"Always give "both sides" equal treatment and consideration no matter what the sides actually are."

It can't even do that correctly. Looking in the list of rights, it has some things called rights and others called policies - "Abortion Rights" vs "Gun Policy". Either call them both policies or call them both rights.

"An AI pipeline breaks each one down into plain-language summaries and shows who it impacts by demographic group."

What controls are in place for bias in this step? Most existing plaintext law coverage has bias in it, so how was it trained to convert the law to plaintext without that biased material?

Edit: Also, where it says it hurts or helps a specific issue, it would be helpful to understand why it was rated that way, especially if there was nothing in it's summary specifically stated about that issue.

Is it still in business? My very limited experience makes it seem like the places that mix share ownership with discounts don't survive.

They had ups and downs of course. The tourism industry can turn sour during a downturn as you might understand. But they weathered for 40 or so years until a bear killed a handler in the summer of 2017 at their wildlife park. This effectively killed the entire park business and forced a major reconstruction. A former major bank CEO offered to buy it wholesale and took it fully private via majority buy-out.

We started with GitHub Copilot, but it was largely replaced by Claude Code. The major benefit was that Claude could execute scripts and Copilot could not. That might have just been the way my organization configured it though.

Claude really utilizes tools or develops its own tools well. If OpenAI could get their sandbox situation ironed out... I could switch.

The paternity issue should be easy to overcome with modern technology. There's really no reason the state shouldn't require a paternity test to ensure the accuracy of the state issued birth certificate.

Some states go the other way - if you (as the father, maybe the mother but that's pretty easy to verify I hear) sign the birth certificate you are the father (Maury) for all legal purposes even if you're not - wether knowingly or not.

Yes, most states see it that way. But you could still make them the legal father through adoption (like with step parents) without providing inaccurate information on the birth certificate.

isn't that fraud?

The state doesn't care about fraud when it benefits the state (a man paying support vs the state paying benefits).

If it's fraud it's on the part of the mother (usually) - the state just wants a clean database to avoid complications; it doesn't actually care about truth.

It's similar to how the justice system doesn't really care about justice, it cares about detailed and systematic applications of the laws, which sometimes coincides.

"the state just wants a clean database to avoid complications; it doesn't actually care about truth."

What it actually cares about is not having to pay CHIP, etc. Having a man who isn't the biological father paying for stuff means the state doesn't have to pay for services. They don't care at all beyond that.

Most of these laws are ancient, from the era of inheritances and such - long before CHIP.

That history doesn't explain their current motives.

"as the courts are flagrantly biased toward women in these matters"

As in most matters. There are many studies about lesser sentences for women vs men who commit the same crimes.

Do you have evidence to back up the implict claim that those two are not strongly correlated?

Of course they're correlated but it's obvious to anyone who has had a long term relationship unravel that the causes are always complicated and multi-layered.

I (man) was the one who pulled the trigger on my divorce but that followed years of conflict and withdrawing from both sides and ultimately you can point to specific milestones (who killed the bedroom, who opened a separate bank account first, who stepped out first, who wouldn't come back to counselling) but it's actually better for healing not to be preoccupied with the blame game and instead focus on where one's own growth opportunities are.

"That's likely no big deal for Windows, which already requires you to enter your date of birth during the Microsoft Account setup procedure."

Not exactly true as you can do local account installs.

I wonder if you can get around the law by just having people build their own image from the source.

Vague laws are not required for selective enforcement. You can have strictly defined laws result in selective enforcement through law enforcement and prosecutorial discretion.

"All laws are vague"

There are degrees of vagueness, but laws generally attempt to avoid being vague with many definitions and strict construction. If a law is sufficiently vague it may be invalidated, or it is at least required to be interpreted to the benefit of the defendant under lenity.

That’s where selective enforcement comes in.

Make it unambiguous that 100% of people are criminals, and all you have to do is control the prosecutor’s office.

This law seems to be in that category.