The scenario is this: the murder took place in 1950 (when the internet was non existent at all) and the perpetrator is alive but at 105 years old meaning he would've been around 29 when they killed someone but back then there's no CCTV or forensic evidence, so the case went cold.

Now, with social media: although limited, the only way is a live streamed confession from his death bed at a nursing home for a crime he's committed from a previous generation (76 years ago) admitting to their Gen Z grandchildren they killed an innocent person.

However, the evidence is expired as the body has decomposed long ago, all potential forensic clues are lost for eternity. The victim's family is deceased as this happened long ago, the only ones alive are the victim's grandchildren and descendants whom one can speak to.

The perpetrator is now someone's grandpa, however since this occurred before Gen Z were born (they can only read archived files from that era and work with that). Since there was no social media when the murder took place, you only have his confession video recorded today.

Even with him confessing that he murdered someone that long ago: should he still serve time in prison despite him now being a gray haired old man who looks like he could be your grandfather? Knowing that he'll pass away soon enough, is it even worth a prison sentence?

Legal chalenges are this: the driverless EV ran over someone but what happens is that corporations (often) bribe the judicial parties not charging them with a hit & run even though the victims families want justice for their vehicles killing pedestrians. The only “prevention” is harm reduction (investing into technology that’s able to detect human presence & sensors that activate in pedestian heavy areas stopping the vehicle).

Usually, when it’s a EV (with no human driver behind the wheel): is it still considered a criminal offense if a driverless EV ran over somebody as it just continues driving? In that case it’s mainly rideshare companies (i.e. Uber, Lyft, DiDi, etc) face criminal liability. Regardless, the companies who dispatch EV’s are sued when their vehicles run over somebody and the EV didn’t stop whilst doing so.

I mean, at least a baby should be breastfed (as in a balance between formula and breastmilk) while there are those who solely use formula as their main means of feeding the baby but later in life that child has issues with their immunity like being susceptible on illnesses that are typically not fatal for most people.

That’s because breastmilk has all the nutrients to strengthen immunity later in life for a child. There is a difference between breastmilk and powdered milk: since formula is composed of numerous chemicals (it’s made from compounds) while breastmilk is from the mother. Is breastmilk healthier than formula?