Did you just turn Success Kid into an angry/upset reaction? Rude!

The italics are a nice hint. Good Poe’s Law submission.

I don’t have experience with it personally, only heard about it from a possibility perspective – apparently prosecutors do a very thorough job screening jurors to make sure that never happens. Just knowing about jury nullification can get you dismissed. I don’t think you’re off the mark with that read, but where I think it comes back from kangaroo court and sov cit land is all jurors have to agree, even one objection to a nullification would stop it; if twelve strangers all agree, there’s probably some merit to it. But, certainly can be abused in the wrong hands.

Right, that’s my point – jury nullification is the mechanism by which juries find that a crime was committed by the letter of the law but the defendent is not guilty.

But following the surface of a sphere causes you to constantly change direction

This is exactly what jury nullification is for

something we desperately need, like making all political donations illegal.

I don’t know how serious this idea is, but I have questions. Wouldn’t making all political donations illegal favor the rich more than the system already does, especially for small local elections? Could people just gift money to a not-yet-candidate prior to starting any campaigning? If yes, then the person with the wealthiest “friends” wins; if no, where do you draw the line chronologically? Is only cash money considered a donation – are stage appearances fine to “gift” to a political candidate? Can I neutralize a candidate by mailing them cash and reporting them? If no, what is required for them to do with the money?

I think I’d rather just see Citizens United overturned, but I’m very interested in more info on this idea

I was just trying to figure out if that’s industry standard or his “veiled” threats… I’m intimidated and I don’t even work there

Wait – unionizing means giving up stock options? I tried verifying this on [search engine] but not finding anything meaningful, is that real?

Value-adders.

DEI hire >> nepo hire

I appreciate your response, thanks!

I mean, there’s room to talk about addressing systemic change and immediate quality-of-life suggestions in mutual exclusion, right? It’s not like taking steps to improve your life now is capitulation, and as I said having roommates was a step up in living conditions and made me better prepared mentally and financially to exist. I don’t see the irony at all – apologies if I’m misunderstanding – but we have to accept some nuance here.

Is this not a good-faith suggestion? If you’re going to disagree at least explain your downvote. I had roommates post-thirty and it improved my living situation drastically.

Uppies for all of you!

Put your foot down everywhere then – it’s a fallacy to think that it’s not worth it to resist data harvesting because it already gets collected “everywhere” anyway, take one step at a time to make it harder and harder. Opting out of this is just one step.

Isn’t reducing the size of the dataset worth it? I’d rather them have a picture from three years ago than a new scan every month or two.

It’s not such a binary thing as winning or losing, it’s a constantly shifting process. The only way to actually lose is by giving up – instead, consider it making it as hard as possible for your privacy to be infringed upon. Sometimes it’s more inconvenient, but what makes us such a farmable populace is our reluctance to be inconvenienced. Be good at being uncomfortable.

I refused, it went fine. I had to repeat myself because it was unexpected and dudebro wasn’t prepared, and they had to turn on the other machine and wait for it to start up, but it only delayed me like 2 minutes. The more people ask, the easier it gets.

It’s the NYT Mini