• 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 7 days ago
cake
Cake day: September 21st, 2024

help-circle

  • I’m agreeing with your conclusion but not with your reasoning.

    You reason that since it looks like he might be innocent, he shouldn’t have been executed. Extrapolating from this yields that you also believe that if you felt he was definitely guilty, he should have been executed.

    I’m saying that because this uncertainty exists at all as a concept the death penalty should be abolished. Its impossible to prove someone’s guilt 100% in these cases, therefore the death penalty is immoral. Not just in this case but in every case.




  • That isnt how it works. The speed of light is the speed of causality; it doesn’t have anything to do with light. Its just the fastest speed at which things can happen. Light, being massless, happens to travel at that speed.

    In your scenario, the light beam would just be stretched along its length and the 2D interface on the surface of the moon would just “lag behind” from your POV. But it would lag at the speed of light.


  • Backlog3231@reddthat.comtomemes@lemmy.worldScumbag Universe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    ELI5: If I’m moving away from you at 50 KPH and you’re moving away from me in the opposite direction at 50 KPH then after 1 hour we will be 100 kilometers away from each other even though the speed limit is 75 and neither of us broke it.

    That’s an extreme reduction but gets the general idea across.



  • It doesn’t matter if he did it or not, honestly. If the state can’t be 10000% certain the person they are about to murder is guilty of a heinous crime then it shouldn’t be possible to fucking murder them.

    This isnt about innocence. This is about the state denying this Black Muslim man due process and constitutional protections.

    And on that note, its impossible to prove guilt in these cases, which is why the death penalty needs to be abolished. Are you comfortable with the idea of bring executed for a crime because you were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Because I’m sure fucking not.



  • The anti-trust cases against google are why this is being brought up again. Google isnt propping up Mozilla out of altruism or a desire to, I dunno, advertise; they’re doing it so that in court they can point at Mozilla and say, “look! Competitors!”. Its the exact same reason Microsoft bailed out Apple in the 00s. Because without Mozilla, Google is unquestionably a monopoly.

    Now, they are anyway. But by keeping Mozilla alive they can pretend in court that they have competitors and that they aren’t engaging in monopolistic practices, which they absolutely are.

    Honestly your comment is kind of why they pay the money. “Google doesn’t have a seat at Mozilla, what’s the big deal?”. The big deal is that Google smothers competition and is pretending in court that they aren’t.