If your goal is to act as a deterrent then harsher sentences do not work, at least according to research.

At this point, we think it is fair to say that we know of no reputable criminologist who has looked carefully at the overall body of research literature on “deterrence through sentencing” who believes that crime rates will be reduced, through deterrence, by raising the severity of sentences handed down in criminal courts.

https://www.crimsl.utoronto.ca/research-publications/faculty-publications/issues-related-harsh-sentences-and-mandatory-minimum

I mean… if something is illegal but the penalties are low or enforcement nonexistent then it’s more like a recommendation. Fines become a “cost of doing business”.

Is this fictional? I thought that this was actually true from the Social Union in WWII. Maybe in the battle of Stalingrad?

I think it’s an oversimplification to say that it was never enforced:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Islam

I didn’t think women were ever independent in Saudi Arabia, but were basically owned by their closest male relative?

EDIT:

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/03/08/saudi-arabia-law-enshrines-male-guardianship

I joined the Democratic party in 2016 just so that I could vote for Bernie in the primaries. Oh well.

I think that it’s not always just about harassment, but sometimes just wanting to be left alone?

I’m curious why you think Python is unsuitable. Both of my kids picked up Python pretty easily.

Meh. I lose power every 3 or 4 years on average. A UPS just doesn’t make sense for me. (When I lived in Virginia it was once a month on average, so for sure it made sense…)

I’m a great believer that the workers should own companies, but the same logic applies. If it is too big to fail, then no private ownership should be permitted, either capital or worker.

Indeed.

Iraq (no nukes) - armies flattened and US-installed government running the show.

North Korea (nukes) - stern finger-wagging by Democrats and angry rhetoric followed by hand jobs from Trump.

Pakistan (got nukes violating treaties) - serious frowning by US until we needed them for our pointless “war on terror” in Afghanistan, then all was forgiven and forgotten.

Iran (desperately seeking nukes) - agreed to stop their efforts for a hot minute until Trump rolled the deal back, showing that US is an unreliable partner and not to be trusted.

Overall the message is clear: get nukes as fast as you can and you’ll be safe to torture and oppress your people. The west in general and the US in particular doesn’t have any real efforts to stop you (although watch your opsec and don’t use Israeli USB sticks you find lying around…).

I mean, they have nine dashes of legitimacy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-dash_line

/s

Wow you’re right! TIL!

That’s the New Testament, meaning the Christian Bible.

The last election in Gaza was in 2006. 65% of the population in Gaza is 24 or younger (!!!) so the majority of Gaza residents literally could not have voted for anyone, including Hamas.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Palestine

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_State_of_Palestine

DuckDuckGo-ed

Yes, correct. You have to assume that each party will be tracking everything they can, otherwise it doesn’t make sense. So the age verifier will know that you have requested many authentication in a given time.

IIRC Osama bin Laden had three reasons for 9/11. One was non-Muslim soldiers in Saudi Arabia (he was salty because Kuwait asked the US for aid against Iraq and not the Taliban). The other was Israel. I don’t recall the third off the top of my head.

Yes, and it can be done in a way where the organization validating the age doesn’t know the purpose. They would still know that you requested an age validation and when, but that’s it. So the German government wouldn’t know whether it was for porn or for signing up for a youth hostel.

I’m not saying that I agree with the restrictions, but it is possible technically.

A system doesn’t have to be perfect to accomplish most of its goals. I mean, mass usage could be easily caught. Smaller scale abuse would be like giving your younger friend a beer - technically against the rules but not really a huge problem.