skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Gerrymandering is self-limiting. You can gerrymander to increase your party's number of House seats from your state, or you can gerrymander to make your seats more secure, but you can't do both! You can make some seats more secure while others weaker so as to strike a balance between these two goals, but you won't get as many seats as if you optimized for seat count and you won't get as many safe seats as if you optimized for seat safety.

If you optimize for seat count then a wave election can easily turn many of those seats over to the other party, and with them control of the House.

If you optimize for seat safety then a wave election need only turn over a few of your seats to switch control of the House.

We have had lots of wave elections in the past 100 years: 1920, 1932, 1994, 2006, 2008, 2010. Three of those are in the past 20 years. Four in the past 30 years.

Gerrymandering isn't all it's cracked up to be. It cannot make any party impervious to wave elections.

This, anyways, only as long as all House districts in each state have roughly the same population.
i don't remember my government class exactly but i think the purpose of the us supreme court is to determine if a law is constitutional or not. I'm not sure if it can explicitly strike down a law but declaring it unconstitutional would be effectively the same.
I mean, it seems a bit unclear what his political positions actually were, but it does seem they were just opinions. As philosophers go, that's pretty small beer: Thales used to roast people alive in a brass container, Marcus Aurelius was responsible for numerous genocides, and Heidegger was a card-carrying Nazi.
Having rationale to support your belief is inconsequential to whether it is rational or not. The important distinction is whether you arrived at the belief through rationale or not. Everyone believes the earth is flat by default because it appears flat. That's what makes it irrational.

If you later revert to believing in the globe because of reason and then convert back for reasons none of that matters. The initial belief was always irrational.
There are political currents which critize traditional media and independence of powers. Like another current touting "A new world order" (offtopic)

The balance of powers is paramount. And it is usually the executive which grabs it when the oportunity arises: not only wars, but also exceptions like terrorism prevention (overblown) and the recent covid pandemic (all countries)
Depends on country. Some still apply their contactless limits to Apple Pay:

https://support.apple.com/en-qa/118627

e.g.:

> France

> You might not be able to use Apple Pay for purchases over 50 EUR.

> Canada

> You might not be able to use Apple Pay for purchases over 250 CAD
Most homeless people do not have a severe mental illness. Costs of living are the strongest correlates of homelessness rates.
Nope, this isn’t Downton Abbey. The further you go in competitive tennis, the tighter the community gets. Also, playing tennis and stringing rackets are two distinct skillsets. For elite players the strings are just as crucial as the racket itself. Check out this interview with the stringer who traveled the globe with Federer for 15 years, ensuring he had nine freshly strung rackets for each match.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sRSqSupzyM
That's an interesting interpretation. I'd be more likely to describe it as engaging in conversation.
Pretty sure I remember trading 300 creds for a Meta Technologies Neural Optimizer and Disassembler in one of the early Deus Ex games.
Right. I even quietly mumble 'asshole' while reading it.
> Chinese scammers outright lie about the products and there are zero customer protections.

The only way to use Facebook Marketplace to buy things is to purchase locally. Anything else is sheer insanity.
This is not a particularly fair representation of the general state of the Federalist society's goals (I don't even think it's a particularly good representation of FedSoc's position on this case, but it certainly isn't a good representation of FedSoc's position on e.g. religious freedom).

> Courts should interpret statutes, not executive branch agencies

This is, of course, impossible. If a statute creates a federal agency, the agency must, definitionally, interpret the statute. The agency cannot simply wait for a court to rule on its legitimacy to exist, much less its ability to take particular actions. This doesn't mean that executive overreach shouldn't be curtailed by the judiciary, but using a standard that good-faith, "reasonable" executive interpretations of a statute are valid is a fine standard.

> Judges can't gin up new "rights" from "emanations from penumbras" in the Constitution.

The 9th amendment (and federalist #84) would have some things to say about this.

> The separation of powers that the founders went to a lot of trouble to implement in the constitution must be respected

This is pretty dubious, there's a clear history and tradition, going back to before the founding, of debate on the level of federation and separation of powers, and the shape of the branches' and federal vs. state powers wasn't clearly established until at least 50+ years after the founding (Marbury v. Madison and to an extent Worcester v. Georgia).
Exactly! If you only look at the commute, you get ridiculous things like commuter trains, that only run in the morning in one direction and in the afternoon in the other.

In the Netherlands for example, lots of people go by car to Work, because that’s relatively far away; but then they’ll use their bike or transport for everything else. Stuff like groceries, dentist visits, meeting friends, going to the gym, etc. because all those things are within (their district of) the city.
Waves of Writing for Google
I worked at a bank where we used Tandem NonStop on Guardian OS - loved the programming environment using TAL language and the built-in SQL database.
Depends on your definition of best.

The most cost and air purity effectiveness is literally just a box fan with a filter meant for an HVAC sealed around the intake end. If you want to be clever you could go further and make a cube of filters and control the fan with controllable power outlet or something.

However if your value lower sound, form factor, or aesthetics, that make things more complex on whether a price overhead is justified.

Some filters will clean the air more quickly, but a filter that needs more “passes” of air through it to clean may still reach the same level of cleanliness when given enough time. Like when you have a quiet fan always running in a room like I do.
Meanwhile in USA, paying a monthly fee for a basic bank account means you need to look for a new bank.
If rumble option does not appear, then it means the browser's Gamepad API does not support it yet. Once it does then it will start working.

But once I get WebHID direct controller support implemented I will get this working with or without Gamepad API support.
Marketplace has posts? I thought the only thing you could do was message the seller directly.
>I'm sure the individual will greatly benefit when the EPA's regulation of the next great carcinogen is struck down on grounds that congress has not explicitly restricted it.

This is the real motivation; the Lead Paint voting bloc is dying off and desperately needs replacing if current political demographics are to be maintained
Same thing happens on Facebook.
I liked this section of Justice Gorsuch's concurrence:

> How bad is the problem? Take just one example. Brand X concerned a law regulating broadband internet services. There, the Court upheld an agency rule adopted by the administration of President George W. Bush because it was premised on a “reasonable” interpretation of the statute. Later, President Barack Obama’s administration rescinded the rule and replaced it with another. Later still, during President Donald J. Trump’s administration, officials replaced that rule with a different one, all before President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.’s administration declared its intention to reverse course for yet a fourth time. Each time, the government claimed its new rule was just as “reasonable” as the last. Rather than promoting reliance by fixing the meaning of the law, Chevron deference engenders constant uncertainty and convulsive change even when the statute at issue itself remains unchanged.
Kind of stunning that people throw around “redneck” here on HN so casually with 0 condemnation, but also simultaneously quite predictable.
Ginkgo Bioworks to lay off more than 150 employees in Mass. with more to come
And still at the end of the day, lenders mostly care whether you earn enough to pay.

The credit rating is mainly a way to check how much credit you already have available and whether you’re up to date or not. Oh, and verify your identity (probably the primary purpose of them).
> Chevron was always contentious […]

Chevron was a unanimous 6-0 decision: there was no debate on its principles at the time.

Chevron said that it was not up to the courts to decide policy when there was ambiguity:

> When a challenge to an agency construction of a statutory provision, fairly conceptualized, really centers on the wisdom of the agency's policy, rather than whether it is a reasonable choice within a gap left open by Congress, the challenge must fail. In such a case, federal judges—who have no constituency—have a duty to respect legitimate policy choices made by those who do. The responsibilities for assessing the wisdom of such policy choices and resolving the struggle between competing views of the public interest are not judicial ones: "Our Constitution vests such responsibilities in the political branches."

If there is ambiguity it is either on purpose (to allow flexibility) or by accident (unforeseen or change circumstances): it was thought that it is best for policy makers to deal with that ambiguity.

Remember: the agencies are headed by an Executive that is elected (President), and run my administrators (Secretaries, Directors) that are Senate-confirmed. There is connection to the will of The People throughout their operation.
> Voila, a detailed comparison table of smartwatches.

How did you evaluate its accuracy?
In my area, Craigslist has been usurped mostly by Kijiji. The personals section shutdown has spawned many "clones" over the years.
> Changing the status quo on a fundamental de facto government structure is not good judiciating.

Isn't the fundamental structure that the legislative branch writes laws, the judicial brand interprets laws, and the executive branch enacts/enforces laws? That's what I was taught in school.

I don't doubt that this is a political move to shift power from a liberal presidency to a conservative supreme court. But to me it seems like a case of the right thing done for the wrong reason.
1/1,000,000 cranks will be right.
On an E-ink screen, displaying static content uses literally zero electricity. Only updating what's on screen requires power. So, from your post, it's not immediately obvious to me why this inactive mode would cause battery drainage.

In this inactive mode, is anything on screen moving/changing? If not, have you actually noticed battery drainage, or were you making an assumption based on the fact the screen was "on".
Northern Raven, the Largest Osint Collection Operation in NATO's History
You misunderstand the situation. Agencies will still get to make regulations, but where there's any legitimate question/controversy over their interpretation of the law the courts will make the final decision -- final, at least, until Congress modifies the law to get whatever effect they had wanted (which might not be the one the agency wanted).

Also, by and large the vast majority of regulations will stand.
So happy to find out what this is! The Meow Wolf in Denver has a huge one of these in the entrance way and I thought it would really fun to build one myself. They have this wonderful clickiness to them, a mesmerizing display both modern- and ancient-feeling.
I see it the opposite way. Triathlon (and cycling time trialing) becomes very expensive if you want to be competitive because there is too little regulation.
You can buy a lot of performance on a time trial or triathlon bike and I don't think it's good for those sports long term.
The Hands Behind New York City's Hoop Dreams
I don't know where you're getting this but there are in fact many tools for local commit hooks https://typicode.github.io/husky/
There have been a well documented series of engineering solutions to problems in the implementation that have taken time to solve. Melting electrodes due to too much power - solved by molten stream electrodes C 2016. Melting holes in the reaction chamber eventually resolved after many different things tried by quartz that is transparent to UV. Etc. Demonstrations are offered to qualified parties.
It's not "only". A similar question is why does ASCII have a control character for ringing a bell?

The answer is that the character sets were designed with specific hardware in mind and often with backwards compatibility.

The accented characters were in use for typewriter and printer with a typewriter like interface or even hardware.
Yes, the hard part is to define what goes inside one module. There are rules of thumb, but lots of exeptions. Taking any advice too literally can also make things awkward.
Their shares are currently worth less than $1. Kir Kahlon at Scorpion Capital (short seller) must be thrilled.
A Chatbot for Ora2Pg supporting database migrations
How is that a billion?

5MM a day is 150MM a month.

Is this a year? That's 1.3B

I generally measure the per second rate. Per millisecond can be mathed quick enough for conversational calculations.
> I imagine both of us sound to the other like we're reading from a list of talking points.

I’m talking about an academic debate around Chevron that’s been around ever since I started law school, and was already robust for a couple of decades before that. This trying to connect it to Thomas’s vacations thing has come out overnight and seems out of a script.

> But that doesn't change the fact that it was codifying existing practices, which is my entire point.

That certainly not what I learned in my administrative law class! Skidmore says judges may defer to the agency if they find the agency’s interpretation persuasive. But the judge always retains the power to decide the meaning of the statute itself. Chevron changes that significantly. The agency interprets the statute, and the court can only disagree if that interpretation is unreasonable. And Chevron allows the meaning of the statute to change with each administration.

> As for Thomas, I do not understand how any rational human being could make excuses for him (or Alito, to a smaller extent.) If you don't think it is a massive conflict of interest to be taking part in rulings related to the interests of Crow when he has received millions of dollars worth of perks, vacations, etc. from him, I don't know that we can have a serious conversation.

You’re misreporting the facts, probably because you’re reading from talking points: https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/04/24/supreme-cou.... There was one 2004 case, involving a portfolio company of Crow’s firm, where Crow was not involved in the management. Critically: “Crow Holdings and Harlan Crow’s name do not appear on the 2004 court filings.” And the Supreme Court rejected the company’s certiorari petition.

The Supreme Court gets thousands of certiorari petitions every year. They identify conflicts based on the people who are named in the filings. (That’s how all judges do it.) The idea that he’s corrupt because he voted against hearing a certiorari petition—to the detriment of the company—in a case where Crowe’s name or his company’s name don’t appear, is ridiculous. It’s a deliberate effort to try and delegitimize the court through mudslinging.
This is not about delegation. This is about interpretation of the limits of delegated power. Under Chevron the executive agencies decided that without check. Before Chevron and after Raimondo it's the courts that decide. The 40 years of Chevron were an aberration.
You have just spent four paragraphs outlining how it must be important to be able to backout of any agreement, how freedom is important, and now you propose semi-facist system!

> licensed professions (eg. doctors, lawyers) adopting policies that would revoke licenses for members defaulting on their student loans via bankruptcy.

Let's consider the meaning of this, and why it smells of fascism:

* An unrelated third party is recruited to use it's power to enforce government policy (if it's taxpayer money) or protect someone else's private investment. This is no longer an agreement between two parties, the loan is now backed by threat of force. The lender no longer has to ask themselves "well if we raise interest rate too much, people will default and we will suffer"

* The revoked license cannot be sold, like a house would be, it is of no use to the bank, the only effect is punitive and moral police

* If i am the doctor's employer, you have just inflicted loses upon me, to protect your investment that I have nothing to do with.

* If I am a customer or patient, and paid for a service, you have also inflicted loses upon me, it's now a crime for me to receive treatment from this doctor, despite the fact that they are qualified.

* It is affected by government policy and macroeconomics that even professional fund managers cannot predict, let alone an 18-year old student. You get high inflation due to war in Ukraine, and suddenly half of your doctors have their license revoked! Great result!

> an education is not an asset that can be seized and sold during the process

As any unsecured loan, you can take out a loan and spend it all on hookers and drugs.

I think this entire attitude is driven by the fact that in the English speaking west there is great contempt for the younger generation and they are okay to exploit. They are subject of derision and almost seen as sub-human. Why don't we treat pensioners this way, make them do some mandatory community service in the nursery to get their state pension! There would be riots in the streets!
Yes, articles on Ben Johns suggest his income is 5% winnings and 95% endorsements.
I agree. Congress is far too small. Both the house and senate. There's too much work for them to do.

I would go even further: maybe congress should be expanded such that we have different chambers for different aspects of life. This way we could elect a lawmaker for each domain... e.g. 1 focused on environmental legislation, 1 focused on financial legislation, etc... rather than trying to cram all sides into a single unicorn lawmaker.
How do you expect Congress to legislate when one side refuses to legislate?
regulatory capture has joined the chat
Elemental iron is in fact present in some rare geology on earth. However, that's unlikely to be related to this issue, since they found the iron localized to main roadways and not splattered all over.
Yes, the election of our legislators, whose job it is to craft laws. Not the election of one single person whose job it is to oversee the enforcement of those laws. Our government is built with its powers divided up, and the ability to change law intentionally kept out of the hands of individual deciders. The president isn't even (technically) allowed to send the military, of which they are the constitutional head, to war without congress' consent.

If anything the last two elections should have taught everyone the dangers of resting so much power in the hands of a single person.
A queer messiah of the desert: Dune and the challenge to the gender binary
Not just for dialup network access.

Microsoft Mail for PC Networks used two processes - one for the email client and one for sending/receiving email (aka the "email pump") .

Since Windows 3.x used co-operative multitasking, only one process could run at a time, the email pump detected idle time and start sending/receiving email. Until that processing email time, the user could open the outbox and open outgoing emails, and modify and resend or cancel them.

A few years pass and Exchange 4.0 is about to ship.

But now the second process has been eliminated and emails are sent via RPC to the Exchange server. The user, though, has almost no chance to stop an email from being sent since the email spends almost no time in the outbox before the Exchange server sees and processes the outgoing email.

People actually grumbled about Exchange being too fast.

I took a look through the list of email message properties supported in Extended MAPI. One of them was a "time delay before sending" scalar, measured in seconds.

The Exchange email client (as seen in Win95, also supported on Win3.x and NT) supported extension DLLs. I created an extension DLL that let the user specify a time delay for outgoing emails, and listened for an "email send" notification and then set the user-specified "time delay before sending" property on the outgoing email.

Now outgoing emails would sit in the outbox for the user-specified amount of time before the Exchange server would process them.

Problem solved.

AFAIK the extension DLL was the only code that had set the "time delay before sending" property on emails. It worked the first time I ran the code. Someone did the appropriate testing.

Eventually Outlook 97 shipped. The extension still worked. But a later Outlook update broke the extension DLL. Finally Outlook added support for the "time delay before sending" property for outgoing emails - no need for an extension DLL anymore.
They should probably unionize like nba players. nba players beyond the top 100 make 10 times more.
Windows: Insecure by Design
That was actually addressed on Page 7 of the decision.

They begin with "The stare decisis considerations most relevant here—“the quality of [the precedent’s] reasoning, the workability of the rule it established,..." and proceed to find the considerations "all weigh in favor of letting Chevron go"

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf

If you read the decision on abortion, you will find they spend significant time arguing that stare decisis underpinning Roe v Wade is not valid.
Here's a very good article from The Guardian about the rise of supershoes.

I remember it well: it was published on the morning of this year's Paris marathon - which I was running in - and it made me feel inadequate for not having supershoes of my own.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/apr/07/carbon-fibre-s...
Where I'm from, our "supreme court" can overthrow congress legislation for not following the constitution. Is this the case here AND is this the case in the US (generally speaking)?
The only problem with increasing efficiency is Jevon's Paradox.
>i think the purpose of the us supreme court is to determine if a law is constitutional or not.

Interestingly, the ability to declare a law un/constitutional is not an enumerated power given to the court by the Constitution. The Supreme Court declared that power for itself in Marbury v. Madison and people have just went with it ever since.
>we need a way to make voters universally and roughly equal uncomfortable eith poor fiscal managment so they feel the pian when they vote thwmselves more stuff without also voting in a payment method

another small govt ideologue that thinks the US's federal budget works like a household's
Yeah, even that is tricky. Every different manufacturer has different packaging for the cells. The Nissan Leaf for example uses a pouch style cell rather than 18650 cells. Even if you stick to say Tesla batteries you have to undo the wire bonding and probably spot weld each battery back together, then balance and charge the pack ensuring you don't have any duff cells. It's a lot of work for reclaiming batteries on an industrial scale.