• neidu2@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    140
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I just want to remind everyone that Mark Bankston was one of the litigators during Alex Jones’ civil suit. And he won that case with a 1.5B$ judgement in favor of the Sandy Hook parents. I suggest everyone get a metric fuckton of popcorn if he brings a case against Musk.

          • Natanael@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            In Swedish we write something like 10 SEK or 10:- (the dash is a substitute when there’s no fraction of a Krona, otherwise it would be some like 10:50 (the latter part, “öre”, typically written in smaller letters) or 10,50 kr)

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        You don’t say dollars 1.5 billion, or pesos 1.5 billion, or yuan 1.5 billion.

        It actually makes more sense linguistically for it to follow than come before the amount.

        • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s funny that you listed pesos, because Spanish adds ¿ before questions, sort of like an opening quotation mark. So the reader knows it’s a question right at the beginning, instead of getting all the way to the end of the sentence. I’d argue that adding the currency symbol before the number informs the reader that the following number will be a currency amount. Potentially handy when you’re dealing with multiple kinds of numbers at the same time.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            I would argue that for that to make a lick of sense we would also be saying cows 100k, sheep 1.2m.

            So not handy at all when it’s the only outlier.

            • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Not sure why something has to extrapolate to every context you can think of in order to make a lick of sense, especially when talking about language and writing systems, which almost always have exceptions.

              • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Maybe that’s the problem, there should be a rhyme or reason so it avoids confusion.

                It’s weird people are advocating for random arbitrary rules instead of pushing for something cohesive and makes sense….

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          Except putting it in front let’s you understand what the number is that you’re reading before you read it. It’s not 1.5B people. It’s not 1.5B paper airplanes. You know it’s dollars being discussed as you read the number. For understanding, I’m reasonably confident it makes more sense to out it in front.

          • DrSteveBrule@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            If it makes more sense to put the unit before the number, then couldn’t one argue we should be writing people1.5B or airplanes1.5B? That way we know what it is before we read the number.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Sure. Some languages do that. It’s totally viable. Our language doesn’t work that way though so you won’t see it, outside of money.

      • ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because the reason why we did it the other way, with the $ in the front was because of checks since checks have gone out of fashion for nearly 20 years now. It makes sense to put the $ sign to the back since you say fifty dollars.

      • iterable@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because it is the proper way to do it. You don’t put cents symbol at start. Also in tech dollar sign at end means terminate or end. So pick either.

        • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          Also in tech dollar sign at end means terminate or end

          And one at the start is for $Variables, like how much money one has in their bank account.

          • iterable@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Still prefer what it means in assembly. As other languages update and change. But assembly stays the same.

    • seaweedsheep@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      I was coming here to post the same thing. He’s been a guest on the Knowledge Fight podcast a few times and is an absolute delight to listen to.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Fun fact: slander is spoken, libel is written.

    So Musk didn’t slander the innocent man, he made a libelous accusation against an innocent man.

    The good part? Legally, there’s absolutely no difference so I hope this poor guy’s client wipes the floor with Musk.

    • droans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s no legal distinction, it’s only defamation.

      Fun fact. At least through the early 1800s, the First Amendment did not protect you from criminal defamation no matter how truthful your words were.

      People v Croswell. A reporter, Croswell, discovered that Jefferson was paying a reporter to attack Adams and call Washington a traitor. He wrote an article on it.

      Jefferson pressured the NY AG to bring forward charges of defamation. Croswell argued in court that he could not be defaming Jefferson because he had proof the actions occurred. The Court ordered the jury to only base their opinions on whether or not the statements were published. They found him guilty.

      He appealed to the NY SC, this time with Hamilton representing him. Hamilton argued that the truth should always be an absolute defense against defamation. After all, it can’t be defamation if it’s factual. They ruled against him as well.

      He appealed to the SCOTUS. Hamilton presented the same arguments: what Croswell wrote were facts, he could prove they were facts, and defamation should only apply to lies. They were split 2-2 which upheld his sentence and de facto prevented truth from applying as a defense to defamation.

      While many states enacted laws providing truth as an absolute defense, it wasn’t until over a century later that the Constitutional opinion changed and allowed the defense.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s wild that the trumposphere’s pathological need to lie about everything has resulted in Slander going from a seldom used and rarely advisable civil charge to file, to a completely normal and reasonable mitigating action to take against one entire half of our political system.

  • loweffortname@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    8 months ago

    Tangential as well, Mark Bankston was one of the prosecuting attorneys in Alex Jones’ TX trial for his slander and libel ('cause he definitely did both) of the families of Sandy Hook victims. So on top of dunking on Musk, he’s also a good attorney? Seems like a pretty cool dude.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’ve met quite a few attorneys lately and it has really changed my opinion to something other than the American public default of “scum sucking lawyers”. In fact, the only attorney I’ve met that actually is a scum sucking piece of shit is a city manager. The other private attorneys are all awesome and do a fair bit of pro bono work.

      • loweffortname@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        In this particular context, I meant “successful and capable” when I said “good”. But I agree with your point generally: people are often less shitty than the stereotypes about them.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    8 months ago

    Tangental, but who needs deepfakes when a bit of old school Photoshop is misleading enough.