Except they had evidence, it just happened to be linked to the perpetrator incorrectly.

Given the light of this evidence would lead to instant dismissal, it would only be right to also jail the defence lawyer and the victim in your scenario (though maybe with a slightly reduced sentence)

No they had plenty of evidence he was the guy. He didn't even deny having that username. Not having a murder weapon doesn't allow murderers to get off free either.

Evidentially they presented enough evidence to get a conviction. There was nothing wrong with the judgement, just a problem with the evidence.

Maybe there should be consequences for the victim and his defence who also didn't identify the issue with the evidence?

No. You're making assumptions based on one line. He wasn't prosecuted based on data on his devices, so not finding evidence on those devices is irrelevant. Cases like this build upon amassed evidence from a variety of sources. A typo wasn't noticed, but the evidence gathered on the account information alone were clearly enough to convict.

If you shoot someone in the street, in front of witnesses, and a camera image, etc etc etc, but get rid of the gun to the point where no one is able to find it, don't expect to go free either. (And yes innocent people have been convicted on image proof, and eye witness testimony too, these mistakes do happen)

Given he himself and his own legal team failed to notice the error, I think you're posting emotionally and not logically. The defence in this case would have been trivial had it actually been noticed by *ANYONE*.

Sentence for what crime? One crime postulated abusing kids, the other was a typographical mistake that not only the prosecution, but ALSO THE DEFENCE missed. That's the bar we just set. Maybe we should put the guy back in jail along with the prosecution if you want to make not noticing typographical errors a crime?

It does not. Courts make mistakes across all grades of crimes from the mundane to the most severe. Innocent people have been executed. Innocent people have been issued parking tickets. Guilty people have gotten away with everything from murder to j-walking.

Not being opposed to a punishment which cannot be rescinded is morally bankrupt and has FUCK ALL TO DO WITH POLITICS.

Apple has already bought 4 AI focused companies for many billions of dollars. The most recent of which was Q.AI, the most ignored of which was Curious AI which resulted in Core ML framework in iOS that the industry collectively yawned at, and the most embarrassing of which was Voysis, possibly one of the first and most promising AI voice assistant companies, only for 6 years later Siri to be the most useless assistant to the point where investors are suing Apple for promising they would deliver on AI.

Apple tried to be an early adopter and trend setter here, and failed miserably.

That is bullshit. They've had a few trend setting successes, but they are also very much a follower for most of the rest of the market.

You're attempting to re-write history. Apple didn't "not follow" the AI trend. They *failed* at it. They promised it. They promised it to users, they promised it to investors. There are multiple court cases underway right now about them failing to deliver AI enabled hardware. They had a whole lot in the AI pipeline, from AI Siri, to AI wearable pins, to even AI glasses. Very much throwing AI in and following anything trendy.

Their big problem is they've always taken their time to try and produce admittedly one of the better implementations on the market. They run the risk of their usual development cycle missing this boat.

The cratering of RAM prices has nothing to do with people thinking they can remove a chip from an NVIDIA V100 card and put it in their motherboard, and everything to do with the fact that supply contracts are locked in for years in advance which will almost certainly be cancelled leaving market oversupply in the production sector.

Given that TFA made no such comparison and the study being discussed explicitly looked at different altitudes independently I think maybe you should read more rather than stop reading. You clearly need the practice.

Preventing the rise of Germany's Nazi Party is precisely why free speech is not absolute in virtually all of Europe. Read a fucking book halfwit.

If you frame it like that then it's clear you don't know why they were granted a search warrant in the first place. The only place reporting it as an online insult is the Daily Telegraph. The reality is that was one example of a singe exhibit in a complex warrant that involved among other things the use of actual far right symbology.

And yes I think it's perfectly alright for the police to come, knock on a door, and ask a few questions before dropping a case. That is literally a textbook example of how a functioning society and police investigation should happen.

What alternative do you propose? Police never investigate anything? Police kick down the door and shoot everyone in sight? Or laws enacted by a democratically elected government to be completely ignorable?

Please tell me what you think would be better, and if your answer is that the law shouldn't exist, don't bother telling us here, go tell it to the voting booth, since that's how democracy works.

Of course there have been police cases. But calling them "raids" is completely dishonest, as is framing the discussion purely about some relevant satire post rather than what is often a larger pattern sometimes worth investigating.

The "pattern" is called police doing their work, and in virtually all cases no one being charged with anything.

Then do more than a textsearch. Search engines are a thing. This entire story has a whole 15 page wikipedia entry with some 32 citations.

Satire is very much allowed. The Germans have done a great job of it themselves. If you want to see the German equivalent of Borat go watch "Er ist wieder da" (Look who's back). It's a German produced satire of what it would be like if Hitler time travelled to today.