Skip Navigation

Posts
7
Comments
872
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • I'm certainly not going to defend the guy who stole from me, but I'm a little less eager to see the cops put someone in jail than I was then. Losing his job probably ruined his whole month at least.

  • It was stressful. I was pretty young and pretty broke.

    A gas station attendant didn't return it when I made a purchase, and I was distracted so I didn't notice. He then put gas in his own car at his own gas station using it. I came back the next day with a cop, and he confessed. The cop called his boss and he got fired. I got a report to give to the bank.

    At the time, I was a little annoyed the cop didn't arrest him, but he was probably as broke as I was and significantly dumber to commit such a stupid crime.

  • I've actually experienced it. I discovered it was missing after the thief had used it, and the bank refunded the full amount, plus the overdraft fee I incurred by making a purchase using the card number after the thief had drained the account.

  • if something happens and your card gets stolen your screwed out of that money with debit usually

    In the USA, if you report the card missing within two days of discovering that it is missing, your liability is limited to $50.

    https://consumer.ftc.gov/node/78373

  • I would include statistics. So much everyday information is presented using statistics, often in ways that are misleading or deceptive. A bit better understanding would make people harder to trick.

  • calling her a "ranting lunatic"

    He's not wrong in general. She's a ranting lunatic.

    He's wrong in the current context though, and she's right about the Epstein files.

  • I don't think you're being taken advantage of financially. I imagine you've spent less money than any option for three weeks of sleeping accommodations in Switzerland aside from living with your parents, for example.

    I do think there's a significant chance there's a mismatch in expectations though. If you intend this to be short-term, it would be cruel to let her think something else. As others have mentioned, there's a risk she's trying to get pregnant to incentivize you to stay or financially support her; you don't know her well enough to say she wouldn't do that.

    As long as you have both of those concerns addressed, it sounds like a good time for all involved.

  • PCs have a BIOS/UEFI that provides hardware discovery and abstraction to the OS, while phones lack that and need the OS to know what hardware to expect.

    20 years ago when the predecessors to modern smartphone hardware were being designed, there probably would have been meaningful costs to adding that kind of flexibility. There probably wouldn't today, but there's also no motivation for phone makers to do it.

  • This was charged as a misdemeanor. No grand jury this time.

    I'm on the protestor's side here, but in general, it probably ought to be illegal to throw sandwiches at people. Some jurisdictions have a separate offense of harassment for offensive or even merely nonconsensual intentional physical contact that presents no risk of injury.

    I'd have voted not guilty if I was on that jury, but guilty for the same conduct under different circumstances, such as throwing food at a fast food worker over a customer service issue.

  • He probably can't. Absurd as it may sound, he was actually guilty.

    Here are model jury instructions for the charge, which include:

    There is a forcible assault when one person intentionally strikes another

    It doesn't say that the victim must be struck with something very likely to injure them. Looking at the statute, it turns out that actual physical contact (rather than making a threat without contact) elevates it to a felony - the charge a grand jury previously rejected.

    Of course, prosecutors normally apply common sense to charging decisions and don't prosecute everything that technically qualifies under the strictest reading of a statute.

  • Did they manage to find 12 people that will consider a sandwich a weapon

    They don't have to. Here are model jury instructions for the charge, which include:

    There is a forcible assault when one person intentionally strikes another

    Notably, there's no requirement that a weapon is used or physical injury is caused. Reading the statute, the fact that there was physical contact elevates it to a felony even without a weapon or injury, but it isn't charged as a felony here because the grand jury refused to indict.

    I hope that the jury finds him not guilty, but if they do it's jury nullification, not that his actions didn't technically violate the statute.

  • I like the ungrounded North American electrical outlet and plug design (NEMA 1-15). It has no safety features, but it's very compact, and very easy for device manufacturers to create folding plugs for USB power supplies and the like.

  • I'm against disabling replies entirely, but for disabling notifications. Once a post is out there and other people are participating in the conversation, it's not just yours anymore.

  • Not in most states, and some of those that do are unlikely to charge the owner in practice.

    I'm going to guess a majority of people wouldn't file an insurance claim. It would only make sense if

    • They have insurance covering theft of property from inside a car, which is far from universal
    • The deductible is substantially less than the value of the gun
    • The insurance company isn't likely to raise their premium as a result
  • In the USA, it's not rare for people to have gun manufacturer stickers on their car.

    Imagine you're a thief and you see a Smith&Wesson sticker on a car parked outside a building where carrying guns is forbidden.

  • The National Crime Victimization Survey is conducted by the Census Bureau by interviewing randomly selected households. It gathers information on crimes not reported to the police, and the reporting rate.

    It's probable that people being afraid to talk to anyone who works for the government will affect its results, but it does have some hedges against that, such as enrolling households for a three year span.

  • I expect we'll see that reflected in 2025's numbers when they come out.

  • The National Crime Victimization Survey shows crime victimization rates being lower than 20 years ago, and far lower than 30 years ago. The rate is relatively steady from 2022 to 2024. This is similar, but not identical to what the FBI Uniform Crime Report shows. The rate of victims reporting crimes to the police increased a little over that time period.

  • So, according to the “Fediverse-Observer” (and similar services AFAIK), in terms of software, sorting by user-count, it seems the top four user-bases are

    Not relevant to the comment where you posted the following to a Lemmy community from Piefed:

    Mastodon is just beginning to rudimentarily connect to PF, but IIRC Lemmy still doesn’t.

    Which looks to me like you're saying "Lemmy still doesn't connect to Piefed", but reading it three more times I guess it's possible you meant "Lemmy still doesn't connect to Mastodon".

    If you meant the latter, then I do have some idea what you're talking about. It actually is possible to interact with one from the other with the constraint that Lemmy can only see Mastodon posts that tag communities. It's not a smooth experience at all to try to consume community-based content from Mastodon.