That's a different question entirely
What would be some reasons why it wouldn't be breaking the law?
If the service is free you are the product. That's why I pay my girlfriend
If you don't use the cloud sync does your phone not have a system gallery app that's sufficient?
Netflix's House Of Cards was based on a British series which is based on a novel
I don't think battle bots is better, it's definitely more successful though
I could see valve moving to a telemetry/user feedback based system in the future - e.g 78% of users who ran this on a steam deck played for more than x hours and didn't crash
It's a podcast called Parenting Hell
That's the thing though, I know exactly what you mean but how do you write that down in a way that ensures that it's only used in those circumstances. The only alternative I can think of is leaving it up to the judges, which would get around the issue if the definition but would probably result in public pressure to use it in circumstances where someone is convicted of a crime which causes a lot of emotional response from the general public. I'm with you in that there are definitely cases where it's a waste of time to keep them alive, but I thing the implementation is impossible.
I think the problem is defining "100% certain" in law. People are only supposed to be found guilty when it's beyond all reasonable doubt that they did it. So how do you make a distinction between that and what would warrant the death penalty?
There's no way we would ever make the leap from tory to green, labour to green is barely conceivable either. Would be nice though.
The fairy from spyro