It is basically when someone is doing something illegal and stupid, but isn’t thinking about it killing someone. Then accidentally kills someone.
Voluntary manslaughter is then when you do something that you know will kill a person, but for some reason it isn’t murder.
For lots (most?) laws, ignorance isn’t an excuse… even though the specific charge may change.
This seems like a good place for a charity… although the cost isn’t just a bus ticket but also probably temporary housing/income as well.
Shit. I just realized I’m suggesting a refugee agency for US states.
Thanks. It’s hard for me to judge tactics from video, as I can’t really tell what is accidental collateral damage vs purposeful. The statements by Israeli leadership definitely supports the view that they are purposefully being punitive… which is monstrous.
Your response seems to be equivalent to “never defend yourself against someone holding an innocent hostage.”
To clarify, I’m not sure what response doesn’t result in more innocent people dying.
I don’t really care about this specific conflict more than any other. And morally I don’t care for the lives of one side more than the other. And morally I don’t care who lived in what cities 100 years ago (note: unless those specific people are involved).
My confusion seems to be that the ‘right’ response people seem to want to this is no response.
So I just heard about this whole thing last night. What is the preferred Israeli response to this?
To me it looks like Hamas using occupied buildings as places to attack from, the Israel being told they aren’t allowed to hit back at people using human shields.
I think the issue might be visibility.
Naively, it feels like most of the issue is from a small number of extra sooty vehicles. But that belief is probably just because of how visible it is. The brake/Tyree dust isn’t visible because it is more spread out.
I think part of it is that these might not have an effect on perception of homeless people quantity.
The people who are helped by the $1k were likely able to show up for it and otherwise be stable enough. If see them on the street walking around you might not realize they are homeless.
When people complain about homeless, they usually are talking about ‘mentally ill homeless people’. These people probably can’t finish this program
Blah blah right to assemble blah blah.
Any reasonable person would say “Ok, but there is also at a minimum the requirement to recuse yourself then.”
I haven’t tried it for a walkthrough yet, but try: https://www.summarize.tech
This would be a great opportunity for someone to make a bit that does this for Lenny.
The irony of the background saying Restore Sanity
They are problems for them… even if they want to pretend those problems are hoaxes.
It seems to mostly be replacing work that is both repetitive and pointless. I have it writing my contract letters, ‘executive white papers’, and proposals.
The contract letters I can use without edit. The white papers I need to usually redirect it, but the second or third output is good. The proposals it functionally does the job I’d have a co-op do… put stuff on paper so I can realize why it isn’t right, and then write to that. (For the ‘fluffy’ parts of engineering proposals, like the cover letters, I can also use it.)
I love my Tesla… but it isn’t clear to new drivers where they can and can’t charge, without some research. I can easily see someone assuming it works like a gas station and that they are all interchangeable.
Why was Trump being interviewed by one of the Supermen from the Flash TV show crossover?
I see this the same as a company asking for a SSN. I didn’t pick it, it is really hard to change without physical/mental pain, and is spoofable anyway.
Based on those criteria… I’m not sure why I care about sharing it. I wouldn’t solely use it for something I’m securing myself, but if some company wants too, I don’t really take issue.
Problem is that kids start out dumb until the learn stuff.
I talk to some of my aunts and uncles from pre-internet and I’m not sure how they survived the stupid stuff they did.
I think your post makes my point well, actually. If the differences between people of a gender is so wide spread as to not matter in a personal level, it seems silly to be highly offended if you are referenced as the wrong gender. If someone calls one of us a brunette or blonde, I don’t think anyone would take great offense because it just doesn’t matter… gender seems like the same rule should apply.
But, the ‘they have (non-marginal) differences but should be treated equally’ is the problem.
If there are differences that matter, those should be considered.
If there aren’t differences that matter, it doesn’t make sense to ‘care’ what gender you are.
The two categories of people covered by ‘TERF’ for instance would seem to interpret your referenced study as supporting and opposing their views.
(In practice, I understand that it basically never matters if someone is a man or a woman but upside of specific situations, mostly involving physical attraction. But I also just don’t ‘get’ why people try to create a ‘he’ or ‘she’ identity. I don’t really care if they do… it just seems like a contradiction.)
I don’t understand why this article isn’t BS. It was meant to prevent passive snooping. If I connect to a network, it needs to know who I am.
I’ve worked with companies that implement this type of tech for monitoring road traffic congestion. IOS reduced the number of ‘saw same phone twice and can calculate speed’