This ignores a lot about how automakers were skirting these restrictions in order to sell us larger vehicles and why there are so few sedans and compact cars being sold here these days.
The rollback isn't the answer because obviously we should be limiting the size of vehicles and closing the loopholes that allow skirting of the law/regulations, but fuel efficiency is forcing smaller cars out and people here are not buying smaller EV's because of range anxiety.
You absolutely can move the thing without cutting it down. It just happens to be quicker to cut them down and most of the people doing this don't care about the charge.
But I do take your meaning and to some extent even agree with it.
Reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit.
A lawyer worth their salt should absolutely defend you against a vandalism charge if by the lawful definition no vandalism took place.
Not only that, but a lawyer's job is to make sure the law is followed during legal proceedings. Meaning they are supposed to defend your right to a lawfully handled trial which would include dismissing charges that didn't fit the crime committed.
This is criminal mischief. That's a misdemeanor (just like vandalism).
Theft involves legally speaking an "intent to deprive the owner of their property".
Flock owns the cameras. It's a subscription model where the municipality actually leases the camera and "retains ownership" of the footage/data the collect.
So by rights the CEO having them dropped off on his property could be considered the same as them being returned to the owner.
You can take that however you want. But vandalism has a specific legal definition.
No. I did not. Relocation of the asset to the owners property means there's no intent to deprive the owner of said property which means that it's not theft.
The property has not been defaced, damaged, or destroyed so that means there's no intent of vandalism. Therefore vandalism did not take place.
What you're describing is criminal mischief, which I would agree this is.
I made a singular allowance in the case that the pole was cut (which counts as damage), rather than being dug up (which wouldn't), which you appear to have ignored.
If you don't like facts, that is a you problem.
You are welcome to kagi or whatever this yourself to see what I'm talking about instead of doubling down.
If you are incapable of that, don't bother to respond to me.
"Vandalism refers to the intentional destruction or defacement of property"
They relocated the item to its owners house. At best the cutting might be vandalism but you don't have to cut them down. That just happens to be quicker.
My brother in Christ, the hole in the ozone layer fixed itself because we as a race decided to listen to scientists and ban the shit causing it pretty much world wide. A full on concerted effort backed by science. What the fuck.
Depends on the definition of "work". There's plenty of people I had on Facebook that I no longer talk to because I don't use Facebook. To be clear, my Facebook still exists. It's there to face tank all the family photos my MIL shares. That's the only reason the account still exists at all.
That's technically working for me.
But lots of people are just addicted and Facebook or insta or messenger scratches an itch for them.
They think it will blow over because so many consumers have short memories when it comes to bad press.
The problem is, the press keeps on coming and so people keep being reminded they're up to no good. Keeping AI in the news cycle isn't helping them win over people who are increasingly dissatisfied with it.
Yes. But it is likely that the seller made such upgrades based in the spec sheet provided by the company on question (either Best Buy or the manufacturer) and in either case someone is liable for that spec sheet being wrong and it promoting the purchase of said laptop.
I'll fully admit that the scenario you experienced is probable, given what's in the article.
But the main issue is that Best Buy sell a configuration of this laptop with 64GB of RAM and this fix openly contradicts that such a configuration is possible.
On top of that they "repaired this laptop" by removing part of the product the consumer paid for. If I had a repairman come look at my washing machine and they removed the extra rinse feature because that was causing it to flood but that feature was a stock feature, I would be pissed and litigious.
The fact that they didn't actually inform the customer is also bogus.
It appears to be a bizarre episode where Best Buy ‘repaired’ an under-warranty laptop by simply removing one of its SODIMMs, testing it worked reliably, and then sent it back to the customer with half the memory it originally shipped with installed, confusion possibly caused by a purchase made from a third-party seller.
This ignores a lot about how automakers were skirting these restrictions in order to sell us larger vehicles and why there are so few sedans and compact cars being sold here these days.
The rollback isn't the answer because obviously we should be limiting the size of vehicles and closing the loopholes that allow skirting of the law/regulations, but fuel efficiency is forcing smaller cars out and people here are not buying smaller EV's because of range anxiety.