• 3 Posts
  • 79 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 8th, 2023

help-circle
  • Influenza

    • There are no known serious side effects in regard to Influenza vaccination which can be linked to the vaccine itself

    Now that’s just wrong:

    In patients with H[eart]F[ailure], influenza vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular death after extensive adjustment for confounders. Frequent vaccination and vaccination earlier in the year were associated with larger reductions in the risk of death compared with intermittent and late vaccination.

    SCNR, you didn’t specify adverse side effects. :P



  • Again if you want to see it like that, fine. Doesn’t change the fact that people from these countries mean something different than you when they say inciting violence is outlawed. They are obviously referring to their specific laws, that use that specific language, in this case verbatim. The “oh but there are conditionals in that law” bit you are doing here isn’t the gotcha you seem to think it is. We are aware of that. And it’s not relevant to the original question of there being potential legal consequences for the people hosting the lemmy world instance. So what is even your point?


  • Look if you want to apply an overly broad definition of violent speech to score some weird semantic point, be my guest. But the original point upthread was that incitement to violence specifically, not “violent speech” in general, is outlawed in many countries, among them those that are hosting the .world instance. And that point is very much correct.

    Which is all beside my original point, which was that the §130 StGB does not work like you boldly claimed it does.







  • Of course, Alabama school, it’s entirely possible that the lesson was complete nonsense.

    Nah, from a solely US perspective it’s correct. There were ~1.6 million military casualties in the civil war, and ~1.07 million in WW2. But there were a few more parties involved in WW2, so it’s kind of weird to frame it as less bloody. If you include civilians, estimates range from 70 to 85 million dead worldwide (not including the >20 million wounded soldiers and unknown number of wounded civilians).




  • can’t see how this can possibly be a good thing, you know it will mean funding with conditions.

    Well, the things they are funding will get funded? How is that a bad thing?!

    The conditions range from very broad, like “fix bugs” (curl), over somewhat specific like “improve cross-platform compatibility and the Linux RNG” (Wireguard), to very specific like “create a test-suite and drive development on the Fediverse account migration functionality” (ActivityPub).

    You can see more for yourself at https://www.sovereign.tech/tech

    All of these seem to be rather tame conditions that are just there to ensure the funds get used in the way they were intended to be used. And I don’t really see how that gives the STF any sort of direct control over these projects, while it gives those projects resources to achieve more than they might have otherwise. There are no long-term funding models that would enable implicit control over these projects.



  • android auto

    First I heard of this, but since it seems to be just some software that runs on the hardware of car manufacturers it seems rather unlikely. But very theoretically possible, if the car manufacturer was using default process scheduling in a CPU constrained machine and now switches to real-time scheduling in an update. But that was possible for years before this news, the code has just been mainlined to the default kernel now. If the car manufacturer cared about that they would probably have done it already with a patched kernel.




  • All good points if true. However I will say that to my limited understanding a crime under a specific law having been pardoned, that same law can then not be used to prosecute this crime anymore. Meaning states would have to find a different (preferably state) law under which the same offence is punishable.

    And that is all disregarding other issues like packed courts, republican controlled states, the vagueness of double-jeopardy in this regard, and the general chilling effect a presidential pardon would have on prosecutors to even press charges in the first place.

    The loss of benefits is easily circumvented by promising a golden parachute along with the pardon, so I could still see a lot of fanatics doing the crime “for country and freedom” or whatever they tell themselves.

    Overall this seems like a potentially dangerous erosion of checks and balances that is easily abused when put in the wrong hands. As the dissenting opinions in the ruling openly state.


  • Ok yeah fair enough, that sounds reasonable. But to my knowledge the UMCJ is a federal law, not a state law, so how does that line of argument factor in there? You cited that as an example of checks and balances that would prevent people from following illegal orders, but it being a federal law still means the president could circumvent it with the official order plus pardon combo, at least if my understanding of this new supreme court ruling is correct.


  • IANAL, but there is the presidential power to pardon. So the president could in theory give an illegal order (as long as it is an official act they have immunity) and promise a presidential pardon once the order is fulfilled (therefore extending immunity to the perpetrator). Meaning the president can entirely circumvent the UCMJ.