he really not have _any_ sense of a proper dose? Seems unlikely. I will say that hiring people who are risk averse is great for middle managers who will say NO to most opportun
60.
by JI00912 5y ago
Mostly Brottsforebyggande Rådet. You have to dig into their statistics though because they tend to like publishing what looks good. Edit: Also personal experience, unfortunately. Edit 2: > Where are you getting the data that recidivism r

More ›