Michael

Depends on the jurisdiction. In the UK, the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 states that "A person who without lawful excuse makes to another a th...

How would you change the law (e.g. the Texas one), to account for such situations as Justin Carter's?

Looks like there's one planned for October.

Not just a law, but part of the Constitution. Requires a referendum. Would the Irish approve?

There's only been one attempted prosecution since 1855, and it was thrown out at court. The related 2009 Defamation Act has never been used, and appar...

Looking at the law more closely, there's this: The punishment for Class B misdemeanors is up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000. Class A i...

The law in question just says "A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with int...

A fireman trying to enter a house which is on fire with people trapped inside but a neighbour swings a knife about and threatens to stab him in the fa...

But as for someone genuinely intending to "cause a reaction of any type to his threats by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emerg...

I addressed that before. If the article is correct, then it's unlikely that he would have been found guilty. Given the context, the prosecution likely...

This isn't about enforcing censorship laws. This is about whether or not you're willing to risk possible legal consequences. Could you end up like Jus...

Whether or not the material is actually offending also isn't really the point. You say that Justin Carter's comments weren't actual threats, and yet h...

You don't get to decide for yourself who has jurisdiction over you. If you use threatening language against an American then the Department of Justice...

Julian Assange faced extradition from Britain to Sweden, and in turn potentially to the U.S., despite being Australian (and now also Ecuadoran).

No, too much hassle.

This might not be true. According to the passive personality principle, if an American citizen is a victim of a U.S. crime committed by a foreigner on...

The site is obligated to operate under UK law. That might not mean you personally, but I presume at the very least it means that @"jamalrob" could be ...

Maybe, but that's beside the point. Protesting the law by potentially breaking it doesn't seem like a wise move.

@"Baden" The big problem is that all the moralizing and claims of injustice won't defend you against actually being arrested (although being outside t...

This sentence isn't 36 characters in length.

The most recent thing I can find is this opinion from the Court of Appeals on Jan 6 2017 denying habeas relief. Also checked the TDCJ offender search....

Which is what? Certainly not self-reference because, as you mention, there are self-referential sentences which don't pose a problem. Something else a...

No, because I always win these arguments, and so I clearly have the aptitude.

Sometimes I wish I'd had committed to my first (serious) career goal of being a lawyer.

Actually, you don't even need to intend to commit the act. You only need to intend to cause fear.

Only if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the threat was genuine, the particular law in this case being: 2 and 5 being the parts that seem...

That's misleading. He wouldn't be charged or found guilty of making a joke. He'd be charged and found guilty of making a credible threat. The best you...

Why? They're different sentences.

The T-schema defines T(x) as x. The liar paradox defines x as ¬T(x). These are contradictory definitions.

So T(x) ? x and x ? ¬T(x). Therefore, T(x) ? ¬T(x). Your definitions are contradictory.

What country are you in?

From what axioms and definitions can one derive "this sentence is false"? Can you set out the proof that concludes with the liar sentence? I don't und...

How so?

This issue isn't with self-reference but self-referential truth predication (without some further addition, like "this sentence is written in English ...

I don't credit anyone for the gain or blame anyone for the drop as I'm not an economist and so have no idea why it does what it does.

Trump's only (and always) responsible when the stock market goes up, didn't you know? When it goes down it's only (and always) because of the Democrat...

These are two different sentences: 1. This sentence is false 2. This sentence is neither true nor false That 1 is neither true nor false isn't that 1 ...

Let's say that to be true is to refer to a fact and to be false is to refer to a fiction. The liar sentence is then "this sentence refers to a fiction...

L: "this sentence is written in English" L': "L is true" L is not equivalent to L' L: "this sentence is false" L': "L is neither true nor false" L is ...

It's the Truman Show, but with the audience in the dark, too.

Kripke's solution.

We've been over this before. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/1047/liars-paradox-an-attempt-to-solve-it-/p1

I didn't watch it.

I have no idea how that addresses my point, which is that given our axioms and definitions, that Pi is irrational deductively follows. Unless you want...

The issue I have is that the maths we use to show that Pi is irrational is the same maths that a simulated person can use to show that Pi is irrationa...

The computer doesn't need to "store" a value of Pi. It just needs to follow a circle-drawing algorithm. Circles, like other shapes, drawn by computers...

My hand doesn't have any value for Pi. It just draws a circle.

You said this: So you're saying that if I were to draw a circle with a circumference of 100cm and a computer were to draw a circle with a circumferenc...

The point is that the computer doesn't need to store a value of Pi. It just needs to draw a circle. Just as a piece of paper doesn't need to store a v...

I'm pretty sure that computers can draw better circles than we can with pen and paper, which is presumably how we first calculated an estimated value ...