ProfessorPeregrine

joined 1 year ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
Is anyone else highly concerned with the SCOTUS ruling that the POTUS is immune from criminal liability? in c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
[–] ProfessorPeregrine@reddthat.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Did you even read Sotomayor' dissent? I did.

Is anyone else highly concerned with the SCOTUS ruling that the POTUS is immune from criminal liability? in c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
[–] ProfessorPeregrine@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago (4 children)

You are not considering the part where we can't use relevant testimony or documents to prove that what the President does is illegal in the first place. The President can just say whatever illegal things they did were official acts, and all the evidence that might prove otherwise is off-limits. It relies on other people in the administration to not follow the illegal order, but of course that is a weak protection and the President can fire them or do something illegal to them without consequence too.

On the Internet, what is a dead giveaway that someone is actually a kid? in c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
[–] ProfessorPeregrine@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago

The right to arm bears...

Fiction with recursive loop in c/books@lemmy.world
[–] ProfessorPeregrine@reddthat.com 1 points 2 months ago

Dhalgren by Samuel Delaney is exactly what you are looking for.

0
Ad firm plans to use people’s data in a maneuver to sink data privacy bill (www.politico.com)
 

Internal emails highlight how an advertising company can use its in-house resources to oppose public policy proposals.

One of the world’s largest advertising firms is crafting a campaign to thwart a California bill intended to enhance people’s control over the data that companies collect on them.

According to emails obtained by POLITICO, the Interpublic Group is coordinating an effort against a bill that would make it easier for people to request that data brokers — firms that collect and sell personal information — delete their dossiers.