Even in cases like this justice must not just be done, but be seen to be done. It seems her guilt has been established, which is good; her sentencing comes next. It seem unlikely that there are any mitigating circumstances to reduce the punishment, but that judgement must be seen to be fair. The French citizenry are not renouned for their forebearance in the face of injustice, so I would be tempted to trust their system for now.
ETA: In fact, it seems like the punishment has already been decreed: five years ineligibility to run for office, four years in prison (two suspended), and a fine. That puts her out of tbe running for president, and likely tarnishes her enough to keep her down even after 2030.
It's not just the size, or the sound, but the fact you could comfortably concuss an elephant with it, or stop a bullet and go right back to typing. Those things were built like tanks.
That's just crazy talk. If we don't listen to the billionaires the line might not keep going up quite so fast. For the purposes of this argument, please ignore TSLA, the climatologists obviously got to that one.
That's interesting. I've often wondered what it must be like programing or using the CLI if you aren't familiar with the English language, but I hadn't considered the dyslexia/graphia type issues.
The rules also ban the use of facial recognition equipment in public places such as hotel rooms, public bathrooms, public dressing rooms, and public toilets.
Why was there facial recognition, or any other sort of camera, in those places in the first place? Has something been mangled in the translation, is it a fuss about nothing, or were organisations genuinely going "hmm, we need to check your face before you can use the restrooms"?
According to the book, there's no need for them to eat it, you just have to give it to them, although I think they may have mixed up 'fascinate' and 'confuse'.
Thank you for the summary. I don't have time to go down a rabbit hole at the moment, so this was just enough to sate my curiosity until I do have time.
As @Tahl_eN@lemmy.world said in another comment, there's concentration and there's flow (aka the zone).
Concentrating takes effort, is often tiring, and requires disipline to block out distractions. It can feel good to consentrate on a problem or task, give it all your mental energy, and achieve your goal. It can be a fragile state though. If a distraction does break through it can completely disrupt your thought processes, causing you to lose track of everything you had in mind, and effectively sending you back to square one. Practice helps avoid that, but concentration is inherently mentally taxing.
Flow is different. You will probably only reach it through concentration, and may not jnitally be aware of the transition, but you'll know it afterwards. The complex becomes simple, stuctures untangle themselves at a thought, you feel mental clarity unlike any other time, everything you'd been struggling with becomes effortless, and time ceases to have any importance. It's more like a trance or meditation than a normal mental state, and you can stay in that state until your body physically runs out of energy. I've ended up sitting at my desk for nearly 24 hours without rising, and without eating or drinking, utterly engrosed in the task at hand, not noticing the sun setting and rising again, and felt entirely calm and rested at the end of it.
It'll turn nasty long before then, when they're told (again) that it's all the fault of those 'immigunts' who are taking their jobs and eating their food.
Once that bloodbath starts, few of those involved will think to change target, and most of those who aren't will be hunkering down, waiting for it to blow over.
So, he's admitting he's ignorant and not in control of this administration. I wonder if his worshipers will ever notice that their idol isn't the one pulling the strings?
Foil will do nothing against ultrasonic or any other acoustic weapon, but may, possibly, be of limited use against microwave weapons should they use them.
Thank you for putting the effort in. The party apparatus isn't going to want to change, but I'm not sure that it's managed opposition as such, so much as those who are 'in' being happy with their lot and doing what they feel they need to to stop that being taken away.
There's two ways to use that to change the situation, either demonstrate that their comfortable position will be taken away if they don't change their politics, or take it away by finding a candidate you can rally enough support behind. Neither is easy, and both require getting people involved en-mass at the lowest levels of politics, which is going to be hard work with the party pulling against you. It's not impossible though, AOC and Sanders are both candidates of a different stripe and have, so far, held their places. Imagine how different things would be if they were replicated even a few times?
This is way. Democrat voters want change, but they're not speaking to the system in a language it understands. The party changes not from the top down, but from the bottom up. That only happens when people with different views stand for, and win, lower level positions. Every voice changed lower down on the totem pole changes the presure on the people making decisions further up. Ultimately enough movement lower down means the top eschalons are pushed out and replaced too.
Whether it's possible to find enough candidates to start filling the party, I don't know, but just focusing on the primaries (or lack thereof) for the top job is missing the wood for the trees.
Why allow depreciation? You wouldn't have bought it with the reduced functionality, and it's going to cost you time and effort to remove it and replace it with something else. Inflation will reduce the value more than enough.
Well, a number of them in Montana flipped to block an anti-trans bill: https://thepulp.org/montana-republicans-flip-to-defeat-anti-trans-bills/ (just a semi-random link to the story, there are many other sources). Some of them can be persuaded to change their minds. Perhaps not many, or by much, but it is possible.
I suspect that is some sort of sunk cost falacy combined with a narative that says only he can get the bad things to stop; once it get's to the point that your cities are being destroyed, you probably wont, and certainly wont have the opportunity to, change leader. It's critical that as many minds as possible are changed before getting to that stage.
Why did you make an almost blank post? All I see it the word Futurama, and I know there were no soul scaring episodes in that. None at all. No way.