Tweak

The issue here is people are trying to apply scientific reasoning in a legal setting. The two are not the same. There is a legal process for bringing in scientific reasoning - you can't just hash it out in court like you would in an academic paper.

I say the case needed a statistician. Incredibly, the prosecution deliberately decided to avoid using one to assess questions like “How unusual is this shift pattern for a random nurse?” or “How likely was it that said nurse was personally drawn to caring for the sickest infants? How were shifts assigned?”

Yes, it might have been better for Lucy if there was a statistician. However, it's not the prosecution's job to prove her innocence, it's her's and her solicitor's. If there needed to be a statistical analysis and sworn statement from an expert, it would be on the defendant to arrange that.

By definition, she was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

No mention of how he was always a massive Russophile, and how Dominic Cummings started out on the UK politics scene as his advisor after living in Russia.

This cunt was a key part in getting the UK out of Europe at the behest of Russia.

Again with the names. If you could acutally come up with something of actual meaning and relevance, I might feel insulted.

But you don't have meaning, what you say is irrelevent, and you don't have value. You say you don't argue and yet you've replied every time, because there's nothing else for you.

Applying a retaliatory tariff, as you suggest, is what would be appeasing Trump. He wants to wreck everything - not just the US - and retaliatory tariffs would do just that.

Thank fuck you don't decide economic policy. I'd hate for a nation and its people to be in such a sorry state.

I haven't seen a thing about multiple accusers? The information I've read suggests it's one accuser, with multiple events in the 2000's and one recent accusation of rape in the 2020's. In particular, the police statement said "The victim is being supported and given access to any specialist help or support she needs.", which directly implies only one accuser.

and the police are confident enough in the case to have advanced to the arrest phase.

That doesn't mean much of anything.

I've demonstrated a lot more thinking here than you. You've presented nothing, you're just attempting to be insulting. The most likely reason for this is that you don't know how to argue nor have anything to back up your position, ultimately because you're wrong.

For all we know he could have been stitched up.

Norris, 65, was elected as the MP for North East Somerset and Hanham in 2024, defeating the Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg.

I wonder who will be lining up to try to win the seat after Norris is gone? Because he's probably not going to be able to hold his seat, whether or not the charges stick.

Edit: In another article they mention that he also has a master's degree in social work. More and more I'm leaning towards this being a potential stitch up. However, we don't know what information the police have, none of that is public.

In that context I think tariffs are absolutely valid. In particular, as you mention, because China is subsidising their EV market and thus discounting the export price. A tariff should raise the price of the imported good such that the local good can compete - and we've seen this with extreme tariffs on Chinese EVs. Trump actually led the way on this in his first presidency, proving he is the proverbial broken clock. Now Europe also has tariffs on Chinese EVs.

Ideally, this should also involve ring fencing the tariff revenue and exclusively re-investing it into incentives for local businesses to pick up the slack of the imported businesses. This rarely happens, but it should.

This doesn't work when tariffing the US, though. The US is often already more expensive for the things people import from there. People buy US goods and services because they want the US version; there is no better alternative. The tariff just makes US products even more expensive, costing buyers more. The only thing it does is raise revenue for the government.

In other areas even tariffs against China have been meaningless. If China sells a trinket for 1/10 the price of local industry, then even a 100% tariff would mean the Chinese product costs 2/10 of the local price. People will still buy the Chinese product over the local one, but now they just pay more. Maybe they buy less, so Chinese businesses make less money, but they'll probably pay more overall. The government get this extra money. This is what Trump is doing in the US with his general tariffs on China, there's no plan behind them and they're all but meaningless - the only thing they do is raise tax revenue for the government.

If the only thing a retaliatory tariff does is raise revenue for the government, then it's no better than what Trump is doing.

A good tariff should minimise the effect at home and maximise the effect against the foreign country the tariff is meant to penalise. I don't think that's viable with import tariffs against the US, the effect at home just isn't worth the minimal damage it would do to US businesses.

It’s 2025, and 90% of all software devs in Hamburg have worked for Otto at some point, and they still can’t get their shit together.

I'd put money on that being a dumpster fire of a workplace - the kind where turnover is very high, everyone is constantly busy putting out fires with slapped together solutions, and if anyone tries to do anything that might prevent future fires they get shouted at for not putting out fires.

The USA detained her at the border because a) there was no direct way for her to go back home from the US/Canada land border; b) she had been refused entry by Canada, who have similar entry requirements, meaning the US should be refusing her entry also; and c) she had already been in the country for 3 weeks and they needed to investigate what she had been doing. That's an awful lot more than just "vibes".

But yes, as I said in my comment above, the length of detention is the real fucked up part. That's longer than needed to sort the logistics or perform any necessary investigations, and proves that this is just about filling private prisons at the expense of taxpayers.

Canada was not in the same position as the US, so the two responses aren't directly comparable. However, you're right that the US is not a safe country - I'd even caution US citizens against crossing the border right now.

That one was at the Mexican border, and I think the woman was German.

You might be right, I remember the tattoo one being a girl who was turned away at another border before being detained by the US on her way back. If that happened in Mexico as well it's easy to see why the two could get confused.

Like I say though the fucked up part is the lengthy detention. That doesn't benefit anyone except the private prisons, at the expense of American taxpayers.