Quantumfreakonomics
No bio...
User ID: 324
Quantumfreakonomics
1d ago
Yes, but we have 30 years more of technological development in lawfare now. Think of how many doohickeys and doodads you can bring up to the jury.
Did you ask whether the engine was governed at 70mph? "No"
Did you ask whether the 80,000 pound truck you hired was equiped with a collision detection system like you have in your personal Kia? "No"
Did you ask whether the truck was equiped with a lane depature warning system? "No"
Was it a red flag that the carrier you hired barely spoke English? "No"
Quantumfreakonomics
1d ago
Islam is right about dogs.
Quantumfreakonomics
1d ago
Another data point I discovered today: There are multiple videos of university commencement speakers getting booed every time they bring up AI.
Quantumfreakonomics
1d ago
There are a lot of leftist spaces where you would get a better response saying, “I think the West takes in too many immigrants,” than you would saying, “I think AI art is good.”
Some leftists think the technology itself is intrinsically evil, but almost all of them think that the people building the tech are evil oligarchs who can’t wait to banish 99% of the population to the permanent underclass (or worse).
Quantumfreakonomics
4d ago
If the Koch brothers wanted nukes I think the Constitution is very clear that they are allowed to have nuclear weapons.
My interpretation is that the phrase, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," modifies the noun arms, not the noun people. So all of "the people", regardless of whether or not they are part of the militia, get to bear arms, but the "arms" that they have the right to bear are militia arms, i.e. infantry weapons. This means that both you and the Koch brothers get to own assault rifles, RPGs, light machine guns, and mortars, but neither of you can own tanks, attack helicopters, or nuclear warheads.
Quantumfreakonomics
5d ago
Yeah, but then what? Do we launch a full nuclear strike? A conventional war? Just a blockade?
Quantumfreakonomics
5d ago
The question is if Israeli jailors would sic a dog on their captive with the intent for the dog to rape him. (Actually, how does that work mechanically: did they tie him head down ass up?)
I wouldn't have believed most of the things that happened at Abu Ghraib if there hadn't been pictures of it. Some people will do weird shit if they have the oppurtunity.
Quantumfreakonomics
6d ago
We are now in the timeline where the journalistic integrity of the New York Times rests upon whether or not it is physically possible to train a dog to anally rape a human.
The New York Times ran an opinion article by Nicholas Kristof wherein a number of Palestinians report being raped or otherwise sexually assaulted in Israeli prisons. There’s not much in the way of physical evidence, but that is hardly unusual in rape crimes. Israel has strenuously denied the allegations, characterizing them as blood libel. It seems to be a he-said/she-said that comes down to whether you believe the Palestinian prisoners (who often have ties to Hamas or other extremist groups, hence why they ended up in Israeli prisons) or the IDF.
Certain enterprising young pro-Israel influencers think they can to better than appeal to untrustworthiness. They puport to have found a smoking gun that proves the NYT published a complete fabrication in order to libel the State of Israel, and by extension all Jews. One of the more salacious anecdotes regards a man from Gaza who alleges that he was raped by a dog.
On one occasion, he said, he was held down, stripped naked, and as he was blindfolded and handcuffed, a dog was summoned. With encouragement from a handler in Hebrew, he said, the dog mounted him.
”They were using cameras to take photos, and I heard their laughs and giggles,” he said. He tried to dislodge the dog, he said, but it penetrated him.
If, in fact, such a thing were impossible, then it would prove without doubt that the paper of record recklessly printed unverified falsehoods. We are now in the “doctors arguing with the author about the medical literature” stage of the discourse. See, even though we have documented evidence that dogs can cause rectal injury to humans, in none of those reports was the initial contact involuntary on the part of the human.
I am not well acquainted with dogs, but my understanding is that it is not particularly hard to get them to hump things. I guess the people making this argument are hoping that others won’t want to think too hard about the mechanics of dog rape.
Despite calls and rumors to the contrary, The Times so far has declined to retract the article.
Quantumfreakonomics
6d ago
What happens if China takes Donald Trump hostage?
Quantumfreakonomics
6d ago
As we all know, no virus that is slightly transmissible between humans could ever mutate to become more transmissible between humans.
Quantumfreakonomics
6d ago
COVID was such a complete mess that we never even bothered to do a proper post-incident debriefing report. Nobody even wants to think about what we should do differently next time. A lockdown would have worked in December 2019. By mid-January it was too late.
We should have kept everyone on the boat in the middle of the ocean and resupplied them by helicopter.
Looking into this, and wow, Congress really did pass an indefinite uncapped appropriation for the federal judgement fund with no substantive limitations. The statute for unauthorized tax information disclosure which Trump sued under allows punitive damages with no statutory cap. This settlement is actually 100% legal.
How many other loopholes like this are there in the United States Code?
More options
Context Copy link