As I said in the previous comment, state prosecutors would be unsuccessful due to the supremacy clause. State kidnapping laws cannot punish Federal officials for deporting foreigners in accordance with Federal law, or with a good faith belief that they are enforcing Federal law.

Federal court orders can, of course make a deportation illegal, and did in this case. Still, criminal contempt would only apply to officials who knew about the court order, which has not been alleged with regard to the initial decision to deport Abrego Garcia. There was, however a separate order from judge Boasberg to turn the planes around. As yet unnamed officials who knew about that order and had the ability to carry it out discussed it and decided not to obey. They are guilty of criminal contempt.

When? There have been a few times people stopped using Firefox in large numbers.

One of them was when Chrome first came out. Firefox (and every other browser) at the time ran every site in one process. As sites became more reliant on Javascript, which was usually poorly written, that meant any one tab having a problem made other sites and even the browser’s own UI unresponsive, or sometimes crashed the whole browser. Chrome’s multiprocess model was a revelation. Firefox didn’t get its own implementation until 2016.

Recently, there’s been some movement away from Firefox due to Mozilla making decisions people don’t feel align with open source, the open web, and privacy. The one that has me looking at forks is the planned addition of terms of use to the browser. Terms of use are for an ongoing relationship between a service operator and a user; Firefox is local software I’m operating myself on a computer I own. Its fine for optional online services like Sync to have terms of use, but the browser should work without those.

Who’s going to prosecute it? The DOJ certainly isn’t. State prosecutors would be unsuccessful due to the supremacy clause. Congress could appoint a special prosecutor, but then we’re back to political will.

What judges can have prosecuted without the DOJ’s cooperation is contempt of court, and they do have the power to appoint special prosecutors themselves in that case (but not for ordinary crimes like kidnapping).

The trouble is the same Supreme Court gave him criminal immunity for official acts (even corrupt ones), which this certainly is. Impeachment and removal is probably the only remaining legal pathway to enforce compliance, and the political will isn’t there.

It’s probably somewhat intentional that he provoked a conflict of this sort early using an issue few elected Republicans will risk their positions over. The next one will be bigger, and he wants the pattern established.

Yes. Return rate influences future product design.

There are several options. Sometimes they overlap:

• Direct gain such as romantic opportunity from sabotaging a rival or items of value from theft. Some people are callous about the harm caused, while others rationalize it as necessary or justified.
• Retribution or justice. Most people are happy to hear that a child molester will receive abuse from other prisoners, to give an example.
• Sadism - direct satisfaction or pleasure from causing pain to others. This is unlikely to make much sense to those of us who aren’t sadists, so it may have to be enough to just know it exists.

Now consider politicians promising to harm some out group and people voting for them. It’s a combination of the first two: the politicians attempt to gain elected office by convincing people that the out group is evil or dangerous and promising to do something about it. The voters believe these cruel actions to be justice done to vicious criminals.

And before you admonish and ridicule these people for not going to such and such website to get the truth etc.

Clearly everyone who isn’t getting their news from Lemmy is irresponsible!

Sure, there are valid complaints about the media, but anyone who heard Trump say

I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have

and still voted for him had everything they needed to know better, and who didn’t hear that excerpt from the Raffensperger call?

For example, it feels like many people bind their identity to a cause so tightly that admitting any fault feels like a betrayal of the whole.

That’s exactly it in a lot of cases. More on that here:

https://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html

How was anyone expecting the guy who openly tried to steal an election after losing to be anything but lawless?

Hibernation is, in fact fully powered off.

I see no betrayal here. He said what he was going to do, and the trees voted for the axe.

I found this response appropriate.

They’re not in this sociocultural-religious equation as they’re not locals.

I think you’ll find the equation would not work if they were removed, so they must be a part of it.

Most Western societies are much less explicitly based on religious scripture, though as others have noted negative attitudes toward polygamy may be rooted in Christianity. Some Western societies, such as the USA explicitly forbid establishing an official religion, but cultural norms are still based on the dominant religion.

Modern ideas about equality in Western societies are not based on a religion, but on how people decided they want things to work. Until about 50 years ago, women did not have legal equality in many Western countries, and a single woman was often unable to open a bank account, rent an apartment, or get certain jobs. A social movement worked very hard to change both attitudes and laws, and now the majority belief is more or less equal = same.

Qatari women are provided with household staff by their husbands to make their lives easier.

How does this work for people who are not extremely wealthy, such as members of your household staff?

This one gets more complicated the longer I think about it.

My first pass was to imagine humans just as we are aside from the ability to die. Many things about how humans are don’t make sense without death though. Pain, for example likely evolved to cause organisms to avoid stimuli that could lead to their death. Fear largely derives from the anticipation of pain. Would true immortals have either? I imagine the psychology of such creatures would be vastly different from our own.

There’s also the question of what form the immortality takes. If it’s possible to destroy someone’s physical body, but their soul can immediately manifest a new one, and pain doesn’t exist, then doing so is just an inconvenience. If bodies are impervious to any damage or alteration, a large category of crimes vanishes.

It would probably come down to some sort of long-term imposition on the freedom of others, but it’s really hard to guess what that would look like.

It’s on a VPS. Whether that’s really self-hosted may depend on how much of a purist you are, but it’s fully self-managed, not SAAS.

It’s recommended to have a PTR record mapping your IP address to your domain, which you wouldn’t be able to do with a residential connection from a typical ISP. I do send mail from multiple domains though and I haven’t had issues with deliverability. What I do not send is any kind of high-volume mail, which would likely attract a different kind of scrutiny.

For example it is terribly difficult to self host email, and very few people actually do it.

I read this a bunch of times and put off trying it because it sounded like such a hassle. Eventually I did and… it wasn’t bad at all. I just had to add a few extra DNS entries. I haven’t had any delivery problems.

Sort of. This is apparently done on-protocol so anyone can issue verifications, but they’re only shown in the official client if they’re from BlueSky or someone approved by BlueSky.

A better way to do this would be to let users subscribe to verifiers the way they can labelers. Better still would be for the label to indicate what the verifier has verified about the account, like “nytimes.com says this person is an employee of the New York Times”, which is something labelers can already do.

So I really think they should have just leaned into labelers.

The thing about this age range is there are a bunch of social changes people go through. Some of them are automatic at a specific age, like being able to legally buy alcohol. Others may not happen at quite the same age, like getting a driver’s license, graduating high school, or moving out of the parents’ house.

I suggest some introspection to be sure she likes you for you more than for social advantages you might have, and to check local laws to make sure a sexual relationship isn’t illegal. Other than that, the half your age plus seven rule of thumb others have mentioned seems pretty reasonable to me.

It appears to depend on Bluesky designating entities to do the verification.