skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>The previous POTUS is accused of using his office to perform a series of actions that culminated in disruption of the function of Congress.

Yes, and was impeached for that.

>Several Congresspeople then concluded he could not be impeached because by the time they were able to consider the question, he had left office.

That's how checks and balances work. They may have made that conclusion, but the impeachment carried on anyway and failed to gain the 2/3rds majority.

>This ruling by SCOTUS suggests there is now no avenue to hold such a President accountable for such actions.

It doesn't suggest that at all.

>whether "Removal from the Oval Office" is sufficient punishment for all manner of crime the President could commit from his position of power, because that is the upper limit of the effect of a Congressional impeachment.

It's removal from office AND "the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.[0]" They can still be found guilty for insurrection after impeachment.

>This seems to give a sitting President carte blanche to throw the Constitution in a wood-chipper if he can interpret it is within his official acts to do so.

That's not how it works because at the end of the day the President doesn't interpret the law, and isn't shielded from impeachment and justice through state/federal courts as I outlined above. This is literally the majority opinion. Similarly, just because a military officer interprets their actions are lawful doesn't make them so.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_St...
> It seems like that world would hamstring the president far too much.

except Obama ordered plenty of drone strikes including on American citizens, so actual data suggests he was not "hamstrung" at all.
Just to prove the thesis of the title, I really hate writing code in Rust.
That's one reading of "probing." There's quite a lot of latitude for interpretation – but note that it does not say probing the legality. Just "probing such conduct," wherein "such conduct" is conduct for which they are immune.
The ultimate Congressional remedy is impeachment, which this ruling doesn't contemplate (except to reject silly arguments presented by the defense). However, the limits on congress and the judiciary are not absolute:

> Congress cannot act on, and courts cannot examine, the President’s actions on subjects within his “conclusive and preclusive” constitutional authority. It follows that an Act of Congress — either a specific one targeted at the President or a generally applicable one — may not criminalize the President’s actions within his exclusive constitutional power. Neither may the courts adjudicate a criminal prosecution that examines such Presidential actions.

It's only the executives exclusive powers (which are more limited) that cannot be restrained.
Those with the most power should receive the most scrutiny and face the greatest consequences for its misuse.
No, because patients deserve the best or most effective drug, not the cheapest.
Unless you'd like to put a price on human life that is.
Also, meds don't hit the market before they are tested...
Testing meds is part of the resource allocation problems because cheap & effective off-label use won't be researched & tested because there is not enough money to be made...
Conservatives since Nixon have been working to ensure none of them could be taken down like he was. This is just the final chapter in them successfully implementing their plan that began with Fox News.
And yet, now here we are in the 21st century, where it feels like we're on the opposite side of the time delay problem. Instead of the War Powers Act, what if we allowed congresspeople to use PEKs to vote by proxy in the case of an emergency (definition needed)? Surely that would be better than creating a all-but-in-title king out of the executive branch as concerns conflict?
Venezuela is first Andean country to lose all of its glaciers
> there are known physical phenomena, such as quantum entanglement

QC researcher here, strictly speaking, this is false. Clifford circuits can be efficiently simulated classically and they exhibit entanglement. The bottom line is we're not entirely sure where the (purported) quantum speedups come from. It might have something to do with entanglement, but it's not enough by itself.

Re: about mermin's device, im not sure why you think it can not be simulated classically when all of the dynamics involved can be explained by 4x4 complex matrices.
I am not saying that they are easy to do, but it is their power to wield.
> Authoritarianism is when the appointed judges vote 6-4 for an interpretation which at worst is an extension of existing principle.

Comrade, in the United States, we have 9 supreme court justices.
i generally think we should tax people, not corporate entities. if we want to extract money from corporations, probably should just tax capital gains directly.
> Immunity for things they do as part of their official duties.

How would attempting to overturn the results of a free and fair election be considered an "official duty"? If it is, then the Presidency became a dictatorship, leaving impeachment by Congress -- an extremely difficult bar -- the only recourse.
That's the appropriate patriotic response that you'd hope all Americans would give, especially those who have sworn to defend the constitution. But what I've come to realize is that a lot of Americans somehow see it as their patriotic duty to destroy the Federal government, and will support anything that will undermine it, including breaking the rule of law and a scorched earth attack on "liberals" that wish to uphold our form of government. This is the legacy of the Confederate grievance that is still very much alive today.
Location: Amsterdam, NL

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python, Postgres, Elastic Search, Kafka, Redis, AWS, Typescript

Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mustafadokumaci

Email: mstdokumaci@gmail.com
The Biggest Problem in Mathematics Is Finally a Step Closer to Being Solved
"We have to let you do bad things, because you will do very bad things if we do not" is a hell of an argument.
If you pay attention to what I wrote vs what you wanted to read, you'd see the false equivalence is yours.

Pay-gating copyrighted content is different indeed from public-posted social media content. In the instance of the Forbes theft, Perplexity offered links to other copycats, but never the original [costly] reporting.
There is some interest in trying to fix this. Mainly with a global minimum corporate tax rate in the OECD as this can’t really be fixed by individual countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_minimum_corporate_tax_r...

Though remains to be seen when it will actually go fully into effect and when/if all the various loop holes will be closed.
Hit the same issue, but it goes fine if you just clone the repo, cd down into the cmd directory and 'go build -o doggo'.
Elicit (https://elicit.com/careers) | Oakland, CA and Hybrid | Frontend, AI, and Full-stack software engineering roles.

Elicit is automating high-quality reasoning so that we can help the world make more breakthroughs in every domain: from climate change to the gut microbiome to longevity and economic policy.

We’ve scaled to over 200,000 monthly users purely by word of mouth and recently crossed $1.5MM in annual revenue, 7 months after launching subscriptions.

We’re now building out our software engineering team, and hiring across several technical roles.

If you'd like to know more about some of the work we're doing you could check:
- A recent blog post current UX work: https://blog.elicit.com/living-documents-ai-ux/
- Me talking about our "AI engineer" role on a podcast a couple of weeks ago: https://www.latent.space/p/hiring

Check out the careers page linked above, or email me at james@elicit.com
The deterrent for such action is that government officials are under the obligation to disobey orders that are unconstitutional. But that loyalty to the constitution doesn't seem to be strong anymore. High positions in the US government are now occupied by the kind of people who would follow those orders without hesitation.
Pressuring an aide, via threats of violence, or whatever, is now blanket immune under this.

You cannot use official communications between a president and his VP for example, as evidence, even in prosecution of an unofficial act that is criminal.

A horrendously stupid, devoid of any logic ruling, so much so that Barrett even disagreed with this part.
Yeah, I didn't do a full blown analysis, just went trough wikipedia's top 10 biochemicals by revenue (Novo Nordisk was no.14) and picked 5 years since that's the longest 1-click option from Google Finance to get a consistent time span.

If you didn't predict Novo Nordisk's hit weight loss drug ahead of time, but just held a big portfolio of large pharmas, the returns seem pretty disappointing to me. Or put differently, if you have a lot of extra money to invest today, would you significantly overweight big pharma based on what we learned from this article?
Could Proud Boys reasonably be considered a terrorist group?
Bit of a stretch to claim that was within his official duties.
> The Constitution does not say that war must be declared for the armed forces to operate.

Yes it does, by reserving for Congress the right to declare war. Obama's drone strikes were carried out under the 2001 AUMF against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
I think that's a bit unclear. They have this standard where things that are part of a presidents "core constitutional powers" enjoy absolute immunity and anything else enjoys "at least presumptive immunity". I think this hints that some members of the court wanted to go further, but anyway I'm not quite sure what "presumptive immunity" means in the context of the law, but I think this quote gives the most clarity for me.

> unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no “dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.” Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 754. Pp. 12–15.

This seems to be the real boundary. To show something doesn't have immunity you either have to:

1. Show it was an unofficial act

2. Show it wasn't part of the core presidential powers and that prosecuting it wouldn't have any danger of intruding intruding on "the authority and functions of the Executive Branch."

I think that last standard is related to presidential immunity from subpoena which courts have also recently construed quite broadly
> One of the key things about a dissent, is that it's not the opinion of the court, but just that judge.

Can you find anything in the opinion of the court that would preclude it? I can't.

> In general, one would hope Seal Team 6 would not follow such an act as they owe allegiance to our system of laws before any presidential order.

It's a strange world we live in where a president can order something illegal but not face any consequences. I suppose you could argue we already lived in such a world, but now the difference is that he can brazenly do it.
Onfido | Senior/Staff Applied Scientist | UK, France, Germany | full-time | REMOTE with offices available | https://www.onfido.com/

We're an identity verification company. We're hiring machine learning / computer vision scientists to help us build advanced models for liveness check, document analysis and fraud detection. We're a growing team of 20+ scientists with a culture of learning and impact in production.

https://jobs.lever.co/onfido/7ce5ce63-f793-4cc3-8dd8-842f82a...
I think it was an impeachable offense, given that Democrats knew from the start that the president didn't have that power, yet he tried it anyway and let the courts strike it down. Pelosi even said once: "People think that the President of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not. He can postpone. He can delay. But he does not have that power. That has to be an act of Congress."

I don't know if that would be prosecutable. Is there a federal law against acting as though you have powers you do not while in office?

I suppose the difference is that having SEAL Team Six kill a political opponent on the President's orders seems like it should be classified as first-degree murder.
Super cool! We're building an API that makes it easy to build chained multi-model workflows like this that run with zero latency between tasks - https://www.substrate.run/
Philosophical arguments aside, the fact that three justices appointed by Trump are then ruling on whether he should be granted immunity is in itself a conflict of interest that would not be allowed on any lesser court.
You should find a therapist that you mesh well with and talk to them before making any major decisions.
I don’t think we covered that in my history classes. Congress’s website about the constitution agrees with you and adds additional details ( https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C11-3... ).
No it doesn't. Alt+space bring up the window system menu to restore/maximize/close?

Alt+f, a to save as?

Negative.
In the US more than likely. In the UK I'm not so sure (can't speak to Switzerland) as there is a healthy community radio scene who may have some democratic influence. There are mutterings of trying to close UK FM broadcasting as well in order to force DAB. I'd like to think there would still be some spectrum allocated for that. If not, the pirates would take over - and good luck to them.

This wholesale move away from simple, analogue radio infrastructure (AM/FM/SW radio) is a disaster waiting to happen in the event of a major regional/global catastrophe.

Most amateur organisations would not even think about trying to experiment with WBFM anyway - too obsessed with ultra-narrow digital modes.
That's not true. He was a sitting president, elected in 1968, and a bunch of the scandal was about his re-election campaign in 1972. He was successfully re-elected to a second term but then those events caught up with him over the following two years, causing him to resign in 1974.
CRCs and Reed-Solomon coding: better together
Meanwhile Amazon pays 0% tax
We see it in other goods like lightbulbs. Economies of scale is understood. The learning curve for solar/batteries has been stable for almost 50 years.

A small part of the price declines is due to subsidies from the Chinese government but I don't believe it's the best explanation for the 97% price drop.

But if you can answer the question "how much would batteries go up in price next year if China removed subsidies", I'd genuinely like to know the answer to that because it is important.

One risk is a war between the US and China, regardless of the subsidy question. So we should get good at domestic alternatives like compressed air and pumped hydro, and work towards our own manufacturing of batteries.
>Would it? I am skeptical about this take and I am skeptical of Sotomayer’s take. What official capacity would Nixon have been undertaking?

For the Nixon tapes, today's SCOTUS ruling would require the prosecution to convince a federal judge before trial that the value of the tapes in the criminal case greatly outweighs the general immunity from oversight presidents have when consulting advisors. Difficult, but not impossible. It probably would've given the same result in the Nixon case, because Nixon didn't use presidential powers to carry out the plan (just the cover up in the Saturday Night Massacre stage). If he had used an active FBI agent instead of a former one to place the bugs, then it might have been OK, according to today's ruling (see III.B.1 which grants immunity to Trump for his sham investigations using the DOJ).

>What official capacity would a seal team six assassination of trump be designated as?

The President is the head of the military and can direct them without consulting Congress. Congress is free to impeach him if he does so without authorization, but he'd have absolute immunity because this is a core power of the office.

Maybe you meant, "What reason could there be to justify that killing in the name of the nation or its people?" In which case, the President would never have to say. His motives are not even allowed to be investigated. See III.A from the majority opinion:

>In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may
not inquire into the President’s motives. Such an inquiry
would risk exposing even the most obvious instances of of-
ficial conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation
of improper purpose, thereby intruding on the Article II in-
terests that immunity seeks to protect.
It's always easy with hindsight to tell how to prevent something. In this case, a comment might have helped why the #ifdef was needed, eg

void CloseAllFromTheHardWay(int firstfd) //Code here must be async-signal-safe! Locks may be in indeterminate state
{
struct rlimit lim;
getrlimit(RLIMIT_NOFILE,&lim);

for (int fd=(lim.rlim_cur == RLIM_INFINITY ? 1024 : lim.rlim_cur);fd>=firstfd;--fd)
close(fd);
}

Although to be honest, getrlimit isn't actually on the list here: https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/signal-safety.7.html

But I hope that removing the comment or modifying code with a comment about async-signal-safe might have been noticed in review. The code you quoted only has the mention SAFE_IN_SIGHAND to suggest that this code might need to be async-signal-safe
Not sure where you’re reading into that, but good for you for figuring out something nonsensical.

as to what I actually feel, I am stating that the parent comment (as sibling comments have pointed out as well) seems completely oblivious to Jan 6 and the subsequent criminal events/statements since then.

Hope that helps your reading/rage issue, have a good day.
Immigration Policy Lab, Stanford University | Full Stack Software Engineer | Remote | Full Time | https://immigrationlab.org/geomatch/

Stanford’s Immigration Policy Lab is seeking a mission-driven software engineer to join our GeoMatch project team. GeoMatch is a matching and recommendation tool that has helped case officers find new homes for thousands of refugees. To facilitate our growth, we are looking to improve our automation and data pipelines, add new modular and scalable features, and focus on application efficiency. The ideal candidate is passionate about leveraging technology for social good and ready to tackle challenges in a dynamic environment.

Apply here: https://careersearch.stanford.edu/jobs/full-stack-software-e...
> Armed forces killing people is a state of war.

There hasn't been a single year of my life where US armed forces weren't killing someone somewhere in the world. The US military has been involved in armed conflicts around the globe in nearly every year since WWII but it hasn't declared many wars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_mili...
I think a big problem here is that all existing laws and the system concerning presidents rests on one very important assumption.
That the commander in chief is a decent, rational human being that carefully considers his actions and holds the interest of the United States and the Citizens in high regards.

It all falls apart and gets too complicated to regulate when the assumption is that you can't trust the person in office.
It looks like baserow (open source alternative to AirTable) is making a fair amount of income.
It's never been better than what MS had and if you think so you've never used the MS way as I do.

Alt+underlined letter with no menus opens opens whichever menu maps to that letter

After which any [unique, as they mostly are] underlined letter activates the press for that menu item.

There is no equivalent to the speed of this in OSX, even with third party software.

Very very happy to be proven wrong on this
Vaultwarden [0]. Bitwarden compatible server written in Rust

[0] https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden
Everyone seems to be calling this "blanket immunity" but that's not right. It's immunity for official acts which are the prerogative of the president. Basically the president is allowed to do all presidential things without having to worry about whether it will be deemed illegal.

This doesn't mean that the president cannot be tried for some illegal act that was not their official duty. Murdering someone, for example.
From UK go to USA, from south EU to UK, from south America to EU, from central America to south America, from Africa to central America. The whole circle.
I find that list very questionable. I'm Swedish and while yes, we sorta got general voting rights for men in 1911, we didn't get truly general voting rights for men until 1918 and women 1919.

However, before that you could vote if you had enough captial. Is that democracy? That list says it isn't whilst saying that America, in which minorities and women could not vote, is a democracy. That seems like a line draw specifically to be able to say America is the oldest democracy, very disingenuous.

If you consider minorities and women to be people then America didn't become a true democracy until 1965.
So the US has to declare war on Russia and China in order to support Ukraine and Taiwan? Declaring war on those superpowers would be a serious act of aggression and start WW3.
This is as the Imperial Supreme Court wants it, so that it will come back to them every time an important decision needs to be made. This enhances their power and ability to shape events. Murkier is better.
Photographer with 1k Featured Pictures for Wikipedia
> For your hypothetical situation to arise, Congress would have to declare members of Congress themselves as valid military targets.

Or just add them to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix.

"As reported previously, United States citizens may be listed as targets for killing in the database. Suspects are not formally charged of any crime nor offered a trial in their defense. Obama administration lawyers have asserted that U.S. citizens alleged to be members of Al Qaeda and said to pose an "imminent threat of violent attack" against the United States may be killed without judicial process. The legal arguments of U.S. officials for this policy were leaked to NBC News in February 2013, in the form of briefing papers summarizing legal memos from October 2011."
> an active threat to the future profits of the fossil fuel industry

Because they can't make profits in wind or solar energy? They certainly can, and do. And that's a good thing because there's no more powerful force for this kind of change than an economic force.
Are Jujutsu users all using it from the command line ? Is there anything magit-like yet ? Or do you use magit with it ? Have you run into extra complexity and messes because of having two VCSes interacting in one working copy ?
This does put the President above the law.

Congress can choose to impeach, but they are not doing so based on the laws of the land, but based on their own determination (whether it is in their best interest for that President to be gone or not), which (unsurprisingly) is split along political lines (which is why it's so hard to actually impeach the president).

Therefore impeachment is not a means to hold a President accountable for illegal or anti-democratic actions, but rather it is a means for a united Congress to have some power over the President in the event he managed to piss off enough people from both parties.
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

Remote: Open to all (Remote, in-person, hybrid)

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Ruby, Ruby on Rails, React, React Native, Java, Spring, MySQL, PostgreSQL, HTML/CSS, Javascript, AWS

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16EC9TJGZjCvxVtfToyHL3cJPRW7...

Email: ncrandall@gmail.com

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicholas-crandall-658849a/

Experienced Software Engineer and Leader with 13+ years of industry experience. Much of my experience includes being Engineering Manager, but I'm also very hands on.

In my current role I've built integrations with Salesforce Marketing Cloud and Adobe Journey Optimizer with Java and Spring. I'm also very experienced with the Ruby on Rails framework. I'm open to full-time and contract positions.