8·
6 months agoI don’t even get how they have the authority to do this. Measure 110 was enacted as an amendment to the Oregon constitution, so it seems like it would require another amendment to rescind that and recriminalize possession.
monotremata
- 0 Posts
- 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 3rd, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
2·6 months agoI mostly agree with you. The AND was kind of crammed in outside the list too, though; they’d written it as NOT bullet: limit 1, bullet: limit 2, AND bullet: limit 3. Basically I don’t think it’s implausible that they intended it to be maximally restrictive and just screwed that up. I just think that applying the law as though it means that requires interpreting the law differently from how it’s written, and different in a way that harms the defendants, which you previously weren’t supposed to do. Which seems super dumb.
I wasn’t suggesting the lawyers or the Justices should have talked about DeMorgan’s law, but rather that it would have been a helpful point for Mother Jones to bring up in the article, to make sure people are on the same page about the logic. You’re right that the notation is probably not helpful though.
The actual legal argument is pretty simple. The law as written is maximally lenient, but also not very logically consistent (e.g. the redundancy indicated in the article). So it seems like some kind of error occurred in the law-writing process. The question is whether they actually meant to write it as maximally restrictive or whether they screwed up in some other way. That certainly seems like ambiguity (a stance supported by the evidence that multiple courts decided these cases in different ways), and the prior standard was that in the case of ambiguity, you had to interpret the law to the benefit of the defendants, which here would be maximally lenient, and indeed also as written. The supreme court has basically reversed that, saying that you can interpret it as maximally restrictive as long as you’re pretty sure that’s what they meant to say. That’s a very different standard.
I think this case is maybe the equivalent of that photo of a striped dress that blew up the Internet a few years ago. Nobody thinks it’s particularly ambiguous, but they come to totally different conclusions about what the obvious correct answer is; just because the ambiguity isn’t necessarily obvious to the individual reader doesn’t mean it’s not there.
Yeah, I feel like the article should have made reference to De Morgan’s Law in order to explain the two interpretations. That’s the one that says !(A && B && C) = !A || !B || !C, and !(A || B || C) = !A && !B && !C.
In English, there’s no proper grouping operator, so it’s basically it’s a question of whether you distribute the NOT or the AND first over the list.
The Justices are saying that the ambiguity is completely resolved by the way the restrictions don’t make sense if you interpret it the other way. But the underlying assumption there is that the laws of this country are logical, free from needless repetition and contradictory requirements, which is a TERRIBLE assumption. Our laws are at best written by a committee of people not very familiar with the subjects of those laws, and at worst written by scam artists who then paid to slip them under the radar and into the books. They’re full of idiotic errors, deliberate sabotage, and absurdities. That’s the whole reason for the thing about the lenient interpretation, and this decision will change that in a way that gives judges a whole lot of power to do more harm.
And for those thinking that maybe time could have turned the THCA into delta-9 THC, that’s true, it could have; but time would also turn that delta-9 THC into CBN. So the delta-9 levels would be unlikely to have increased much over the baseline regardless of how old the weed was.
They’re actually kind of doing that in the E. Jean Carroll case. His “appeal bond” has to be 110% of the judgment award, so he has to put up 91.6 million instead of the 83.3 million she was awarded. My understanding is that the extra is to cover the interest that might accrue during the appeals process in the event that she still wins.
They did them first. I still keep seeing ads for “free” turbotax, though, so I’m not sure what effect it’s having.
A recent (satire) headline from The Onion: https://www.theonion.com/alabama-middle-schooler-jailed-after-taking-basketball-1851186115
I reject your premise that loving Israel means being unable to tolerate any criticism of Israel’s actions. I’m a citizen of the US; I would argue that I’m critical of the US because I love it, and want to see it improve. That’s why I’m so critical of our military and our foreign policy. We commit a lot of war crimes; it’s a huge problem. I’m also critical of our shitty healthcare system, our lack of social safety nets, our institutional racism, and so forth. As an individual I don’t feel like I have a huge amount of agency to affect those things, but I do try my best, including voting and communicating my views to those around me.
So yeah, I think it’s totally fine to be Jewish, and totally fine to love Israel. What I don’t think is fine is being okay with every aspect of Israel’s current actions in Gaza–in particular, the multiple instances of the killing of journalists, health care workers, and children, and the extreme restrictions on supplies entering the country. Those aspects are all obscene. The level of suffering in Gaza overall right now is unbelievable.
If someone takes offense at my calling those actions by the military obscene, I would argue that’s not a matter of Judaism. That’s a matter of rather extreme nationalism.
11·7 months agoI’m not sure it’s just on Reddit…
So say we, y’all!
Doesn’t the “missed step detection” on the Prusa printers already achieve a lot of that? I think it monitors the current to the motor and flags any abnormal behavior, without needing extra hardware on the motor.
That’s not to knock the value of positional feedback, which is clearly superior, but just to say that I don’t think this idea has been entirely neglected.
CADmonkey, DemBoSain, and HjFun are correct in this case. 43,560 sq. ft., or 4046.86 sq. meters.
Coffeebiscuit presumably dropped a zero accidentally.
I see. I was thrown because the “Protocols” took the form of a fake leaked document revealing a fictitious plan for world domination, claiming to be written by Jewish elders, but actually written by an antisemitic propagandist. So given that this is also a plan for world domination and is horrifying those who read it, it seemed like you might be suggesting it was a fake created by left-wingers to discredit the right. Sadly, it’s all too real, and it’s not leaked–it’s all out in the open for those who bother to look.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was written by folks making shit up to try to stir up antisemitism. Project 2025 was written by actual “conservative organizations”: https://www.project2025.org/about/advisory-board/
It’s possible to play games like that, but most folks don’t. Even professional or tournament games are mostly played over the course of an hour or two; there are just a few extremely high level tournaments where the games are split over a few days. I’ve played a couple of postal games that went on like that, but people do that with chess too. All my in-person games have been under two hours, including in tournaments, and most under an hour.
I’d encourage you to find a local Go club and check it out. As I say, the folks are very friendly and eager to teach newcomers.
This is why I think Go is actually significantly more approachable than chess. With chess, you really need someone of very similar level; if one of you is a little better, that person will almost always win, and that’s often kinda boring for both of you. But Go has a handicapping system built in that makes it way more forgiving of differences in skill, so that you can both play a pretty challenging game. I think it’s contributed a lot to the culture around the game being more open and focused on teaching others, too.
That said, there are still a lot of things that high-level players memorize. But it seems like there are a lot more folks just playing for the joy of the game, and at the low levels, those folks will often outplay those who get very into the memorization too early.
I mean, only a misdemeanor offense, and the caller ID thing only cost them $6 million. Sounds to me like this is definitely within budget for a bunch of candidates.