Be reasonable! Just as even interpreted software must eventually appeal to hardware actions to give them meaning, laws must eventually appeal to human-judged concepts, including reasonabless.
A definition like the one above actually strikes a good balance. It leaves it up to courts faced with real situations to evolve rules about what constitutes "reasonable"; while giving those courts a definite thing to judge the reasonableness of.
I am no plasma physicist, but the concern I hear about fusion is that whenever we scale a system up we find the plasma is behaving in new ways, resulting in new loss mechanisms.
Identifying and understanding those new behaviours sounds more like science than engineering to me. (That said, scientists frequently do engineering and engineers frequently do science; I've been on both sides of it).
I expect so. But there is still an interesting point: witch and heretic-burning likely tap into much the same psychology as ancient human sacrifice. Even the rationales overlap:
"Devine will demands these deaths; we will ensure the safety of our community by ritually killing these people."
Yes. The Romans they accepted as inevitable that vast numbers of infants would be killed all the time. The Carthagians would have also had to deal with this reality. Perhaps they did so by framing it as a sacrifice to Moloch -- a practice which the Romans found nearly as abhorrent as we do.
But then, given that the killings were happening anyway, the existence of an infant necropolis does not prove that sacrificing was going on.
The Jews weren't merely fellow Semitic speakers, they were neigubours to the Phoenecians. And rivals.
In fact this is a point in favour of the Jews, in that even if such practices were not common among them; they would still have a strong reason to bother condemning them because there hated neighbours did it.
One of the very few things I know about audio codecs is that they at least implicitly embody a "psychoaccoustic model". The "psycho" is crucial because the human mind is the standard that tells us what we can afford to throw away.
So a codec that agressively throws away data but still gets good results must somehow enbody sophisticated facts about what human minds really care about. Hence "artifacts that are natural".
Be reasonable! Just as even interpreted software must eventually appeal to hardware actions to give them meaning, laws must eventually appeal to human-judged concepts, including reasonabless.
A definition like the one above actually strikes a good balance. It leaves it up to courts faced with real situations to evolve rules about what constitutes "reasonable"; while giving those courts a definite thing to judge the reasonableness of.