Watched muted. Message still received.

Machoke Meowth

I’m sitting at around half that.

It’s complicated, but no, I don’t.

The nearest bus stop is an hour away, and it’s for interstate transit. 🤷

The place I’m planning to buy a home is so remote that I’m considering a backup car.

I learned how to repair my own vehicles after I was quoted $2,600 to install a $40 part. I could’ve also had an entire rebuilt engine shipped and swapped it in myself for about half that, but I ultimately decided to go with the $40 + basic tools.

Bots don’t upvote. There’s so much voting activity here as a ratio to actual contributions that my first impression was that the votes might be faked.

It’s a multi-edged sword. It also means someone could be forced to testify against a friend or loved one, and in a slightly removed example, my beliefs also apply to laws that allow individuals to be imprisoned for failing to provide a password to locked electronics, regardless of whether or not they actually remember it.

Maybe it would be a good middle ground to instead expand the privileges that allow members of a marriage to avoid testifying against one another, to include friends and family. The same reasoning applies, except that the state believes it can determine the strength and meaning of a relationship by its title and type alone.

I think you’re confused. The court already has the ability to force testimony, and witnesses can already be thrown in jail for refusing to testify.

I updated the title to make it clear that I’m referring to penalties that already exist, rather than suggesting that new penalties should be created.

Yes, exactly like that.

Of course, it depends on whether the court can prove their recollection whether or not they can be punished, but the bottom line is that it’s still illegal and the court remains legally entitled to forcefully procure truthful thoughts and memories from a person.

I don’t support any suggestion that updating the law doesn’t matter because it is sometimes difficult to enforce, if that was your intention.

A witness can still be punished if the court can prove that claims of poor recollection are being abused.

It was starting at $10k with an undisclosed reserve price.

I did some digging and it seems like the family’s suit should actually be against the pub that was renting the in-park space from Disney. It’s just unfortunate that the prevalence of corporate propaganda in news media, especially in what would be a critical period for Disney to invest in damage control for their public image, makes it difficult to confidently believe one thing or the other in light of that finding.

I never cared much for Disney to begin with, so I won’t waste any more time with verification. Regardless, the suit definitely shouldn’t be dismissed on their argument of the arbitration agreement alone because it would set an awful precedent, even if the suit itself happens to be toothless. I wouldn’t put it past Disney to try to take advantage of the situation to that end (They may be hoping the suit will be dismissed for arbitration because the judge already knows the suit is pointless so that future legitimate lawsuits against them for wrongful deaths in their park can be more easily dismissed on the same grounds).

I went back to check things out for the first time in a while and realized just how awful it is in comparison to Lemmy. It’s an incomprehensible clusterfuck of bots and influence campaigns. As long as engagement and new account numbers look good on paper to appease shareholders, I guess.