vlsdo

vlsdo t1_jcnxh7t wrote

I think it might be a bit like phase transitions in supercooled fluids, for example. You drop the temperature slow enough (in this particular case it's interest rates going up instead of temperature going down) that the water ends up in this very precarious equilibrium. The tiniest disturbance or impurity initiates a phase transition to ice, and that spreads across the entire liquid.

2

vlsdo t1_jayd5oz wrote

Nobody said anything about letting people off. But surely mentioning the motivation for their crime is relevant to the case and should be admitted in court. Otherwise why even have courts in the first place? Why not just dispatch justice Judge Dredd style, where the judge decides on his own the guilt and punishment for any action?

11

vlsdo t1_ja1mad3 wrote

Reply to comment by GreyNGroovy in Madlad by hozzam11

Nah, think about how much that tanker weighs full and what that means in terms of inertia, compared to a tiny motorcycle.

−20

vlsdo t1_ja1m1ae wrote

Reply to Madlad by hozzam11

Apart from not being able to see the road in front of you (and thus not able to avoid potholes or oil slicks), it's not that bad. Even if the truck hits the brakes hard, as long as you react quickly, you can stop much faster.

−20

vlsdo t1_j9m2pvk wrote

Yep. Although my understanding is that sometimes precedents do get set, because it's basically left at the judges' discretion whether to throw out the case or not. So it's not an automatic loss, just a likely one. I.e. it's worth trying to sue if you have the resources for it, not necessarily for yourself but for everyone else that comes after you.

4