@zero_spelled_with_an_ecks That's fine. That's your call.
I think differently. I think that criminals should be punished.
I'm also in a different country entirely.
Dss
joined 2 years ago
@zero_spelled_with_an_ecks I think that the right to an attorney is nice, and he got that. He is also guilty. Supression of the evidence of his guilt doesn't make him not a criminal.
There's plenty of examples of overreach the ACLU could be using their limited funds on. Someone who is an actual robber, proven beyond doubt? Well, morally, I'd leave him and spend the money elsewhere. Once the point is proven elsewhere, he can try and appeal.
@zero_spelled_with_an_ecks It's generally better to retain the moral high ground as well as push the law.
@laurelraven We had cable internet, 30 years ago in Preston. 30mbps and it was far faster than the 750mbps we have now!
A few years ago the average webpage was larger than the whole of Doom. What they are now, who even knows?
@[email protected] they seem to repeatedly and endlessly hammer certain pages on sites, too, for no reason. Some of the stories on here are horrendous - openAI &tc effectively DDOSing entire sites!
@[email protected] It's a terrible idea. Revocation on a whim or a bug, it shouldn't be legal to revoke without due process, but this allows that.
@zero_spelled_with_an_ecks You'd be wrong.
But, he did it. That's a fact. There's proof. A legal argument that he shouldn't be found guilty of his actual, factual crime because the police looked at his phone a bit harder than he would've liked? That's your argument for releasing a criminal?
You get that it looks terrible, right? It's the kind of thing that'll get trunp writing a chatgpt EO in a heartbeat, and it'll be far worse for everyone.