So often that you could say almost always. To make the joke even funnier, the feed is loaded with supplements and medications which are extremely disruptive to local biomes. There is nothing sustainable about most forms of fish farming, and the externalities are absurd.
The percentage of wild fish as a proportion of feed has been going down. Researchers and companies are aware of this problem. Duckweed and farmed insect formulated fish feed are being tested and produced right now. It's still not great that wild fishes not fit for human consumption and whose capture is contributing to overfishing are used to support fish farming.
I wished someone leaked current NSA projects like Snowden did back then... We would probably be very disappointed to see how little changed and how worst it is.
Apple and other large businesses get fined nowhere near what they have in assets.... no matter how bad their actions are. One billion is just crazy in this case...
Because Apple is not inflammatory in the court. You cannot go into a court and behave poorly, especially in the a case covering murdered children and expect a jury not to punish you to the full extent of their capabilities.
The ALAB podcast has a fun theory on the subject that while ostensibly your success in court is a matter of law and procedure, but the underlying test you've got to pass is "who's the asshole here?". Because the judge is going to decide which party is the asshole at some point, and part of the job of lawyers is to make sure it's not them and their clients.
On the other hand, Gawker network was completely obliterated for copyright infringement over the Hulk Hogan thing. That seems more disproportionate than this.
put it this way: I have never in my life heard of this man, and I doubt most people have either. Alex Jones has somewhere in the region of 100m viewers
Correct. That's the point. If free speech is based on how much you make or how many people listen to you then it's not free speech it's a system for extortion.
the person I'm talking to seems to think that an actor with a smaller audience and smaller capacity to cause damages should be punished equally to someone with a bigger audience and bigger capacity to cause damages. with great power comes great responsibility, and the law reflects this
whether you think courts generally award damages appropriately or not is beside the point
