It is nuanced. Insurers can be problematic. Tort law has strange incentive structures in the way it's implemented in various places. But, broadly speaking, the price of insurance is an informative signal.
It's symbolic since these cases broadly speaking need to be adjudicated in federal court for the most part and the federal law doesn't mention any immunities, it's a court-created doctrine. But neither the court nor congress thinks it's urgent enough of an issue, the last time a bill had support it ended up with around 70 cosponsors and it adds nothing but affirms that the law is applied as written and didn't get a vote, during the short period of tri-partisanship in 2020, because nbd it only accounts for 3-4 billion dollars of money that is taken from those who aren't able to be charged with any crime and redistributed to cops around the country in a sort of slush fund fashion, chump change if you consider how much debt we're running for... god knows what at this point. When you speak in trillions and can simply handwave that sort of deficit away, a few billion eventually sounds trivial, I'm guessing.
Engaging in a cover-up is in fact a crime. Recently a Massachusetts trooper who engaged in railroading a fabricated suspect was exposed for sending extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts to fellow troopers. But the names of those troopers and their own behavior remains opaque to the public. That's crazy!
Nobody should put up with that.
Even if it is a criminal offense, a prosecutor still has to bring charges. No prosecutor is ever bringing charges against a cop unless there is an absolute media frenzy that pushes it beyond the point it can be ignored.
Prosecutors need cops. Cops bring them cases. Cops testify in their cases. If they piss off the cops they can't do their job.
They do, special prosecutors, but the court has to appoint them. The bar is extremely high for getting a judge (80% ex-prosecutors) to appoint a private attorney or outside-jurisdiction prosecutor as a special prosecutor.
What really bothers me is how an independent investigator made a compelling case that identified a member of the DC metropolitan police as the suspect who placed a pipe bomb on Capitol grounds. Then after years of inactivity, the FBI suddenly broke the case and arrested a mentally unwell black kid.
The "compelling case" was all based on gait analysis which is heavily debunked and while making the case they quoted from reports about gait analysis but left out all the parts about it being an extremely inexact process prone to false matches.
There's a lot of junk "science" used in trials because there are plenty of "experts"[0] available to back it up for the prosecution and fewer funds to pay for the countervailing defense expert available to present the problems with it. Usually it takes a particularly bad case making it to a supreme or appeals court for that kind of evidence to be disallowed.
[0] The people paid to perform these analyses in the first place and then go testify convincingly for the prosecution about it but that's a whole separate rant.
>Recently a Massachusetts trooper who engaged in railroading a fabricated suspect was exposed for sending extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts to fellow troopers. But the names of those troopers and their own behavior remains opaque to the public. That's crazy! Nobody should put up with that.
What does sending "sending extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts to fellow troopers" have to do with cover-ups? Anyways my guess is that it's general policy for police/courts to not release evidence unless it's part of a trial, similar to how the Epstein files weren't released across 3 administrations and took an act of congress to get released.
>Are you saying people need to put up with racist POS cops?
Nice strawman.
I'm saying that the hand wringing about racism is counterproductive because it's implicitly saying "you can be crooked but just don't be racist" and it distracts from the question of just how common this sort of crookedness is by asking same question of the racism.
By all means go after them for whatever policy they violated. But that's tangential. Same as if embezzlement was uncovered. Some rando who's out four figures because some cop needed an extra DUI that month to make the numbers work is out no more nor no less based upon the racism of the cop.
If anyone actually gave a shit about police racism, or any other -ism, they'd prioritize making the cops less crooked because the undeserved screwings cops dispense is concentrated among those least able to screw back. The general case solution solves the specialty problem (racism, or whatever) here.
When is the last time, other than one of those coding on a whiteboard interviews, where you coded your own implementation of an important algorithm?
AI has created more situations where an algorithmic twist or a really clever implementation makes a significant difference. But those situations are still rare compared to everyday work in software development.
It won't be possible to keep the solar panels in full sunlight 100% of the time, so you need batteries too.
The math don't math. Too many young dudes watched too much space opera with big heavy armored spaceships that rumble when they fly. Real space is lightweight and fragile. We don't make data centers out of that stuff.
> They seem to have constructed a rocket with 10x the payload to LEO of the one they used to put those 10k satellites in orbit
They seem to have constructed a rocket that consistently gets heavier and more complex and more expensive and farthrt behind schedule and hasn't demonstrated specified payload.
I checked the publicly released stats over Starship's development, and this is what I found: compared with the initial ~5,000 t / ~73.5 MN concept, the latest V3-class Starship/Super Heavy is trending toward roughly 35%+ more loaded propellant mass and about 40% more maximum liftoff thrust if you use the FAA’s ~103 MN figure. Payload capability has also moved upward from the early 100+ t reusable LEO baseline to SpaceX’s current public claim of up to 150 t fully reusable and 250 t expendable.
Starship has never met claimed specs and capabilities. It is so far behind schedule that it won't meet specs in time to remain relevant. Which is a generous way of saying it never will.
Circa 2032: "Remember when everybody was going to launch constellations of thousands of satellites?" "Yeah, just like the data centers, only about 10% of that got built."
The Civil war never banned slavery. It only banned private citizens from owning people. The government (state and federal) kept sole right to still own people.
The only gate is found guilty of a crime. Technically, that can even be for a speeding ticket. And when they can keep prosecuting for a laundry list, they effectively guarantee a win against whomever they want.
reply