Cruel

If people willingly choose to shorten their life, I don't consider it a problem.

Now, lying and manipulating people into choosing it, similar to what the cigarette industry did, is obviously a problem.

But at this point, everyone knows cigarettes and processed foods are unhealthy. People just don't care.

Which is...?

When 1.6 came out I was stubborn and refused to install Steam which was needed for it. But I eventually did and it eventually grew on me even though recoil and everything is a bit different. Still using my 22 year old steam account.

Sometimes lawyers do preliminary motions like to suppress unconstitutional search warrants or change of venue and stuff. If it's complex, it can take a while, and defense cannot request speedy trial if they're filing things, but you also don't necessarily want to forgo filing useful things.

Also, if they violate the constitutional right to a speedy trial, you can file a habeas corpus or something and, even if you win, there's still no consequence except them shrugging and saying oops.

Yeah, been like this for quite a while. They can drag you for a while, lose their case, shrug it off, and continue as normal.

Meanwhile, you lost your job after your arrest, maybe even were denied bail and had to stay ~2 years in jail waiting for trial, and spent $100k on legal expenses. Winning at trial gives you no restitution for those massive losses. You're expected to also shrug it off and continue life.

Important for those who don't know: police can legally lie to you. Happens all the time when they're trying to get a confession. In a discussion, they'll be like "we have your fingerprints matched and we have video of you, so it's better if you're just honest with us." But they often don't have anything which is why they're desperate for a confession.

Weird to me that people are taking issue with the cameras more than the police work.

The problem here is charges being made with weak evidence and officers legally allowed to lie. I had a similar experience, but she was smarter than me. I was 22 and naive, thinking I didn't need to prove my innocence because they have to prove my guilt in court (logically seemed impossible when I wasn't guilty). The presumption of innocence is a lie. And juries and judges don't operate with pure logic and reason. I had to learn the hard way, losing many years of my life.

This is where everyone here is being disingenuous, or are just completely ignoring opponents of DEI. When have opponents of DEI called for overlooking meritorious minorities? When have they called for discrimination? Because they must have explicitly done so if DEI combats this.

I know what the stated goals of DEI are, and it sounds good, but I also know how it's often implemented: quantitative goals and affirmative action. These are discriminatory practices.

People routinely admit that white women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI, calculated from things such as their access to STEM jobs (eg. IBM setting a goal of 50% female engineers), then they go right back to saying that hiring based on gender is actually not DEI. Pure gaslighting.

Yeah, but your code will be culturally one-sided! You need diverse coding practices, like three-space indentation!

My favorite was companies like IBM setting a goal for 50% female engineering representation even though barely 20% of the respective college grads were female. Like, they're just blatantly picking from a smaller pool, making it statistically inevitable that they're bypassing more qualified people.

But people here evidently support this sort of gender/race based discrimination. 🤷