• 0 Posts
  • 36 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 14th, 2025

help-circle
  • Publicly-funded media is great and all, but that’s because its bias is obvious and upfront, not because it is unbiased.

    And here I again wonder where your from to have such a mindset

    These people aren’t politicians…

    a “centrist” bias where multiple extremes are presented as being equally valid.

    You’ve not seen Dutch news. They don’t talk about hate speech as an equally valid option to our constitution the way that you’d expect with the current voting patterns and government composition if your statement were true. This uninformed opinion on what news can and must be, without having seen anything but english-cultural standards it sounds like, is what I mean…


  • I’d be curious what country/ies the downvoters are from. This is also how I see it but nobody online ever agrees. I suspect it’s a culture thing: most people online aren’t from the Netherlands and I can’t say if this type of news also exists abroad (Tagesschau seems okay but I haven’t looked at it in detail or talked with enough germans about it to say that with any confidence whatsoever, and I’ve got even less info on other countries)

    In NL we of course also have some loonies who call the general news channels leftist propaganda, but overall I don’t have the impression that places like NOS spin things one way or another. It’s also government-funded which, going by the banners google now shows on publicly-funded youtube channels, probably means American readers of this message think I’m completely brainwashed by my government? Who knows, but then I’d be curious to hear what types of things they ever represented counterfactually











  • Used to be 5km where I grew up in the Netherlands, nowadays living in Germany it’s 1km but uphill (don’t have those in NL!). In either case I don’t want to walk it and there’s not a chance I would if it’s 30 degrees out: that temperature means it’s probably in a month of the year where I burn within 10-20 minutes. I’d have to put on sunscreen for going to the store! They better have a sandy beach aisle







  • Why would a judge do that in the first place?

    Or if they do, what prevents either side from going to the next court to get it overturned? And the next court after that

    Idk if this is everywhere but the system I’m used to is this: the first two levels of court look at the case details in-depth, then there’s a third ‘last resort’ court for if you think there was a mistrial (this usually gets rejected), and they can send it back to the second court to re-do if something crazy happened that’s not in line with correct procedure as it sounds like it did in your example

    If we don’t trust a whole series of judges to pass judgment fairly, then I’m not sure we should have judges. Personally I trust these more to apply laws and case law than if we’d put elected politicians on the seat of judge, as basically happens with them choosing the sentence parameters (and as you see more and more often in my country; older judges also speak of higher and higher sentences being expected, makes me wonder if we’ll go full-circle to medieval practices eventually)


  • Regarding the first paragraph, the way they measure this is observing the incidence in different circumstances. Similar country but higher punishment? See if fewer people do the crime. Oversimplified.

    The research shows that the deterrence effect exists but, beyond a certain punishment level, it doesn’t do much anymore. What helps is primarily the odds of being caught at all (and then an appropriate punishment) and secondarily the time between violation and punishment (I didn’t realise this would matter for adults but apparently so)

    Going to jail for two years, four years, or six years, either way you lose your social life, the roof over your head (once you get out), your job, everything. It’s a doubling or tripling of the sentence but is it really that different? If I’m okay incurring 2y prison sentence… I’m probably not the target audience for this but I imagine such a person would also risk 6y if they want someone gone that badly and the odds of being caught are low enough

    Prevention is golden, as you say. But then rehabilitation is silver imo: if they lose everything, feel thrown out by society, what still drives them to do good afterwards? I’m sure many of them will simply want to better their lives but external motivation must also help

    So I see it like the people who I saw saying upthread that rehabilitation should be the goal: if they’re a danger to society, idk, whatcha gonna do but control that? Need to lock them up or similar (ankle thingy, idk). But if there’s a good chance they’ll get back on their feet and become taxpayers instead of prisoners or crime group members, then that’s what we should asap strive for