parineum

The answer is no.

It's complicated because the District Attorney is usually responsible for seeing cases against police and deciding to bring charges but they rely on having a good relationship with the police.

The high profile stuff you see on the news are the hard cases. Most of the time the instances where people say they got away with something are very biased takes that leave out a lot of context rather than a successful cover-up, though both do happen.

People talk about qualified immunity like it's a personal shield for police but it's much more nuanced than you'll read about most places. Qualified immunity just says that the individual police officer has immunity from prosecution or liability in cases where they genuinely believe they are doing their job correctly.

The right to an abortion was also a legal fiction "created out of nothing".

> to do things that need high quality results

Are there situation where you don't want high quality results?

It's taken until very recently for me to trust AI to actually do what I want it to do for hobby projects. I still have to scrupulously code review everything that isn't greenfield or an http rest endpoint.

> Just as a reminder to those out there, the strategy of recent administrations for crises like this was to cut federal spending

Which recent administration cut federal spending?

The affordable care act forced people to give insurance companies more money and did nothing to curb the rising costs of medical care.

> There are millions of Americans like me who will never step foot in one because of their association with Elon Musk.

You guys have to realize at some point that you're not a significant part of the market. There are a lot of people who don't particularly like musk but the amount that would never use a cybercab isn't a significant part of a 300m person market.

Obama didn't do much with his two years of majority anyway.

Plus, president's don't usually have more than two years of majority.

The whole character and his role in pop culture I find very frustrating.

The guy is the antagonist in the movie so you're not supposed to like him and he's written that way. He's a strawman and his whole speech is how the real version of him would sound filtered through the ears of someone who disagreed with him.

So you end up with people holding him up as an example that disagree and agree with him but the both of those groups are choosing the sides of a caricature that doesn't understand the point he's trying to make. It's weird.

The FAA doesn't run airports.

This is like those articles that say, "[entity] quietly [doing totally normal thing]" to frame it like it's some devious thing.

That's what banks do. It's not a secret. Any cursory understanding of banking gives you that information.

Why would you assume that the group of people would be anything other than the average driver?

> Falcon 9 is partial reusable, took a lot of money to do so and yeah its a good product. Not sure how expensive it was for US americans to gift it to Spacex but sure.

How much money have Americans gifted NASA to pay Russia for launching payloads ton Soyuz rockets?

Do you frame all government funding as "gifting"?

That's the purpose of the comment, to make a comparison that's simpler than the article that is missing from the article.

If the article said, "It's basically just REST". There'd be no need to comment as such.

Maybe post that as a reply to someone who says something like this instead of making a sarcastic, non-sequitur comment.

> What is the opportunity cost of building that datacenter compared to different kinds of development

Is there another group that's lining up to build stuff on that land? Should nobody ever be allowed to build on any land unless it's being used to the maximum possible utility?

Democrats have participated in previous bailouts, I don't see why they wouldn't participate in this one. Especially given that the "it" in your "let it burn" scenario isn't AI companies, it's the economy.

> Do we need “economic growth”? For that matter, what does that even mean? Personally, I’m more concerned with meeting real human needs, ensuring a fair and equitable world for everyone,

For example, social security relies on economic growth for funding. Meeting real human needs is a lot easier when humans are more productive.

Economic growth doesn't just mean people have more money. It means people are more productive. More productive people produce more goods than they need to survive. Those goods can be redirected to people with needs they can't supply themselves.

Economic growth is what has driven the world to be more fair and equitable over the last thousand years.

The key aspect of NIMBY isn't even in the acronym. The key aspect is the implication that it _is_ something that's wanted, just not here.

Being a NIMBY is wanting affordable housing... somewhere else.

Being a NIMBY is wanting more homeless shelters... somewhere else.

It is the same. Do you think those people who voted against data centers aren't using Cloud services, AI, services hosted on AWS, etc.

They want the data centers, just NIMBY.

You're describing insurance. The distinction between gambling and insurance is basically betting on something you have a financial stake in.

"Hedging" is like insurance but the thing you're insuring against is another bet.

Something someone else brought up in one of the previous threads was to identify the refusal routes and remove them.

Subprime mortgages were subprime because there was no documentation given to prove incomes/debt of the people they were given to.

The people who defaulted on their mortgages did so because they couldn't afford them. The reason they got a loan that they couldn't afford was because they lied about either their income or their debts while getting the no-doc loans.

The failures in process that led yo the industry allowing people to lie to them without verification is another part of the story but it's completely dishonest to act like the people getting the loans they defaulted on had no agency.

I actually didn't say anything about them at all.

The people who "lost everything" were people who bought houses they couldn't afford by lying about their incomes. Counting on the bubble growing forever.

I think you moved pretty quick past the part of why mortgages weren't safe.

Mortgages were given to people with no documentation allowed people to lie about their income and get loans they couldn't afford. That was alright because they had low introductory rates/payments they could afford. The market was getting more expensive and you could refinance to a better loan when you're LTV was more favorable before the balloon payments hit.

Those were the loans that were rated AAA.

Once the market growth slowed just enough to not allow the refinancing before the balloon payments, the defaults started, at first slowly then all at once.

I'm more in your camp of "it's culture" but I think it's a lot to do with the amount of attention a parent can pay to their kids education. Some of that is cultural but sometimes it's just a time constraint. Either due to financial constraints (and time spent working), single parents or whatever.

Kids obviously vary in aptitude but the ones that actually get the chance to excel are usually the ones that are getting an extra push at home. Some kids you just can't stop though and excel regardless.

There are issues that animate the left that are similarly trivial and en vogue.

How important is it right now to a very vocal group of people that you attach the word genocide to gaza?

I think the "it's Facebook" crowd are people who either weren't around for or don't remember before then. I don't remember before the "It's fox news" time but I now suspect there was probably something before that too.

I think a lot of it has to do with the young and idealistic clashing against the old and jaded and both groups yelling at strawmen of each other.

Where does this widespread knowledge come from?

That information is certainly in the training data.