bentley

What I gather from hearing her lawyer talk about it is that the prosecution’s case seemed (and was) weak, so the lawyer counseled her to wait a few months to see if the case would be dropped. Then when nothing happened, they filed a writ of replevin to get her car back. Immediately afterward the arrest warrant was issued and she had to surrender herself to the police.

Her lawyer did in fact negotiate her surrender into custody after the arrest warrant was issued, and there was a bail hearing, but the judge ruled against her, which is why she was held with no bond.

She (correctly) never spoke to the police, other than an initial denial when they seized her car, and was never Mirandized or interrogated. By the time they knocked on her door (reportedly at 3AM), her car had already been seized since she lived in an apartment complex with an outdoor parking lot. But she wasn’t arrested until months later.

She was never arraigned. The arrest was made on a no‐bond warrant claiming she was a danger to the community, since the incident being investigated was a hit‐and‐run resulting in three deaths. This necessitated a bond hearing to determine whether enough evidence existed to detain her pre‐trial. Her lawyer submitted forty photos of her completely undamaged vehicle, but the testimony of the experts was that her car showed signs of collision and subsequent coverup, and the judge ruled that the prosecution had met the necessary burden for detention. However, what her lawyer presented in the hearing led the prosecution to reinvestigate the collision with a team of state investigators instead of regional investigators, which led to reevaluation of the 911 calls and witnesses with a more accurate description of the car.

(Source: around 13:00 in this interview with her lawyer, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F_0iIaXGqA)

Its reach exceeds its grasp, but what a concept to reach for. Truly distilling seven years of a life into a single couple‐hour documentary is obviously impossible, let alone seven years of fourteen lives, yet in trying it gets partway there, and later episodes get even more interesting by acknowledging the limitations. A phenomenal series.

No, they came from a range of schools. In fact, the premise of the first documentary, before it became a series, was that where children end up in life can be predicted from the social class they started in. But the series outgrew that simplistic idea very quickly.

> I mean it also accurately depicts relative land mass sizes?

At the cost of distorting shapes and distances.

> compared to Mercator

The UN resolution compared Equal Earth to Mercator, a comparison Equal Earth easily wins in many circumstances. But the comparison should not be to Mercator, but to other widely used projections that do a better job of minimizing distortions generally, such as Winkel Tripel.

The UN resolution is explicit that Equal Earth was chosen specifically for “social justice”–type reasons.

> The word "equal" has been used in maths since centuries without any baggage at all. …

> I think it is actually you now that tries to impose this load onto the term, not the original name givers of the projection.

Certainly “equal” is a perfectly normal word used normally in all sorts of circumstances, including equal‐area map projections. That said, while I wouldn’t call it “baggage,” it’s impossible to separate the Equal Earth projection from the context in which it was created: the previous most notorious equal‐area projection, Gall–Peters, was heavily pushed (both when it was popularized in the 1970s and when it regained a surge of popularity in the 2010s/2020s) by promoting the idea that use of non‐equal‐area projections causes westerners to subconsciously internalize feelings of superiority over the poor oppressed Global South based on the distorted size of their home countries on a map. This idea is, shall we say, controversial and not universally accepted. But if you read the original UN resolution that was voted on, it’s clear that the UN representatives believe it (or say they believe it, anyway).

In that context, it seems absolutely clear that the name “Equal Earth” was a very intentional double entendre by the authors of the projection. I don’t fault the authors for coming up with such a catchy name, but I feel strongly it’s important to push back against the false idea that establishing use of equal‐area projections is some meaningful act of restorative social justice.

> I don't get why people say this / focus on Africa in this conversation.

Because the resolution specifically talks about the supposed injustice Mercator has perpetrated upon Africa over the centuries, and loudly trumpets that adopting Equal Earth is an act of reparation toward Africa.

“Noting the proclamation by the African Union of 2025 as the year of “Justice for Africans and people of African descent through reparations”, and decision Assembly/AU/Dec.942 (XXXIX), adopted by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union in February 2026 in Addis Ababa, endorsing the period 2026–2035 as a decade of action dedicated to justice for Africans and people of African descent through reparations,”

“Noting with satisfaction the adoption by the African Union of the Equal Earth cartographic projection, which more accurately represents the sizes of all continents, particularly Africa,”

“Convinced that correcting cartographic distortions of continental sizes constitutes an act of cognitive justice and memorial reparation, understood as promoting accurate geographical knowledge, as well as historical truth, education and awareness-raising, and promotes mutual understanding among peoples,”

“Affirms that cartographic distortions of continental sizes inherited from history have cognitive, educational, cultural, geopolitical and socioeconomic impacts and constitute historical biases, the correction of which will promote recognition, justice and development, particularly with regard to the African continent;”

“Recognizes that the Mercator projection, widely used around the world, particularly distorts, from the perspective of area representation, continental masses located far from the equator, resulting in a proportional shrinkage of Africa and other regions;”

https://docs.un.org/en/A/80/L.104

What was the UN’s default before?

Do you think the UN was using Mercator before this vote?

It’s silly that the UN chose to prioritize equal area over all other aspects of a map projection, but if we must use an equal‐area projection, I’m glad they chose this one. Gall–Peters is just hideous and it’s awful that it’s as widely adopted as it is. I hope Equal Earth replaces Gall–Peters everywhere.

GS50 would be a better choice.

> This is a very US-centric (and maybe Canada) thing though?

If what you say about “the rest of the world” using other messaging apps is true, then yeah, it probably is North America–centric. So what? Are you agreeing with the OP who didn’t see any point and advocated that GrapheneOS “totally ignore RCS”?

GrapheneOS already supports WhatsApp, WeChat, Telegram, Snapchat, and LINE. What’s wrong with improving OS support for another widely used alternative, that for all its faults is mostly better than still another widely used alternative (SMS/MMS)?

There’s a thread on the GrapheneOS forum titled “Using RCS with Google Messages on GrapheneOS” with 2,192 posts in it. Clearly there’s a lot of interest in using RCS on GrapheneOS!

I find, as a user primarily of free and open source software, it’s really the opposite: native FOSS apps have minimal tracking and analytics that defaults to off or is easily disabled, while most free and open source webapps are behind Cloudflare, blocking access to them until I turn off my VPN and disable the anti‐fingerprinting features in my browser.

It is indeed illegal to insult someone in Germany (Beleidigung). Actually, it’s illegal in quite a number of countries. Such a concept feels very archaic in the Anglosphere, like a remnant of honor culture, duels, etc. which we lost our taste for in the nineteenth century; and doubly so for the USA with its strong freedom of speech protections.

People have had their homes raided in Germany and electronics seized for calling politicians dicks on Twitter or Facebook.

“Berlin Wall”? You mean the Antifaschistischer Schutzwall.

Can you provide some examples?

Lack of evidence.

> You are conflating the work week with the week.

The weekend has always been innately tied to the work week specifically, both historically and in current usage.

> Dictionary.com

Has as the third listed definition: “any two-day period taken or given regularly as a weekly rest period from one's work.” And has a whole paragraph describing usage, including: “More strictly speaking, the weekend is thought to consist of Saturday and Sunday (often regardless of whether the calendar week is considered to begin on Sunday or Monday). In practical terms, the weekend is typically considered to be the period between the end of the workweek (or school week) and the beginning of a new one—which is why most people consider their weekend to start on Friday night, after work or school.”

> Merriam-Webster

“the end of the week; the period between the close of one work or school week and the start of the next”

> Cambridge

“Saturday and Sunday, or Friday evening until Sunday night; the part of the week in which many people living in the West do not go to work”

Every dictionary you cited agrees that the weekend is or can be defined in relation to the work week!

> If the end were the beginning that particular day would belong to two different weeks, but that's nonsense.

Millions of people living in cultures where Sunday is the first day of the week have no problem with the concept of a single weekend consisting of a Saturday from one week and a Sunday from the next. There’s no logical contradiction. “Monday as the beginning of the week is the only logically defensible position if you support the weekend” is a false statement, because a single weekend is not required to consist solely of days from the same week.

If you’re referring to Slavic languages, they’re counted from Sunday.

• Sunday: “no work”

• Monday: “[first] after Sunday”

• Tuesday: “second [after Sunday]”

• Wednesday: “middle”

• Thursday: “fourth [after Sunday]”

• Friday: “fifth [after Sunday]”

• Saturday: “sabbath”

Treating the work week as the start of the calendar week is a 20th century invention, as is the five‐day work week. Historically, Slavic calendars began on Sunday: https://www.russianhistorymuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2025...

> The end of the end of the week cannot be the beginning of the week.

Of course it can. The word “weekend” just refers to the block of free time starting at the end of the working week. It doesn’t have any direct relation to the way weekdays are laid out on a calendar. The word was invented in England at a time when the English still considered Sunday the first day of the week, a hundred years before ISO 8601 moved Monday to the start for commercial reasons (as described in Annex A).

When a public holiday falls on Monday, my friends and I call that weekend a “three‐day weekend” or a “long weekend,” even though the Monday falls well within what a strict ISO 8601er would consider the next week. What makes the weekend the weekend is when the weekend starts—the end of the work week—not when the weekend ends.

The reasoning behind that change was religious, and those who made the decision were Christians. That most Christians accept that change doesn’t imply they would accept a contradictory change made for secular reasons.

It is very common for Christians to religously rest on Sunday (e.g., Puritan Sabbatarians) and even, for some, on the Jewish Sabbath (seventh‐day Sabbatarians). There’s been plenty of theological debate on the subject. It’s absolutely not true that Christians, categorically, don’t consider themselves obligated to rest on the Sabbath. And those who treat Sunday specially as the Lord’s Day also keep it on a seven‐day cadence.

That’s a late 20th century invention, and not universally followed. Consider Unix time functions, which predate the ISO standard and follow what’s common practice in America even today, that Sunday is the first day of the week. Of course, Sunday was the first day of the week in Europe for over a thousand years and that practice has not fully been extinguished.

That would defy the point. To Jews and Christians, the cadence is literally inscribed in stone. To quote the Ten Commandments: “Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. … For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Exodus 20:9,11 (ESV)

“One of the five days was randomly assigned to each worker as their day of rest; the purpose of this system was to allow factories to operate every day, always having most of its workers present to maintain production.” I can see why that didn’t last long—part of the appeal of the weekend is being able to spend one’s time off with family and friends.

You’d have to convince a lot of religious people to give up the day of rest they’ve considered a religious obligation for thousands of years.

After reading Allan Asherman’s The Making of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan a few years ago, I embarked on a Wrath of Khan–themed read of books that either influenced the filmmakers or were referenced in the movie: The Prisoner of Zenda, Paradise Lost, A Tale of Two Cities, and the entire Horatio Hornblower series. Very enjoyable! I still have one left: Moby Dick.

> More than zero.

I’m not convinced it is more than zero. Do you know of a single case in the 21st century of a 12‐year‐old marrying an adult in the United States?

After all, you rhetorically mentioned America in the same breath as Afghanistan, where 15% of women were married below the age of 15. (page 11: https://www.unicef.org/afghanistan/media/2711/file/afg-repor...)