The sentences are very different (7-10 years to 42 years), but to be fair, the crimes are also different.
1 time might be a "mistake", 2 times is a trend. Also, I don't know the specifics. I know children are not legally able to consent to sex with an adult, but I would punish harder in the case that the child doesn't even "consent" to it. Maybe the boy "consented" and the girl didn't. Also, I assume the "young woman" is an adult, so she definitely didn't consent.
Why would I want anarchism if it would not change this?
Then not only do I have to worry about the largest state, which may or may not want to kill me and is thousands of kilometers away. But I would also have to worry about my neighbors, which I have many at less than 100m away from me. And I would also have to worry about the largest state even more because I wouldn't be in a state myself that could defend me against the largest one.
"My system is not worse than the current one because your concerns about my system exist in the current one" is not a valid argument when "concerns about my system" is way larger than the ones in the current one.
Yes it is. In Spanish it is "No a la guerra". I found it weird that they translated the quote but didn't just change 4 for 3.
Minor nitpick. But it seems the actual article has been edited and no longer says "four words" for obvious reasons. Could update the summary too.
Nono. You see, Israel wanted to bomb Iran, but the US knew that if that were to happen, Iran would attack the US. Therefore someone should stop this situation! So they bombed Iran harder to avoid the retaliation from Israel's planned attack. What else could they have done?
/s
Who decides who looks like children though? Sounds like an unenforceable law
Just wait until PP or vox gains power. Which will probably happen since now the cia+mossad will work together to get them into power.
Those are probably assets of a micronation with 0% corporate tax. Idk why Americans should be upset.
You went through my comment history and quoted me, to just not read the whole quote.
Here, I'll help you:
It's fine if someone already answered with what you were going to answer. You can just upvote that guy and move on.
As I said, there are already 3 top comments explaining to you why you're being downvoted. I don't need to explain myself when I mostly agree with them, I just upvote them.
If everyone had to explain every downvote, we would have hundreds of comments on each post, and most of them would say the same thing.
There are at least 3 comments with well laid arguments (hint, they have way more up votes than the post). You have answered to none of them.
I never used them. AI is shit, and they're still at the "burning money" stage, wait 2-3 years and they'll enter the enshittification stage, where it will be even worse.
Plenty of times I've seen coworkers stuck at the same problem for hours. Until they come and ask for help and I give them a simple answer for their simple problem. Every time it is "well, I asked the AI and it said this thing and it didn't work, so I asked it to fix it and it didn't either, a bunch of times.". I just tell them "you're surrounded by a lot of people here that know a lot about programming, why don't you ask any of them?".
For real, why use an AI at work where you are surrounded by people that can actually answer your question? It just makes no sense. Leave AI to those that can't pay an artist for their game. Or to those that have a "game design idea that will change the world" but won't pay a programmer even if they can't program themselves.
Shocking. A generation that was told since childhood that gender roles are so important that they actually change your gender gives importance to gender roles. Absolutely no one could see it coming.