@kingrat@luis_in_brief it would be surprising to me if Quinn's ethical duties were specifically laid out in an engagement letter such that they could be enforced via contract.
Among many other things, they show that targeted privacy and security interventions that companies like Grindr, Whatsapp, and Signal rolled out got used by community members to protect themselves!
...I did really not need to do period tracker discourse again. The question remains: what is this data useful to prove? Unless how long the people were pregnant was otherwise unknown, I genuinely don't understand what period tracker data adds.
(The drug testing is actually legitimately a big deal.)
Okay, Fediverse academics. This spring, I'm teaching a class called "Gender and Technology, Gender as Technology" in Harvard's Women, Gender and Sexuality program.
If you teach a related class, I'd love your syllabus, and regardless, I'd love your recommendations for work that you love that would be good for undergrads.
I suspect that a significant part of the ire is about the doubling down on the cases in the April 25 filing. If they had come clean then, I feel like the judge might be more lenient.
Anyway, hearing is set for June 8th. Popcorn will be a must. Thanks for reading!
While you're here, check out the episode of Mystery AI Hype Theatre where I talk about why this is exactly the problem with generative AI hype in law. I think at about 30 minutes we talk about this problem. https://peertube.dair-institute.org/w/o6sb7f7RwapWBJd9VC61t4
On April 26, the day after the affidavit with he cases is filed, BB, the lawyer for the defendant, files a letter with questions. They literally can't find the cases anywhere else. The docket numbers don't line up. And the federal reporters (sort of like a DOI, for my non-lawyer readers) turn up a different case. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.30.0.pdf
Our dramatis personae - some lawyers in federal court, in a lawsuit over a personal injury on an airplane. Bartholomew Banino (BB) represents the airline.
Peter LoDuca (PL) and Steven Schwartz (SS) represent the injured person.
The case is in federal court, and they're arguing over whether it should be there or in state court. The airline has filed its motion to dismiss on Jan. 13. On Jan. 18, the plaintiff asks for more time to reply (#19). The judge gives it to them. (#20).
Bespoke bullshit and combat epistemology for the right causes. Non-oblique description: Tech lawyer at Harvard Cyberlaw Clinic. Director at the Initiative for a Representative First Amendment (IfRFA). Fan of the @torproject.I know too much about the Comstock Act. Friends and really good sandwiches make me happy.