You'd make the camera reach out to a signing server for the user's signature. You'd even sign the whole photo, not a hash supplied by the camera, to give you (via the server) a chance to verify the image was correct.
Or, you'd adapt a hardware wallet to do the same. Either way, there'd be two devices from two manufacturers, communicating over a transparent protocol.
Not equality of people, equality of paths. In an FPS the shotgun and the rocket launcher shouldn't be equal or there's no need for both.
imho the thing to do is take OPs suggestion, Paradox should make gay-marriage possible but have people refer to it in variable ways. Some egalitarian societies can call it marriage, others sodomy, etc. And then add other cross-cultural restrictions too, where civilizations may not recognize bi-religious or bi-racial marriages for various reasons.
In other words don't minimize the issue, lean into it in a CK way, deeply and unsettlingly.
I think the discussion gets a bit blurred around what acceptance means.
It varies from acceptance of an adult just being trans, of trans babies, of schools preaching medical transition without parent approval, and of issue of bathroom usage and sex-segregated prisons.
Regardless of the political questions presumably Swedes are fairly liberal about someone's personal choices.
> That's not really comforting to the minority people whose lives were ruined by them.
Actually, it probably is somewhat. I hate paying money but that my taxes go to useful things makes it bearable. I hate sucking up to a guy in a uniform but that he also arrests murderers makes it less infuriating.
But moreover, that's not the issue brought up originally, which was net damage to a group. The implication was that the justice system harmed minorities and as a group that's simply not true.
Also, the language used is trying to borrow outrage. Harmed minorities? No, harmed the poor. Many of whom were minorities. But there are rich racial minorities too.
You are trying to dilute the impact the racist history of US has had on minorities via the justice system. Justice and policing policies disproportionately target minorities. Sure the poor are affected by lack of proper representation, but minority populations also happen to be disproportionately affected by poverty. Stop and frisk, racial profiling, less lenient prosecutory discretion, mandatory minimum sentencing, and the War on Drugs all disproportionately impact minority groups compared to Caucasians[1]. If you just think we need to solve the poverty problem, a significant part of that problem is rooted in systemic racism too.
Per the Innocence Project, 70% of the cases they have exonerated have been of a minority group, and often these cases involved underlying racial prejudice to railroad an innocent person into a long-term prison sentence or death.[2]
>As of November 2019, 367 people previously convicted of serious crimes in the United States had been exonerated by DNA testing since 1989, 21 of whom had been sentenced to death.[9] Almost all (99%) of the wrongful convictions were males,[19] with minority groups constituting approximately 70% (61% African American and 8% Latino).
So the largest discrepancy from proportions in the US population is the overwhelming skew in favor of males (99%) - are they “minorities” too?
If the problem is racism, in a country where sexism against women is said to be a major problem, why would there be a 99:1 preponderance of men? Are the racists also biased in favor of women and against men?
Are males a minority group? No, technically not, since sex split is about 50/50. Is the high preponderance of men ending up in prison concerning? Yes. Frankly our high incarceration rates for non-violent crimes is extremely concerning. Does this somehow invalidate the problems brought up around female equality? Absolutely not. I also believe there is probably additional negative bias towards African-American males because of racist tropes.
Also the 99% figure was from the Innocence Project, Google brings up Federal Bureau of Prisons stat suggesting active incarceration is closer to 93% male, 7% female. Still concerning.
> You are trying to dilute the impact the racist history of US has had on minorities via the justice system.
Hasn't anyone told you that you learn more with questions than assertions?
No. I'm saying that the language used is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Regardless of all the stuff you mentioned, which is true, the system is still a benefit.
You should not go out of your way to further weaken trust in the system that has benefitted those minorities you mention more than it has hurt them. Especially as you are presumably not those groups, you should be careful not to wreck what they have. (You may not be aware, but white 'progressives' often speak for people of color. Their messages sound like ones of support initially, but because these people are often merely social signaling the rhetoric can often prove harmful to people who have to live with it.)
> [...] all disproportionately impact minority groups compared to Caucasians
Some minorities, yes. Others, no. Deeply troubling to the white v black narrative is that Nigerian immigrants often do very well in the USA, even when Americans don't know if they're american-descendants-of-slavery or not.
But yes, ADoS do have it rough. If you want to support someone though, vague "minorities" is not how you do it.
> Per the Innocence Project, 70% of the cases
You can't use that stat in that way, presumably they picked the most egregious cases which would be the poorest, etc.
I think you're saying minorities are better off with a justice system than without. Maybe everyone is technically better off with a justice system, than with something like vigilante justice, but the US has always had some level of justice system even during slavery. Was it really to their benefit at that time? Can we say things have improved, yes, very slowly, but systemic racism still exists.
>You can't use that stat in that way, presumably they picked the most egregious cases which would be the poorest, etc.
No, you cannot just ignore ingrained racism within the judicial system from day one as simply being a class issue. You can read more from the National Registry of Exonerations about racial bias in exonerated cases[1].
In Portland protestors have clubbed police on the head with bats (and famously a wrench), tried to set the courthouse on fire, and tried to set the mayor's occupied apartment building on fire.
Attempted murder, and arson of occupied structures. Far worse than the capitol riot.
Also, who the violence was directed at. In DC most of the rioters were unarmed and fought with police. In Portland and LA many protestors were armed and fought passing citizens, attacked drivers, etc. Police don't "deserve" to be hit, but they sign up knowing that the job can get rough. Random old ladies protesting the vandalism of their building shouldn't be hit but the justice mobs feel free to hurt anyone.
No, I think I'll still assess the hitchhikers I pick up.
Seriously though, especially with individuals, why shouldn't you use all the information available, if it produces results even an iota better than blind acceptance (and for most people, their empathic-sense does)?
It depends. Sometimes the answer is obscure because of our setup - like you'd need to know to look in the other repo. I'll always tell you that, and point you to the doc and the problem-list to update in case the doc is wrong.
But, if you ask me a question where the answer is in the code, the proper answer you seek, in the detail you need, then I'm going to ask you to read the code first and only ask me what's left.
Perhaps the story is true as retold, or maybe the original guy asked about the right things and read the code for the rest, but people watching from the outside couldn't tell and conflated it all, turning it into a story of ladder-pulling bitterness.
That doesn't really ring true for me because I want coworkers taking responsibility for these odd systems (that they have to find me to ask about). But I don't want to be stuck in the role of their System-X guy who they get to do their changes. This guy's incentive would be to walk the line, educate and hand-off.
> Because black frees us of any argument over coding style in merge requests and this is great. It helps us focus on the important things.
I hear this all the time, along with 'Juniors will be confused' but it never seems reasonable. Sometimes I line up variables:
name_field_id = 0x01
address_field_id = 0x02
Sometimes I don't. I do it when the cognitive load is more on the values or the identifiers, as a group. No tool is going to help with this judgement call.
Sometimes stuffing a method on one line is best because you get ten boilerplate methods on ten lines and can see the similarity, other times that's just silly and they'd be best spaced normally.
Sometimes I use a rightward assignment { ... } => x because it fits the code better, leaving the reference to x right next to the next statement which will use it.
> so we regularly argue over them and this is a waste of time.
Strange disfunction. It sounds like your team is too opinionated to allow other opinions.
> I wish it were much more opinionated
Suggest turning on more rules but leaving them as suggestions. Where any reason to not follow them is enough. You do want to make sure people have some reason to make sure they aren't just leaving a mess but it's easier to get them to care about style if they have a say in what clean looks like.
As an aside, part of the issue is comfort with the tooling. If I have to work in someone else's file and I hate the syntax and it's a big deal, I first run the linter to make the code look my way, make the change, run the linter to go back to their style, squash it onto my change, and rebase away the first lint. Work done, no problems dealing with someone else's style - even in the case that it would otherwise be a problem. I never have to, but because I can it doesn't bug me.
> I think the same problem is starting to show in all of the assist technologies in cars. People are starting to rely more on those technologies than they should.
Have you seen the commercials where someone is driving and almost gets everyone killed by taking their eyes off the road. The system slams them to a halt, barely saving them, and the parent happily smiles - family safe, nothing to learn here. In one commercial, the parent is supposed to be teaching their child to drive.
These driving aids should work differently. If they ever have to emergency-brake to save you they should immediately activate a small packet of thermite in the ECU, rendering the car into a brick. You proved you can't use it safely so you shouldn't have it.
It would be different if these devices worked, but they don't. They just tell you that your lack of skill is okay.
And then the question adds state, "as of yyyy/mm/dd, which customers were more than $30 into credit?"