In a case where the two people have differing accounts of consent, and there is no other usable evidence, the person is found "not guilty" (not the same as innocent) because it cannot be proved. This is not the same thing as assuming consent, it is applying the principle of the law.
Assuming consent is a much more insidious thing, which means actually disbelieving the victim on principal, because of the type of crime. This is not a problem in e.g. theft, because nobody assumes people want their stuff stolen.
> This is not a problem in e.g. theft, because nobody assumes people want their stuff stolen.
This could actually be a huge problem if the thief is someone you know. Imagine you find some items missing from your house in the course of a normal day. You then go and tell the police that the potential suspects are your friends, your SO, and everyone else who was in your house.
Do you think the police (in any country) will be serious about investigating your case?
> How can we even begin to go about writing an algorithm that can reason about the scene like I did?
You are doing AI wrong. AI should learn all of that context by itself, from a large amount of stimulus. If it was a good one, it might be able to learn enough in less than N years, where N is the age of a human who would laugh at the photo.
If we could make AI study the relationship between objects in images and videos, it could learn a lot of raw common sense. Also, it could be useful to add a different domain to the mix by cross referencing that with information extracted from text.
It strikes me that a forum such as this one might make a great training tool for AI. So many good cues for following branched reasoning, dealing with ambiguity etc. I usually"read" the articles through the comments.
> Slander/Libel, in the UK where this isn't, has to contain falsehoods.
Be careful this is a dangerous interpretation of UK law. Slander/Libel must contain some element that the person doing the saying/publishing cannot prove in court. Note the burden of proof lies on the person saying/writing rather than the person sueing.
(I am not a lawyer and this post does not constitute legal advice.)
SQL is great for a very specific job: talking to a database. If you try to do anything else in it, you end up in a horrible mess (e.g. cursors).
Luckily, people rarely try to do anything difficult in SQL, because they are using another language and dropping into SQL to talk to their database. This can lead to inefficient code, depending on the API/SQL engine, but it means people end up with sane code (unless their other language is PHP, of course.)
Personally, I've found it difficult to keep up the practise (meditating every day), but when I do remember it does improve things. Even as a one-off activity occasionally it is good for introspection, and identifying subconscious sources of stress allowing you to act on them.
 NICE aren't perfect, but they do a reasonable job.
> Homeopathy is not available on the NHS in all areas of the country, but there are several NHS homeopathic hospitals and some GP practices also offer homeopathic treatment.
So, it's possible to get a stupid pointless "treatment" on the NHS. You might want to write to your local clinical commissioning group if you want to stop them spending money (about £4m per year) on homeopathy.
"NICE currently does not recommend that homeopathy should be used in the treatment of any health condition"
"Some homeopathic remedies may contain substances that are not safe, or that interfere with the action of other medicines"
"there is no evidence that homeopathy is effective as a treatment for any health condition"
"Some people who use homeopathy may see an improvement in their health condition due to a phenomenon known as the placebo effect"
I'm not sure what the phrase 'NHS homeopathic hospitals' means. Does it mean more than what is implied by the paragraph following the one you quoted, that some people that work for the NHS also work privately on alternative medicine like homoeopathy.
I'd also be interested to know more about the £4m per year.
The page on mindfulness has a very different tone  to the one on homeopathy.