qyph · HackerTrans

Bit late, but since I don’t see any correct answers here - no a jury is not required here. The judge chose to convene an *advisory* jury here — likely to strengthen the factual findings of the court and maybe to save the court itself some time/effort.

qyph

2 mesi fadiscuss

Not a lawyer but generally it is as you say: "because the trials suck after a while cuz no one remembers anything". It's not fair to have a trial when the evidence is unreliable because of the flow of time.

Encouraging timely action is another factor. Generally people with real harms will file sooner than later, otherwise why wait?

It's also to grant peace of mind -- so people can stop worrying about potential litigation after some amount of time.

qyph

2 mesi fadiscuss

Are you a lawyer? IANAL but my understanding is it would be difficult for an appeal to succeed. Appeals courts only evaluate review matters of law, not of fact. Whether is has been more than the 3 year limit the statute of limitations places is a matter of fact I think. And the advisory jury makes this much harder to appeal. What do you think the grounds for appeal will be?

qyph

3 mesi fadiscuss

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2030202550259962338

qyph

9 mesi fadiscuss

I wonder if this could be used for doping in aerobic sports? Could this elevate overall oxygen intake in a healthy person?

My vague understanding is that oxygen intake is a big limiting factor in aerobic activities hence measurement of things like vo2max in sports science. ‘Blood doping’ has similar benefits though it’s also about having more blood period.

It seems unlikely that one could take a big enough suppository to help in a meaningful way in a marathon, but in a middle distance race lasting only a few minutes…

comments