Shadow79

This is during the era before Spotify existed: during the time CD's were big along with the infancy of iTunes including the first iPods during the early 2000s (third party sites is where users uploaded mp3 files of songs, the full length available for free download) my cousins would often download entire albums.

The same crap generations before did with vinyls (with a wax mold, used to etch the soundtrack onto a wax copy but audio is shit) since buying an official copy from a record store isn't cheap for some people. I've heard "torrented" songs from cassettes (via a tape recorder) when the radio played a song, press record.

Music stores in the 90s would sell CDs of the latest hits from known artists of the time, a friend would buy a copy then rip the hell out of it by "pirating" the entire album onto a blank CD-R. Pirates did the same with concerts of famous singers, placing a tape recorder on the side adjacent of where the singer would perform.

I'm mainly talking about:

• Voting (at federal elections)
• Jury Duty (at a courtroom)

I know that in certain countries like Australia for example: citizens there actually have to vote otherwise they face a A$20 (12€) fine for literally not putting a vote. There was a case where a guy was sued and received a A$303 (182€) fine on top of that for disregarding the previous penalities. To me, that sounds stupid, voting shouldn't be "forced" down on citizens, if that's the right way to say it.

What about the scenario you receive a letter from the courts that you're selected as a juror? Let's say you got a letter saying that you've been chosen within a pool and assigned a number (like a draft lottery) whether the courts decide if you're "fit" enough to be a juror at a trial. The thing is, has this happened to you or anyone you know in your country? If so, what is it like receiving a summons?

For example back in 2020, in Minneapolis: George Floyd was killed by a white cop which sparked a worldwide protest regarding the BLM movement. That was a high profile one. However, before that: there are cases of "black kid gets shot for holding toy gun" or anything equivalent.

The scenario is this: the murder took place in 1950 (when the internet was non existent at all) and the perpetrator is alive but at 105 years old meaning he would've been around 29 when they killed someone but back then there's no CCTV or forensic evidence, so the case went cold.

Now, with social media: although limited, the only way is a live streamed confession from his death bed at a nursing home for a crime he's committed from a previous generation (76 years ago) admitting to their Gen Z grandchildren they killed an innocent person.

However, the evidence is expired as the body has decomposed long ago, all potential forensic clues are lost for eternity. The victim's family is deceased as this happened long ago, the only ones alive are the victim's grandchildren and descendants whom one can speak to.

The perpetrator is now someone's grandpa, however since this occurred before Gen Z were born (they can only read archived files from that era and work with that). Since there was no social media when the murder took place, you only have his confession video recorded today.

Even with him confessing that he murdered someone that long ago: should he still serve time in prison despite him now being a gray haired old man who looks like he could be your grandfather? Knowing that he'll pass away soon enough, is it even worth a prison sentence?

Legal chalenges are this: the driverless EV ran over someone but what happens is that corporations (often) bribe the judicial parties not charging them with a hit & run even though the victims families want justice for their vehicles killing pedestrians. The only “prevention” is harm reduction (investing into technology that’s able to detect human presence & sensors that activate in pedestian heavy areas stopping the vehicle).

Usually, when it’s a EV (with no human driver behind the wheel): is it still considered a criminal offense if a driverless EV ran over somebody as it just continues driving? In that case it’s mainly rideshare companies (i.e. Uber, Lyft, DiDi, etc) face criminal liability. Regardless, the companies who dispatch EV’s are sued when their vehicles run over somebody and the EV didn’t stop whilst doing so.

I've heard that the quality of KFC has diminished in the US (despite that being where it started) but doing well in other regions (like in Asia or Middle East) as the menu is adapted to their palate (food exclusives that don't exist in the USA), even the marketing campaigns do differ based on region.

Japan has their own portrayal of Colonel Sanders, they even have a buffet in some locations than being just a fast food joint. Have you been to a KFC overseas? If so, how different is their menu (regarding the food they sell) or regional pricing (are prices cheaper than in the US)?

I've been to a KFC in Thailand, and the quality is much better than having it in the United States (I wonder why?). They have a spicy chicken bowl for example, even for what you're getting: it's cheaper for more items (while ripped off in the USA for barely any food on the tray).

I mean, at least a baby should be breastfed (as in a balance between formula and breastmilk) while there are those who solely use formula as their main means of feeding the baby but later in life that child has issues with their immunity like being susceptible on illnesses that are typically not fatal for most people.

That’s because breastmilk has all the nutrients to strengthen immunity later in life for a child. There is a difference between breastmilk and powdered milk: since formula is composed of numerous chemicals (it’s made from compounds) while breastmilk is from the mother. Is breastmilk healthier than formula?