Also wasn’t the kia stuff really easy to do and needed like no special tools?
KIA/Hyundai removed immobilizers from their US models because US regulations didn’t require them so they didn’t do it to save money.
Immobilizers check that the ignition was turned by the car’s key. Without it, anything that turned the ignition would start the car. The ignition also isn’t a keyhole. It’s just a rectangular hole. So any object that fit in that hole could start a KIA/Hyundai
Outlaw Country is a musical style and doesn’t actually relate to anything political. It’s a funny pun but not really an example of doublethink. Conservatives who like Rage Against the Machine however…
Unless you’re talking about the exit code of a computer program. Then coming up zero is a good thing.
What this means is that the White House still overestimates how much the military is in their pocket
When their enemy is civilians, they only need a few willing soldiers. China ordered several army units to use deadly force against protesters in Tiananmen Square. Several generals denied the order. Whole squads threw their wepons into the river and deserted. The Square was still covered in the blood of thousands. A few loyal soliders in tanks is all that’s needed. The generals and soldiers who denied the order were court maritaled.
Absolutely no one should respect a billionaire who fucks over others to slightly see her numbers go up. She didn’t need that money from cheating, but she did it anyways and fucked over everyone else.
To add some concrete numbers. Martha Stewart’s net worth is about $400,000,000 and the insider trading was to avoid losing $40,000 in stock value. In other words, she fucked people over to avoid losing 0.01% of her wealth.
because apparently the constitution is detailed enough to specify things like that.
It’s impossible for laws to include every single possible detail. Lawyers and judges exist to apply generic laws to specific cases. In this case, a lawyer argued that removing bike lanes creates a saftey issue and since the constitution says the government must protect “life and security of the person”, removing bike lanes goes against the constitution. The judge agreed with the argument.
the rules are clearly presented
I use Voyager. Community rules are hidden unless you specifically go to that community page, open the menu, and select “sidebar”. It’s incredibly easy to miss.
If a community only wants some people posting then a quick fix is to not allow just anyone to post to it.
I! AM! A SURGEON!
you could face roughly $100 in fines
hands court clerk $10 bill with an extra 0 drawn on it
The UK has multiple political parties and free democratic elections. Just because the current government passed a law you don’t agree with doesn’t mean the country is authoritarian.
It’s 40+ year olds calling you names.
That always makes it a bit worse. When I see ignorant comments on other sites, I usually tell myself it might be made by an edgy teenager. Can’t do that on Lemmy. That’s a grown adult praising North Korea…
Your account is on lemmy.world. You can see the other instances that lemmy.world federates with and which ones it blocks by going to https://lemmy.world/instances. You will be able to see any content posted to lemmy.world as well as any instances in the “linked instances” list. You won’t be able to see content from the “blocked instances” list. Most instances get blocked for being the source of spam or trolls.
You’d only need to make an account on another instance if you want to participate in communities that are on instances that lemmy.world blocks.
It was sarcasm. I really dislike that the only thing young men will protest about is saving video games.
What do those have to do with my video games?? I just wanna grill game!
Ah yes…that’s why I downloaded them too…
So far the only thing they haven’t been allowed to show is an image of the prophet Muhammad.
Definitely! That’s why I said it’s possible non-consenting stuff took place after the video ends. It’s entirely possible, but people don’t go to jail because it’s possible they committed a crime.
I also don’t believe that the Crown even argued that consent was revoked. I believe their argument was she was too drunk to consent so what she said in the video doesn’t matter. Again, possible, but they couldn’t prove that beyond a doubt.
I’m not a lawyer either, but reading the judge’s verdict, it sounds like the only evidence the prosecution had was the woman’s testimony. The defence had video recordings of the women verbally consenting. Kinda hard to prove beyond a doubt that the woman did not consent when it’s on video. Not that some non-consenting stuff didn’t happen when the video was turned off but again, a guilty verdict requires no doubt.
That’s what the CBC article is about. How sexual assault victims often don’t come forward since securing a conviction is incredibly difficult on testimony alone.
It’s a Markdown thing. End the line with two spaces.
First line (two spaces) ->
Second line
Reminder that being gay, a woman with opinions, or a slave who wanted freedom, all used to be mental illnesses as well. What is and isn’t a mental illness largely depends on social norms.