Except then the ordinary workers who did nothing wrong are made to suffer. Either they don’t get paid or they lose their jobs. IMHO you make the CEO personally liable. They have the power to change the company attitude and policy. They need to have their personal fortune hit as well as jail time.
I guess it’s “I don’t want to use fossil fuels but I don’t have an alternative. Give me an alternative! Don’t have one? Then I’ll keep using fossil fuels”
In fairness though not using fossil fuels it’s something of a luxury at present. EVs are more expensive that non EVs. Maybe this will change but slowly. Home solar is very expensive and still doesn’t get you self sufficient in most cases. Power companies need to make the grid renewable to make it accessible to the average person for home power.
So basically upset that the press do their job??
IMO the main reason for the press to exist is to hold people in power accountable for their actions. It doesn’t matter the lengths they go to to get the information or their motivation. There will always be press looking into politics on both sides of the spectrum and we as the public should be glad for it.
You should not excuse bad behaviour just because they are on your team. You should encourage the press to do their job as long as they don’t go too far into harassment, distortion of the truth or digging up irrelevant personal details about someone that affect noone outside that someone.
I really like the line “democracy does in darkness” because it is so true. Political figures who dislike the press generally have something to hide.
If counter with: “We’d be well served to remember the long and cherished tradition of settling criminal matters in the courts.”
Basically they want the right to commit crimes without consequences beyond the possibility of simply not being re-elected… But only for Republican politicians. Democrats should be treated differently.
Even then you can still have someone read the source and write a spec for a second programmer to write a library. The programmer never saw the source code but it was still useful. Still legal to do this. If someone dumped original source into the projector could be similarly checked for duplication without breaking the law.
1: “… and then we’ll be able to stop terrorist attacks. Simple”.
2: “ok but if you put a back door into encryption, won’t others be able to find it?"
1: "no we’ll be the only ones with the key. Great huh?“
2: “and you don’t think the key will be leaked or be hacked?”
1: “I said we’ll be the only ones with the key.”
2: “so what’s your plan to make sure the key stays secure”
1: “…”
2: “what’s your contingency plan if the key *is * hacked or leaked?”
1:“…”
1: "I SAID WE’LL BE THE ONLY ONES WITH THE KEY. "
2: “…”
1: “don’t you want to protect our children ??”
Because you are a kid and you don’t know but are pretending to be an adult. Nice try!