I don't think a stereotype can ever really be constructive, even if "positive" since it limits the space for people that don't fit it.
A clear example of this would be that Asian people are good at Maths. Not true, and does a lot of harm to the many Asians who are not exceptionally good at Maths. (For instance that Asian University candidates are often penalised for only having average Maths grades, or just the bullying and social pressure of feeling you're not living up to a birthright.)
I accidentally beat the Mantis Triplets far earlier than I needed to because I couldn't find the path into the ruined capital city I was meant to take.
Long route back to fighting the optional boss to enter a far too difficult zone for me. Only after beating them and discovering that that was not where I was meant to go did I backtrack and find the turning I'd missed to actually progress. (I rather liked Hollow Knight despite this, but you don't and that's fine. I just think it would be funny (, and a sign of poor map design if you made the same map reading error I did).)
I'm fairly sure that at this point pirating has been shown to lead to increased sales, even of small scale productions.
Also, no one said that people can't keep the rights for a while, just that if you don't let people access those things you don't get to prosecute them for making the art available.
Vietnam, the country allied with the US against Chinese expansion?
I wouldn't want to be in a South China Sea nation when things get hotter.
UK has outsourced prisons to for profit companies, too.
As a country we spend too much time looking at the US and deciding we want to be more like that. It's infuriating.
You're right, the bribery talk is the logical extrapolation of the ruling that is laid out in the dissenting opinion. (and also in a minor dissent from one of the 6 judges who made the ruling.)
Edit: and unfortunately I live in a place where the US supreme Court website does not allow access so I can't read the conveniently shared link. I have tried to find it online and read as much of it as I can. I would like to read the full thing, maybe you could share the image on a Lemmy instance and link to that? You could do the same with the dissenting opinion, too, for completion's sake.
What I can find from the reports and snippets I can find is that the ruling that Roberts wrote talks about not only immunity for official acts, but not using official acts as evidence for prosecuting a US president. This then becomes the talk of bribery as making an appointment is very much an official act, and where that one conservative justice breaks line with the other five, as she maintains that official acts should be eligible as evidence when prosecuting unofficial acts.
Doesn't the ruling say that if the president takes a bribe to give someone an official appointment, that the person was appointed is not admissable as evidence in court?
That's both new, and stupid. But what Roberts wrote in the majority ruling.
Edit: It also states that Trump putting pressure on Pence to change the election results may or may not be an official act, and whether it can be prosecuted is unclear (and whether it can be discussed in law needs an investigation and a ruling, rather than deciding it in a court of law).
Edit II: Romer below said it all far better than me. https://lemmy.autism.place/comment/224475
"The Democrats have fielded the only candidate who could lose against Trump, and the Republicans have the only candidate who could lose to Biden."
Enjoy the 4 specials, I've got the last of the Ncuti Gatwa series to go.
He is back now, and it's fine.
Much better than Chibnall since RTD actually understands Who.
That's a list of Eurovision hits right there.
Moldova had a good run for a few years. Don't think they've made the finals over the last few though.
I rate both JohntheDuncan and Andrewism highly as not overly wanky Left politics channels.
(No, you don't need to pad the video out with 50 minutes of intercut "plot line" where you fight with a mirror world version of you, who's wrecking havok on the lives of your guest stars who can only be sent back by a tangentially related metaphor to the main topic of the video.)