Skip Navigation
Tim Walz Is Too Good at This. Let me remind everyone that Walz is, in fact, a politician.
  • Right, it is only in juxtaposition of the Trump Vance ticket that theirs seems so... idk, righteous? Wholesome? But were this 20 years ago, they'd be pretty normal. It's only with the looming threat of another Trump presidency on the backdrop of what he and the GOP have wrought on modern politics that what should just be normal is so hopeful. But I'd love me some fucking normal right now so I'm gonna go ahead and still be excited about that if you all don't mind?

  • ​​Black Pastor Arrested Watering Neighbor’s Flowers Wins Appeal ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​
  • Good. I saw the video, watched the ATA analysis, this was ridiculous all around. A neighbor called about some black guy on their neighbor's property when they were put of town, so the police went to check it out and approach him to investigate, which is fair enough. The guy answered all of the officer's questions, explained that he had permission to be there, that he was asked to water the flowers by the home owner, gave his name, that he lived across the street, etc. And yet he was still arrested because he refused to provide an id. There is no legal requirement to provide physical id to the police unless you are driving and must show your drivers license. You are only required to identify yourself when under arrest, and even then it only requires you give your name and address which can be done verbally, and he had already done so.

    The police are allowed to investigate and detain in the process of that investigation if they have reasonable suspicion of a crime. But that detainment must end once that suspicion is dispelled. And they cannot arrest unless that suspicion rises to the level of probable cause which requires a higher level of evidence. In this case, they had reasonable suspicion to detain the pastor based on the anonymous call. However, that became dispelled pretty quickly when they find a man watering flowers who identifies himself, tells them where he lives, says that this is not his property but his neighbor's, and that he was asked to be there and water the flowers by the owner. At that point, barring any other evidence, they should have ended the detention. They could still talk to him, or pull back and monitor from their vehicle, or just leave. But they could not demand id, and could not arrest him for refusing to do so.

    The lower court argued that their suspicion was not reasonably dispelled by their observations and his explanations. They said that becuase anyone in the process of a crime could pick up a hose and pretend to be allowed there, the police still had reasonable suspicion. But there are two problems with that argument. 1) Their anonymous call was about an unknown man on the neighbor's property. That is all the evidence that they had that a crime may be in process and that is not a high bar of evidence. Barring any other evidence observed on the property (like broken windows, the removal of property from the home, etc.), of which there was none, his explanation was suitable to dispell the only reasonable suspicion that they had, a 3rd party who was unfamiliar with the person on another's property. Also, short of tracking down the owner who was out of town, contacting them and asking if the pastor was allowed there, what other channels beyond his story and their observations were they going get to dispell their suspicions? 2) Getting a physical id from the man would not have provided any more context for his presence or support for or against his claim that he was allowed to be there. And as he was not required to show his physical id in these circumstances, that failure to provide id on request cannot extend the detention beyond the point that they no longer have reasonable suspicion of a crime. Though they may request id from anyone, they may not detain you nor arrest you predicated only on your unwillingness to provide it (excluding providing a drivers license when driving). So whatever argument there is to be made that they should still have been suspicious, that does not support his continued detention, let alone his unlawful arrest.

  • Vance mocked for saying eggs cost $4 — while standing in front of a dozen for $2.99
  • First, you missed the part where the actual price now is not 4 dollars? He lied. It was 3 dollars, per the sign right behind him.

    Second, national inflation is calculated off a broad spectrum of goods and services providing insight into the relative buying power of tthe dollar itself, so it is not missing the point to compare based on the adjusted buying power of the dollar. It is a more accurate reflection of the true rise in cost of this individual good comparing how its rise in price has outpaced the average rise in costs across the board. It reflects the extra pressures put on the egg market from the avian flu outbreaks and possible other factors rather than the general inflation of the entire economy.

    Third, if Vance's goal was to demonstrate that inflation in general had gone up tremendously and blame Harris specifically for that (despite how ridiculous that is), using eggs as a specific measure of the effect of their policies when the price hike on eggs have significantly outpaced other goods and is clearly due to non-policy related circumstances outside anyone's control is obviously disingenuous. And that was before he lied and tried to add another 30+ percent on top of the already inflated price.

  • Vance mocked for saying eggs cost $4 — while standing in front of a dozen for $2.99
  • Not to mention the price spike on eggs specifically is also way less than he would like to make it appear. Yes, in 2020 dollars, a dozen eggs was $1.50. But adjusted for inflation to today's dollars, that 1.50 is actually about 2 dollars today (inflation being a much broader issue and highly affected by covid). So the price didn't jump from 1.50 to 4 dollars, an increase of 167%, nor even from 1.5 to 3 dollars, an increase of 100%. It only went up from 2 dollars to just under 3 dollars (given the signs), an increase of just under 50 percent. Considering all the avian flu outbreaks that is an entirely reasonable price hike on a high demand good.

  • If simulation is possible, we could upgrade reality to 4D
  • If there were a 4th spatial dimension and you could see in 4 dimensions, yes, you could see the inside of things that are enclosed in 3 dimensions. It wouldn't be like x-ray vision exactly though. Think about a sphere in 3d. It is enclosed. When you take 2d projections of the sphere by slicing cross-sections of the ball, from a 2d observer on that plane, they would also see an enclosed circular object. But from the 3rd dimensional observer looking down at that cross section they can see everything enclosed in the circle. From the 4th dimension, then it stands to reason they would have a similar view of a 3 dimensional objects innards. But rather than seeing through the object like in an x-ray, they just see the whole thing laid out in every detail at once like we see the insides of the 2d circle.

  • If simulation is possible, we could upgrade reality to 4D
  • I disagree. I think we are very much hardwired to innately understand 3d space in an intuitive level. All else about higher and lower dimensions is learned experientially and/or academically, and it's near impossible not to understand it in terms that relate to 3 dimensions or math. I also think that thinking about 4 dimensions in relation to 3 dimensions makes it impossible to truly understand 4 dimensional space as a whole. We can describe every detail of it mathematically, but still not be able to visualize it in whole. Regardless, given the fact that there is no 4th spatial dimension, I doubt either of us will ever have a definitive answer.

  • If simulation is possible, we could upgrade reality to 4D
  • I've read it. Recently actually. It is really cool. It kind of supports my point though. It's hard for those to both comprehend and describe that have been in higher dimensional spaces and much of what they do describe is in 3 dimensional terms, (enclosed spaces being visible as if by an open top being a good example of trying to comprehend a thing that would be uncomprehendable in 4d through a 3d mindset). Of course, it's also written by an author that hasn't actually experienced such things and is also trying to imagine what it would be like to experience his interpretation of the phenomenon, so... not exactly conclusive either way.

    Also later in the story

    When they describe how 3 dimensional space is dropped into 2 dimensions, I think it also illustrates how hard it would be to comprehend 4 dimensions from our 3 dimensional mindset because every bit of 3 dimensional spaces that drops into 2d space would unfold and expand infinitely because there's no way to fit 3 dimensional data completely in 2 dimensions. So trying to comprehend 4 dimensions from a 3 dimensional perspective will likewise always leave gaps

  • If simulation is possible, we could upgrade reality to 4D
  • You are correct that 4d toys (and other games) already simulate 4 spatial dimensions. But those games all display the 4th dimensional space from a 3 dimensional projection. I think what OP is suggesting is creating a game that displays an actual 4 spatial dimensions. I have argued in another comment that I don't think this is possible in a way that our brains could ever percieve or process due to the limitations of a brain evolved in 3 spatial dimensions.

  • InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)KR
    kryptonianCodeMonkey @lemmy.world
    Posts 0
    Comments 785