But arresting and then having it cleared costs time and energy but adds nothing to society.

Look, I’m not advocating that they should have more freedom. I am saying there is already freedom because the world is not as clear as the law states, so police should be properly trained to be aware of their role.

My general point I think follows from your last paragraph, their role to protect the people comes before following the letter of the law, but they should always try to uphold the intent.

If the law says by possessing marijuana you are a dealer, but a cop finds someone with a small amount, it’s likely for recreation and their possession brings no harm to society or others (what the law wants to prevent). Arresting them may be following the letter of the law, but not the intent (to stop distribution).

Another invented situation: cop pulls over someone driving erratically and too fast, then the driver is a woman who escaped being raped by her date. She was driving erratically because she was emotionally and physically distraught. Is giving her a ticket helping anyone? The cop could say “okay, take it easy and slow while I follow you to make sure you’re out of danger and feel safe getting home”.

Sorry I can’t be more specific, I haven’t gotten years of training on such situations.

Which part? Understanding how they should follow the law in the real world and the responsibility that brings? They could be wrong or right in any situation (they aren’t lawyers and the world doesn’t conform to laws) and they should be aware of that.

Anyone got suggestions for instances to join for a new account?

Not on a whim, based on training on the law and its intent. Not that they get that training like that in the USA, AFAIK.

Police should also be accountable to laws and weigh that responsibility against each situation.

Sure, but the world is too grey to always follow laws exactly as written. If someone is sitting on a beach smoking some weed, they are not going to damage society or others by doing so. Arresting them for drugs that only harm themselves, costs society money for the arrest and provide no benefit to anyone.

Unless our laws are perfect (likely impossible) there will always need to be some leeway for interpretation of the spirit of the law. Cops should not blindly follow laws but understand their intent to prevent harm towards others.

Also, laws are slow to change and don’t often stay up to date with societal changes.

Have you heard about looking under the stem to check ripeness?

Yeah I can imagine it would take a lot of energy to both do your job well and constantly justify its existence to your peers.

I get the sense that is changing… People are worried that many jobs will soon be automated and see that the trades will be safe from that for quite some time.

Damn, that’s tough. Working in a new field must be hard enough, but it must be even tougher when no one understands why it exists or values it’s existence.

If you don’t mind, what was your “dream job”? It seems incredible that you could study for 8 years in a topic and get no working experience that would indicate that you’re going to hate it when you finish.

I never had a clear idea of a specific dream job, just a field. Now I have such a job I’d say 60-80% is interesting stuff I might do as a hobby (if not doing it at work), with the rest being bureaucratic bullshit most jobs involve.
It’s not super high paying considering the field, but it is often satisfying.

tl;dw
HDR is broken (or all colour grading)

Isn’t that a Windows 11 thing?

I use powertoys and have the mouse highlighting tool enable when I shake the cursor back and forth.

Before this tool I also moved it around so I could see it, now it becomes highlighted when I do.

I think someone will make an app that overrides the IMU measurements so the phone thinks it’s in landscape when it’s portrait, then use another app to rotate the video to be vertical.

I agree! I wonder if there’s already camera apps that do this?

In any case, unless it’s in the default camera app and a default option, it will likely do nothing to reduce the plague of vertical video. I would guess that most people filming something that would be better in landscape didn’t even think about it, so won’t think about turning an option on.

I realise sensors come in other aspect ratios, but I didn’t want to spend the time researching and listing them all. Some sensors are 4:3 (like the IMX363).

But that’s irrelevant to my point that the sensor is not square which means you lose more resolution cropping to 16:9 in one orientation (usually portrait) than the other.

Because the sensors are landscape 4:3 and you would lose resolution when doing so.

AFAIK there’s no other reason other than that and giving people the option might confuse people.