How do these hold up in backpacks / luggage bags? I'm worried they'd catch on stuff and tear pages more than other bookmarks (that can be pushed totally into the book).
And if the stakes are even higher, you can ultimately try to get me fired from this job. The exact social process for who can fire me is not as clear to me as I would like, but you can convince Eliezer to give head-moderatorship to someone else, or convince the board of Lightcone Infrastructure to replace me as CEO, if you really desperately want LessWrong to be different than it is.
I don't plan on doing this, but who is on the board of Lightcone Infrastructure? This doesn't seem to be on your website.
Like, I guess I have never heard the term "civil justice" used instead, and I don't know of a better term that clearly spans both
Just realized I never responded to this - I would just use the term "civil law" (as I did). For a term that covers both, "the legal system" perhaps, altho it's a bit too broad, and you're right that there's not a great option.
I can't comment on how things work in Germany, since they have a very different structure of law (that my guess is English-language terms are not well-designed for), but:
I agree one could maybe make some argument that it's not "criminal justice" until you "commit a crime by violating a civil court order"
This is what I think - in particular, the "criminal justice system" is the system that involves dealing with crimes, and the "civil law system" is the system that involves dealing with civil wrongs. You're correct that they relate, but there are enough distinctions (who brings cases, proof standards, typical punishments, source of the laws) that I think it makes sense to distinguish them. I further think that most people with enough context to know the difference between civil and criminal law would not guess that a similarly informed person would use the term "criminal justice system" to cover civil law.
Relevant evidence from the Wikipedia page on Criminal justice:
Criminal justice is the delivery of justice to those who have committed crimes[...]
The criminal justice system consists of three main parts:
- Law enforcement agencies, usually the police
- Courts and accompanying prosecution and defence lawyers
- Agencies for detaining and supervising offenders, such as prisons and probation agencies.
Civil law lacks parts 1 and 3.
I would not use the term "criminal justice" to describe civil law, since civil law deals with civil wrongs rather than crimes.
A classical example of microeconomics-informed reasoning about criminal justice is the following snippet of logic.
If someone can gain in-expectation dollars by committing some crime (which has negative externalities of dollars), with a probability of getting caught, then in order to successfully prevent people from committing the crime you need to make the cost of receiving the punishment () be greater than , i.e. .
Note that this is more centrally an example of micro-informed reasoning about the role of punitive damages in civil law, not criminal law, as illustrated by this classic article making basically this argument about punitive damages.
My understanding as a guy who... watches a bunch of YouTube videos and promises he's right:
But you're right that there are different change-of-status ceremonies that denote different kinds of entrance into intense official religious life.
Sure, but I bet that's because in fact people are usually attuned to the technical details. I imagine if you were really bad on the technical details, that would become a bigger bottleneck.
[Epistemic status: I have never really worked at a big company and Richard has. I have been a PhD student at UC Berkeley but I don't think that counts]
I wonder if "discourse in such a way that your interlocutor, if they decided to adopt good faith, could easily deal with you (or otherwise leave)" gets you the benefits of "assume good faith" without the drawbacks of asking you to sometimes assume false stuff?