I think it was irony, bro.
DauntingFlamingo
joined 2 years ago
If someone is allergic to peanuts or some other ingredient, they take their own life in their hands when they eat food that doesn't have the ingredients listed. Those people usually carry EpiPens as a safeguard. If one passes away (which happens, though not as often nowadays) there needs to be proof the person was intentionally given something the issuer knew would do harm. It's really hard to prove, and genuine mistakes happen (parent giving a child a snack with wheat or peanut in it, that kind of thing).
You would not be liable unless there was proof of intent
If someone is allergic to peanuts or some other ingredient, they take their own life in their hands when they eat food that doesn't have the ingredients listed. Those people usually carry EpiPens as a safeguard.
If one passes away (which happens, though not as often nowadays) there needs to be proof the person was intentionally given something the issuer knew would do harm.
It's really hard to prove, and genuine mistakes happen (parent giving a child a snack with wheat or peanut in it, that kind of thing).
Even for a religious person, being smart within their company is usually preferred. Priests and the like take great pride in their knowledge of faith and understanding of wisdom. They may take a vow of servitude and condemn themselves to poverty, but they do so with the apparent knowledge they will be rewarded for their sacrifice. That is playing the long game, which takes smarts. "Understanding God's love" and the required knowledge to be a part of a faith, you know?
People prefer to be smart over poor, when those are the only two options
I hadn't heard of the YouTube thing. Doesn't matter because I don't use it, but it's still outrageous.
I am willing to watch an ad or two every 15 minutes, so long as they are no more than a minute total of wasted time. This ultra-monetization crap where it's a minute and a half every 5 minutes is why people use AdBlockers and pirate media.
Be reasonable as a business, and you'll get a reasonable response. Flood my free time with ads, and you get AdBlock and piracy.
Does anyone actually choose to be poor if being smart is the other option? Feels like you'd already have to not be very smart to get the choice wrong.
You would have to prosecute both to make the charge stick. The only way to discover food tampering would be the stealing of the food.
Also there are perfectly legal modifications that are dickish but don't constitute tapering. If the ingredients are normally edible without adverse effects, it isn't tampering. You are allowed to dump a bottle of hot sauce into your coffee creamer. You can absolutely add salt instead of sugar to your homemade pie. You can bring a bottle of Gatorade that has been emptied and refilled with lemon juice.
You can't add laxatives or NYQUIL or other items to booby trap your food. Basically you're not allowed to effect someone's health with drugs or things that aren't food
Jesus Christ you're late to the party. Ever had the perfect thing to say to someone a day too late, after they already left? That's you. Read the comments, and get over yourself. Like Chandler without the laugh track.
The Muskrat wishes he were as badass and terrifying as Ramsay Bolton. Instead, he's just a petulant man-child who used Daddy's money to buy out others and take credit. Could've been seen as a Tony Stark type if he'd stayed out of the public eye, but now people know too much about him.
I don't understand why you got downvoted. Openly discussing exactly how you're going to trespass on government property and hog tie prominent politicians would raise a lot of eyebrows quickly. The multiple coordinated attacks, stashes of firearms and ammunition, the bombs that were placed, and the scheduled armed reinforcements that we now know about through the various court cases all happened in protected echo chambers and private chats, not on the open web
The most basic driving like long stretches of highway shouldn't be banned from using AI/automated driving. The fast paced inner city driving should be augmented but not fully automatic. Same goes for driving in inclement weather: augmented with hard limits on speed and automated braking for anything that could result in a crash
Edit: I meant this statement as referring to the technology in it's current consumer form (what is available to the public right at this moment). I fully expect that as the technology matures so will the percentage of incidents decline. We are likely to attain a largely driverless society one day in my lifetime