Up until your DNA is taken because you are a criminal, your DNA should not be on a criminal database, or be used for criminal identification.

That's the end of the matter.

The police could identify her from other evidence, but now that they used the DNA as a basis to get that other evidence, it is all tainted.

And DNA isn't the be-all and end-all.

9 is the only option viable for anything relating to intimate medical issues.

The fact that the doctor even asked for the photos to be sent digitally is a major issue here, although obviously they didn't consider it a problem at all.

You do no coerce anyone into taking intimate photos, for whatever reason, of children. And that's what that doctor required of the parent.

If the doctor provided a HIPAA compliant safe photo taking and upload application, that would be okay - the photo should never touch device storage even.

I imagine that normally, you would take the child to the doctor, and there would be no photos.

But during Covid, the surgeries started requiring photos for telephone consultations.

It's clear that the doctor/surgery should not have made the parent take such a photo, and as such are potentially (i.e., it would be easier for them to settle than risk the court case) liable for coercing an adult into taking such a photo.

It is Google's response that is worst - the police clearly saw immediately that there was no crime, but that has not fed back to Google, and Google refuse to reinstate someone's digital life for what has been determined to not be a crime. Their stupid trite and irrelevant comment is the icing on the cake.

The person he killed would not have been killed had Charter not hired him, skipped standard hiring checks, turned a blind eye to prior complaints about him, not had lax security allowing him to impersonate Charter on his day off, and so on.

He is in prison, that's his punishment.

This was a lawsuit regarding Charter's role in giving him access to people's homes without any checks and not dealing with complaints about him - pretty basic negligence.

The awarded amount is so high because Charter is a massive company.

What you say would be fine if that local office was not following head office guidelines that would have prevented what happened in this situation.

As the rot extended to the head, so do the repercussions.

That's the same as you earning $100,000 in the last year, and sticking $10,000 into a savings account.
You'd find a $13k fine by a court a pain, but affordable, and still good value considering someone died as a result of your lax checks.

It is great to see the fine given actually scale to the size of the company.

They absolutely should not be able to 'pay off' their terrible behaviour.

They're not that wide, perhaps a Glasgow or Budapest style metro subway could be fitted.

But the stations and curves are designed for cars, not trains.

So I feel this idea is not viable either.

What they could do eventually to fix the broken design is put some rails down in the tunnels, and run single carriage higher-capacity pods in place of the cars. It might be multi-stop, like a lift, as a result, but probably adequate because the on/off boarding would be far faster with the pods with walk-on, walk-off. Nobody cares about car-level comfort for a sub 10 minute trip, as long as there's some sort of seat and it's clean.

Light rail can run with ~90s frequency, and the capacity is many times that of a car. Also they are walk-on, walk-off, which is far faster than getting into a car. The passenger onboarding process is critical to not having delays and frustrated passengers. Sure, they are going to try avoiding this by having little branches into each hotel basement keeping the main line a moving 'token ring' style system, but in the end the cost of infrastructure is going to expand massively.

But it's still 4 people every 30s per slot on the ring, until one car breaks down due to not being much more special than a consumer car and then it's none.

I don't even think light rail is retrofittable - there are no stations, just branches. I can only see the transport pods getting a bit larger, with more rapid onboarding.

The A72 is a very cheap core to licence. The cutting edge cores are not.

It was a surprise the Pi 4 actually got A72s in my opinion, but they saved on silicon area with the shrink and kept a tiny GPU.

Pi 5 will likely get A76s, which appears to be the next 'cheap ARM big core'.

Remember the cost of the SoC has to be under ~$10 for the Pi. You can't put 4 $1 CPU cores on it.

This will cost more than a RPi, especially with a breakout board being required.

However the CPU configuration is similar to what I am hoping for the RPi5, perhaps even faster, being 8nm (I'm expecting 12nm for the next RPi SoC).

The issue is that a lot of the RPi value comes from the ecosystem around it, not the hardware itself. If this board doesn't have all the features working on an out-of-the-box Linux kernel, or at least a distro with recent kernel and drivers, then it's not going to be that great.

Huh, all the recorded changes (e.g., sea level) are tracking the higher end of previous IPCC estimates. Half of the reason for the conservative estimates was precisely to not even risk 'crying wolf' about the issue.

Climate change has always been about the effect in 2100 and beyond, not today. It's rarer that predictions in the short term occur, but with more data they can be made more reliably now. Once in a century floods will be once in a decade, between 2050-2100, for example.

Pre 1990 it was 1.1mm per year. Recently it's been 3.2mm/y, up to 3.6mm/y now. The rate of change has been tracking the higher end of IPCC predictions.

So there's your tripling in 30 years, in recent history.

If the rate stopped rising, 3.6mm/y * 30 is only 11cm, which is not a problem. But it's not. Thermal expansion is the main driver (around 70%) and that will continue to happen for a long long time (there's a lot of heat in the atmosphere now still to be absorbed), compounded by higher temperatures due to climate change.

So in many ways, it is like compound interest on savings.

Well the sea level rise before 1990 was 1.1mm a year, in 2000 it was 3.2mm a year, and around 3.4mm a year in 2016. The data here is pretty reliable, and the increase in rate is visible.

The majority of sea level rise is thermal expansion (~70%), not additional meltwater adding to the volume (~30%).

To get 30cm would require a big increase in rate from now, or a melting event that significantly increases the meltwater proportion (and these events are hard to predict accurately). But you'll still lose your wager just based on the current increase, without either of these.

Using DNA alone, infinity, as the rape victim's DNA should not be on a database. That's the entire point. There's no 'seriousness quotient' to allow this.

Using other mechanisms, CCTV, eyewitnesses, actually investigating - the police can find criminals without DNA database searches, and then take a swab and match the DNA to the crime scenes.

Any criminal worth their salt will take some hair from a barbershop floor with them to sprinkle around anyway when they commit crimes.