People always come up with people-centric definitions. They need to be updated based on what are the fundamental characteristic of something that is alive.
The current, more standard definition, seems to be based on metabolism. I disagree and argue for reproduction and evolution.
That is a discussion that inflation resembles a tax. And in any case, how does that refute the idea that taxation in general is not a solution? That’s like saying soda taxes are bad so we shouldn’t have income taxes either.
> That is a discussion that inflation resembles a tax.
That's splitting hairs. Inflation is a choice, just like taxes, and, importantly, it's a regressive tax, which helps us understand why the elites love it so much. Inflation shouldn't be mentioned without pointing out that it's a regressive tax.
> And in any case, how does that refute the idea that taxation in general is not a solution?
It doesn't. Nobody claimed that either.
Taxation by itself isn't a solution, but I doubt there is a solution that doesn't involve taxation.
> You’re arguing that because inflation (which is not a tax) is kinda sorta like a tax, therefore taxation in general isn’t a solution?
I can't find anybody claiming anything of the sort.
> That’s like saying soda taxes are bad so we shouldn’t have income taxes either.
> Under a decade-old state law, California police are prohibited from sharing data from automated license plate readers with out-of-state and federal agencies. Attorney General Rob Bonta affirmed that fact in a 2023 notice to police.
You're right, and I apologize. It's just difficult sometimes to not react to easily disprovable falsehoods designed to manufacture a political point. I'll do better in the future.
Many thanks. Please remember the guidelines ask us to "assume good faith", so we need to avoid making assumptions like "easily disprovable falsehoods designed to manufacture a political point". If a comment breaks the guidelines. you can flag it or report it to us via email at hn@ycombinator.com. But if it's something you just think is incorrect or a line or reasoning you disagree with, please just reply with a correction or an opposing argument.
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
The law only prohibits the sharing of data if it's being used for immigration law enforcement. ICE doesn't just bust undocumented migrants, they also investigate all kinds of other crimes (like smuggled contraband), which is something the CHP would also presumably be involved with. It's perfectly legal to share data if it's not being used in an immigration case.
> Adam Schwartz, privacy litigation director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, confirmed that Senate Bill 34 of 2015 prohibits California police from sharing data from automated license plate readers with out-of-state and federal agencies, regardless of what they plan to do with the data or whether they’re working on a joint task force.
> “Just because Oakland has collected ALPR data for purposes of dealing with local crime doesn’t mean this is a ‘come one, come all’ buffet,” Schwartz said.
> The law only prohibits the sharing of data if it's being used for immigration law enforcement.
Citation? The law does not appear to be this narrow.
Per the article: "Under a decade-old state law, California police are prohibited from sharing data from automated license plate readers with out-of-state and federal agencies. Attorney General Rob Bonta affirmed that fact in a 2023 notice to police."
"Accordingly, SB 34 does not permit California LEAs to share ALPR information
with private entities or out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement
agencies."
The article refers to Senate Bill 34, but you’ve posted a link to a Wikipedia article for Senate bill 54. How could the article’s content and assertions be made clearer? Should it have spelled out the numerals?
I think that in a physical sense you can compare computation throughput unfairly against GPUs, by comparing 1 FLO against a minimum window of time in which a particular neuron spiking or not is significant, multiplied by the number of neurons.
Yes it was partly toung in cheek. These were good people who acted on principle.
However... I was young and it took me too long to see the hypocrisy of their thinking. They would happily feed the chickens but I would be the person who killed them... their angel of death. I wasn't even properly shown how to kill a chicken.
One day I was present when a pig was slaughtered a process which was overseen by a vet. That animal certainly knew it was going to die and did not like the idea. I was only 19, and was somewhat badly affected by the experience. For a while I even became a vegetarian but developed health issues as a result.
In the long run what I took from the idea was that meat has a cost. Life is not sacred but it is certainly precious. For that knowing it was worth it.
reply