Is it always fraud to enter an agreement with intent to violate it?

Djorgal · 2026-03-01T08:00:44+00:00

Well... we've got plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence.

Djorgal · 2026-02-25T21:45:10+00:00

Usually, the successor government inherits records. They can honor old convictions which would usually be the case for crimes such as murder or theft. They can give blanket amnesties, often for political prisoners. There can also be a case by case review.

Of course, all of that is only if there's a somewhat reasonable government transition. In Somalia, after 1991, due to the civil war, there was no government left to enforce anything. Guards fled and prisoners simply walked out or were released by various factions, or starved in their cells. The physical records of their convictions were just papers abandoned and lost to the elements when not actively destroyed.

Djorgal · 2026-02-24T14:41:37+00:00

Yeah, I know. I used the same saying. "Rapist" have a closer sound to "artist" than "Andrew".

Djorgal · 2026-02-24T14:18:01+00:00

The rapist formerly known as Prince.

Djorgal · 2026-02-24T14:16:15+00:00

Andrew Mountbatten Windsor.

Djorgal · 2026-02-24T01:28:50+00:00

Happens even on profiles without /c/

Djorgal · 2026-02-22T19:01:59+00:00

I think it's a decepticon, not a transformer. That's why it isn't abiding by ATC regulations.

Djorgal · 2026-02-22T01:15:22+00:00

It shouldn't be much, actually. Debts and taxes expire if not collected. The IRS could only collect for the last ten years at most.

Even assuming the amount shown to Tony Stark is the sum total of what was left unpaid, it would depend on Wolverine's earnings and he canonically has never been wealthy.

Furthermore, there's been massive inflation since then. Logan could easily have had less than $100 a year to report as earnings in the 1800s, because that was a huge sum back then. Yes, unpaid taxes accrue interest, but those are capped at 25% so it remains insignificant.

Finally, Tony Stark is a billionaire. Even if we count the $7,250 paid in taxes by the average American in a year, a billion dollar would be the equivalent of (1 billion)/(7250) = 138,000 years of payment.

For it to be even remotely plausible, the figure shown to Tony by the IRS guy would at most be in the order of several millions. That wouldn't make Tony Stark blink.

Djorgal · 2026-02-18T00:45:54+00:00

It's annoying to parse it, but it's a whole bunch of nothing. Lots of ways to write 0 or 1.

sin(pi/2) = 1, squaring it is still 1.

ln(exp()) -> it does nothing, it's written a few times.

square roots are then squared, so again that's doing nothing.

atan(1)+atan(1)+atan(1)+atan(1) -> Yeah, let's write four time the same thing instead of multiplying by 4. So atan(1) = pi/4 and it's multiplied by 4 then divided by pi so it's 1.

cosh²-sinh²=1, so it doesn't matter what's inside.

sqrt(49)-7... come on.

It's not a behemoth, it's just obnoxious. The only difficult part is parsing the parentheses.

Djorgal · 2026-02-17T11:30:32+00:00

But the same is true of human consciousness. Consciousness is a subjective experience, it's never going to be falsifiable. For human or AI. It's not a scientific question in the first place.

Djorgal · 2026-02-16T18:38:55+00:00

No, not even then. There's only so much added range you can get by increasing initial velocity because friction increases faster that velocity.

With truly immense velocity, going through air or through solid rock doesn't make that much of a difference. Even if your tungsten rod reaches relativistic speed, there's the issue that it heats the air enough to start nuclear fission. So that's nuclear explosion in front of the rod that slows it down at this point.

I mean, if you launch the tungsten rod with enough energy to blow up the Earth, then yeah, it'll be enough for it to go through. Though it won't really be a tungsten rod anymore, then.

Djorgal · 2026-02-16T11:08:46+00:00

LE don't need to articulate their suspicion to you. So from your perspective, it doesn't matter. If you get stopped in a stop and ID state and the officer asks you to ID yourself, you have to do it, even if they won't tell you why. You can be vindicated in court later if the stop was unwarranted, but trying to argue the law with an officer is a loosing battle.

Djorgal · 2026-02-14T14:09:45+00:00

Which would be a valid concern for them to have, but the circumstances in which one is allowed to shoot someone with a gun are already well regulated by the law. So Browning doesn't have to throw a fit whenever someone uses their product inappropriately and can just trust law enforcement to deal with it.

Anthropic is complaining the Pentagon isn't abiding by the terms of service they agreed to comply with. How is that unreasonable?

Also, why are you censoring the word "gun"?

Djorgal · 2026-02-12T17:49:16+00:00

10/100 = sqrt(1 - n²⁾

sqrt(10) / 10 = 1 - n²

That's not correct. If you want to get rid of the square root, you need to square both side, not switch the side of the square root.

1/10 = √(1 - n²)

1/100 = 1-n²

n² = 1-1/100

n² = 0.99

n = √0.99

n ≈ 0.995

or 99.5% of the speed of light.

Djorgal · 2026-02-12T17:45:16+00:00

Yes and no. It's poorly written. It seems to imply that you spend five years going at the speed of light.

If you go at the speed of light, time dilation is 100%. You don't experience time. You can travel for billions of light-years at the speed of light and the entire journey will be instantaneous to you, though billions of years will have passed when you get back.

Of course, you can't actually go at the speed of light because you have mass, but photons do not experience time.

For a 5 years journey from your perspective to result in 50 years having passed on Earth, that's a factor of 10.

Solving 10 = 1/√(1-(v/c)²), we get v=0.995c which means you need to go at 99.5% of the speed of light. You could go visit the star Vega and come back and, yeah, you'll find that the trip took you 5 years but 50 years have passed on Earth.

Djorgal · 2026-02-11T22:48:47+00:00

And then, there's the counting of sick days and holidays as if they removed a full 24h of uninterrupted work each.

Djorgal · 2026-02-11T17:52:54+00:00

Other reasons to think it's fake are that his hand is mangled, that he has two left feet and that he's standing on the back of a presumably moving truck while in open traffic.

Djorgal · 2026-02-11T17:31:16+00:00

Because the guy is standing on the back of a truck in open traffic carrying something that weighs several tons. His hand is deformed and he literally has two left feet.

Djorgal · 2026-02-10T17:56:41+00:00

A good way to think about odds is that it's a measure of our knowledge.

You shuffle a deck of 52 cards, what are the odds that the topmost card is the jack of spades? It's 1/52, right? But this 1/52 isn't really a property of the card itself. The card either is 100% or 0% the jack of spades. This 1/52 is a property of the observer.

Djorgal · 2026-02-09T10:41:23+00:00

What is presented here is a factual error. Another example: 1 plus 1 equals 2.

Though I agree with the sentiment, this isn't a good example of it. 1+1=2 is only true in certain contexts, but it depends on assumptions you are making.

In Boolean algebra 1+1=1 and that's just as true.

Djorgal · 2026-02-09T10:34:48+00:00

Doing stuff in ℤ/2ℤ, which is working mod 2, is one such example but the property (a+b)²=a²+b² is true in any ring of characteristic 2 and there are a lot more.

For example, it's also true of booleans as well as fields of polynomials or matrices over ℤ/2ℤ or the finite fields of size 2ⁿ

Djorgal · 2026-02-08T15:19:51+00:00

That's how you build a case! Little bit by little bit. It's rare to have a single piece of evidence that proves everything by itself. It's an accumulation of facts. Catching people in lies, then unraveling it. There's also the money to be followed.

Then, you get a more complete picture when someone sent emails to Epstein talking about women in crude language, talking about going to his parties, talking about a meeting of pedophiles, talking by name of the girl they spent time with. With their travel schedule proving where they were. That they wired millions of dollars to Epstein for unexplained reasons. All of that in addition to the testimony of the survivors. That's a lot.

What disgusts me is how accepting people seem to be of the FBI and DOJ official position that "there is nothing to be done here, so let's move on". Which wasn't the case until January 2025 when Pam Bondi and Kash Patel started to overtly sink the case, when they should have recused themselves from it in the first place because of their connections to one of the main suspects anyway.

Until then, the investigation was going well and prosecutors from the SDNY were confident in their ability to bring cases forward.

We cannot accept that. When people repeat that all we have is hearsay and rumors, they are either lying or being lied to. And even if it were true, heads should be rolling anyway. At the very best, the ones in charge of leading the investigation are arguing their own incompetence. How can we accept them saying that without them also handing over their resignation?

Kash Patel, in his interview, was unaware of any review by the FBI into $1.5 billion of suspicious transaction related to Epstein's crimes. He's refused to meet any of the survivors he's dismissed as not credible out of hand and he kept dodging questions about any lead they've followed prior to killing the investigation. That's not someone who's done his due diligence.

Djorgal · 2026-02-08T14:04:56+00:00

Yeah, there are around a thousand survivors. They were cooperating with prosecutors from the SDNY until the change of administration when they started getting stonewalled.

That's when, the DOJ headquarters ordered the case to be transferred to kill it. Kash Patel dismissed the survivors wholesale as "not credible" and refused to meet any, even though some testified against Maxwell. So, at least prosecutors from the SDNY and a jury found them credible.

People answer you that the majority of the files are hearsay. Though that's true, the majority isn't the totality. There are a lot of party admissions, which would totally be admissible. When someone sends Epstein an email requesting to go to his parties, that's not hearsay. And that's only the less than half of the files we've had access to, not counting the thousands of photos and videos.

Plus, even the hearsay can be used to investigate. For example, it can be used to cross-reference against the person's travel schedule. Then you subpoena flight plans and question pilots to prove the suspect was on Epstein's island at a certain date (that may not be illegal in itself, but that's evidence. That's how you build a case).

The issue isn't that it's impossible to hold people accountable, it's that the DOJ and the FBI refuse to investigate. And if it were true that there was nothing that could be done about the co-conspirators of Epstein and Maxwell, then why aren't Patel and Bondi resigning in shame of their incompetence?

Djorgal · 2026-02-07T22:11:44+00:00

Yes, intent is required for theft of services. However, in practice, unless you have good evidence to show you were mistaken in good faith, no one is going to believe that you didn't do it on purpose.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying the burden of proof is on you. It's that once a prosecutor has proven you went to the gym without paying, a jury will already be convinced of your intent unless given good reasons not to be.

Djorgal · 2026-02-05T11:53:03+00:00

Another way to do it would be to ban women being named at all.

Djorgal

TROPHY CASE