You didn't really answer the question though, how are you not nervous about your job security and how do you still see any value in software that you make with almost 0 effort?
I think in nyc I'd prefer to lock my $100 dumper of a bike on the street and be able to take the expensive component with me, if this thing is as detachable as it seems
It may just be that I’m comparing to the Bay Area, but I’ve never been that concerned about bike theft in NYC. If you lock your bike with a good lock and leave it somewhere with plenty of foot traffic, it’s quite unlikely to be stolen. Most people don’t even bother locking the wheels! Just a U-lock through the frame.
In the linked page it shows the battery as easily removable.
If the potential thief , realizes the battery has been removed, "I think" it would sharply reduce?? the attractiveness of ebike theft to the thief ?
We need marketing for working class laypeople, esp on the right, to understand what's happening on our web, our devices and on our streets and why they should care. I don't think I've seen this type of marketing for this demographic land in any meaningful way yet
Hm but the drugs are only evidence because they're illegal? So the phone owner only destroyed evidence if the phone contained something illegal, but innocent until proben guilty?
Evidence is simply a word to describe the artifacts that one wishes to use to support their case. There’s not some gate-kept process to “become evidence”.
After they get it when they are authorized to get it. You cannot point at random things and call them evidence. For instance, I can take a dump and flush it, despite law enforcement's assertion that my stool is evidence in some imaginary crime.
Yes, when they are authorized to make a drug bust. And that's assuming they catch him before he flushes, i.e., get the drugs. Otherwise, what are they going to say? He is a drug dealer because we heard the flush? Or let's say they are doing a missing person's search and hear the flush. What now? We came looking for a missing person, but heard the flush, so there were drugs whose evidence he destroyed?
Of course, tampering with evidence is — itself - a crime. And you need evidence to prove that crime.
But yeah, people tamper with evidence because they think they can get away with it. That doesn’t mean they always succeed in cleanly doing it without creating evidence of the tampering itself.
Yes, absolutely. Something can be evidence if the police haven’t even seen it at all.
For example: the police think you are running a fraud scheme. They knock on your door. You shred a bunch of paper. The police wanted to see what was on the paper. You have violated the US law on tampering with evidence.
The prosecutor can argue that you violated some laws, but they will have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt of that. And they will need a lot more than "I heard the shredder" to convict you. In an overall case, the shredding can be a piece of the puzzle. Shredding, standing alone, is not a crime, nor is shredding as a general matter tampering with evidence.
Yes, if someone wants to bring charges for evidence tampering, they will be required to collect additional evidence to successfully prosecute that crime. That's how it always works. They might collect fragments of the documents themselves, communications regarding the shredding, etc.
> It's still worth it to avoid becoming massively reliant on centralized services.
This isn't really good enough. Many of us need to get things done in a pinch and if our employers are already getting used to the idea of paying for enterprise subscriptions to cloud llm's then the local option needs to be good
reply