So discussion of jury nullification is ok as a general topic. If someone mentions JN in the context of a crime that has not yet been committed then that’s not ok. If the crime has already been committed then that’s ok. If the crime is not violent in nature then we can discuss JN, and if we are just having a general conversation about JN that’s ok too.

Specifically, the concern is that talking about JN in the context of some hypothetical violent crime that has not yet been committed could be interpreted as advocating for violence.

This sounds pretty stupid so far, but my question is then, why wrap the ToS around specifically jury nullification? Why not just reiterate the ‘no advocating for violence’ policy.

If someone is advocating for violence, then adding on some point about jury nullification is irrelevant, they are already breaking the rule.

Is that what it takes to get two different desktop orientations using Linux?

I couldn’t resist

You could use Windows 11 from Microsoft, it can do both landscape and portrait.

It’s not autism, it’s the word ‘real’ that threw me off. But I don’t know that suspension of disbelief is any better.

Belief is irrelevant, all that matters is what can be tested and demonstrated.

Also I didn’t realize that shower thoughts required metaphors.

I suppose shower thoughts are generally just half baked ideas, and science is magic is quite half baked, so I think we are good.

Science requires that you do not simply start with a belief in something, quite the opposite in fact.

Sure, things that have been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt may become the foundation for further research, standing in the shoulders of giants and all, but if you are starting with a conclusion you are doing science wrong.

Magic has two common definitions: a trick which is designed to create the illusion that something supernatural has occurred, or an assertion that the supernatural does indeed exist with magic being the ‘evidence’.

As I am sure someone has said at some point, real magic is fake and fake magic is real.

Magic has nothing to do with science, even though someone once famously said that ‘any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.’

I have a pretty good burn on my thumb from a s’more I was making and now I know that it is in fact a 2nd degree burn.

Nice, never caught that