Be more disturbed that the Minuteman III missiles, one leg of the nuclear triad, rely on the big 8 inch floppies in their launch control systems.

The replacement missiles will not enter service until the “early 2030s.”

All those people who were just elected need to step up and keep their eyes on the ball. Because there’s still at least two quarters of antifash left to play.

Fuck Whitmire. He could have signed this order any time before the election, but he didn’t.

And then he went ripping up bike lanes that we had already paid good money to install. How the heck does that make any damn sense?

The only way to counteract it now is to take it to the Supremes (which isn’t likely)

Technically, there is an alternative option to request “super” en banc with all 29 judges. But the 9th circuit has never once granted super en banc in the entire history of super en banc.

This case got really unlucky with the 11 judge panel lottery: 5 Trump appointees out of 11 plus one judge from the original 3-judge panel.

Indeed. But appeal bond is a standard requirement for any kind of appeal. I expect the $83 million is sitting in a different escrow account right now, waiting to be paid out to the winner.

I’m hearing about a whole bunch of feds being deployed to polling sites as “observers.”. I haven’t heard of them doing anything other than “observing,” yet.

I recommend voting, even if you get observed in the process.

Edit: the threats and intimidation against the CA election workers are currently prohibited by court order. A court in DC has ordered that the “observers” may do no more than just that.

2nd edit: if you see irregularities at the polls, call the ACLU Election Protection Hotline.

English: 1-866-OUR-VOTE / 1-866-687-8683 Spanish: 1-888-VE-Y-VOTA / 1-888-839-8682 Arabic: 1-844-YALLA-US / 1-844-925-5287 Bengali, Cantonese, Hindi, Urdu, Korean, Mandarin, Tagalog or Vietnamese: 1-888-274-8683

He paid off the other $5 million judgement. This is a different case that has been on a later timeline.

Update: It is now lunchtime on Sunday, and the DOJ has still not put up their emergency appellate motion in the SEIU case. They noticed the appeal yesterday, but if they don’t ask for expedited handling, that appeal will not be decided until 2027.

DOJ is really not up to snuff on tactics any more, like they used to be.

There’s a lot of moving pieces with multiple court actions.

Judge Carter denied the TRO to segregate the 20k ballots. Because he declined to issue any order, Judge Carter did not prohibit the feds from doing anything, like these subpoenas. But he did say he would be very unhappy. This case went all the way through the 9th circuit yesterday, and I expect it to show up at the supreme court today if it’s not already there.

In the SEIU case, public employee unions that represent CA election workers went to court to stop the harassment from the feds. They won a same day, ex parte, TRO enjoining the feds from doing the shit in the headline with the subpoenas. That happened on Friday; yesterday the feds appealed to the 9th circuit. This suit is not mentioned in the article.

There’s a 3rd case, headlined by “California Nurses Association”, that won a bigger injunction against election worker intimidation practices in multiple states. CA Nurses is further along in the appeals process than SEIU.

Both of the injunction cases have some legal problems. They purport to restrict the feds from doing certain subpoenas or certain indictments before they actually do them. The feds are going to claim the court doesn’t have the power to enjoin that

The long established legal remedy for a bad subpoena is a motion to quash in the individual case. And the remedy for a bad indictment is a motion to dismiss.

The other side of that argument is going to be that the feds’ behaviour is so egregious, and the stakes are so high, that the equitable power of injunction can expand to meet this task.

TLDR: Lower judges are saying they can’t even issue the subpoenas. They could very well be overruled. If they do, then they would have to fight each individual subpoena.

Life with parole is effectively figured as 45 years in Oklahoma. So with the consecutive sentencing that’s an effective figure of 87 years for parole computations.

I don’t know French very well, but it seems like it works better, grammatically speaking, in French than in English.

The modern Effective Altruism movement is a quasi cult loosely connected to another quasi cult called the “rationalist movement,” and all of this is loosely organized around the Bay Area.

Don’t get me wrong. Rationalism has a long intellectual and scholarly history. Effective Altruism is based on the philosophy of utilitarianism, with its own long scholarly history. Subscribing to these ideas alone doesn’t put you into a cult.

But there definitely is a loose, quasi cult system, originating out of the Bay Area, using these names and ostensibly claiming to promote the ideas.

These people also go pretty hard on AI doomerism, and AI singularity as a coming end times sort of event. They’ve been taking this position since long before LLMs ascended to where they are now.

Lesswrong is the pen name and Internet handle of one Eliezer Yudkowsky. It is also the name of an Internet “community blog” where I think a lot of the rationality side of the group got organised, and maybe where they still organise. I don’t really keep up with the goings on.

[email protected] is/was a Lemmy community dedicated to critiques and criticism of the rationality / EA system or nexus or whatever. (I have a hard time coming up with names for this. It’s definitely not organised like the Mormons or Scientologists or so on.)

I agree. But at this stage they’re not trying to get the exhibit admitted into evidence. They really just need to match it against one of the categories of items listed in the search warrant.

(Warrants shall describe the “place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”)

She has also challenged the warrant, trying to get her stuff back. I haven’t looked into the details on that.

I’m thinking a book might have a publication date or a printing date on it somewhere. There’s a remote chance that would provide some loose circumstantial evidence as to ages.

From what I have read it’s not even a problem if it was filed while she was 18 provided she had no knowledge of her late father’s actions.

Lack of knowledge might insulate Ilhan from criminal charges. But because she has derived citizenship, she can lose the derivation in a civil process if it is proven that she was really 18. In that case she reverts to her previous status of lawful permanent resident. There’s no statute of limitations on the civil side.

If she is found to have never received citizenship, she will probably not be eligible serve as a representative.

(Yes. The immigration laws of this country are fucked up.)

Ilhan Omar received her citizenship as a dependent minor child when her father was naturalized. She was, in fact, 17 years old when this happened.

The governments theory of the investigation is that she lied about her age, and she was really 18 at the time. If that were true, then she would not be eligible for automatic derived citizenship, and she would have needed to do her own naturalization.

To be clear, this age thing is a bonkers Internet conspiracy theory. But an old children’s book might conceivably be relevant.

In most places in the United States speeding is a criminal offense. Each element of the crime must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And the accused has the right to confront the witnesses against him in court.

I sort of understand the argument about cops needing to hold the radar gun, but I also don’t really get what they’re contributing to the legal validity of the case.

The biggest thing they contribute is proof of identity. When they pull you over and run your license, they can testify with pretty strong credibility that it was you driving the car.

To prove speeding you have to prove that the car was going too fast and that someone in particular was driving.

Having a cop signing the ticket also gives the government a convenient witness who can be subpoenaed to come to court and to testify with personal knowledge of the incident. That satisfies the confrontation clause. Whereas in jurisdictions that have tried pure camera enforcement, the only witness they can usually bring is a low level camera company representative who has no personal knowledge. This leads defendants to demand a lot of discovery into the automated processes of the camera system, because that is what is really accusing them.

Conclusion: US jurisdictions do a lot better with camera enforcement when they create civil infraction liability under state law. But then some forms of enforcement, like license points, may be taken off the table.

Witnesses say that a man was ejected from his car and fell, striking either the car or parts of the ride structure at least three times on the way down.

Another car that was not the accident car halted on an incline tow, and riders were evacuated down the stairs.

Witnesses say that attendants checked the harnesses on the accident car before dispatch.

Okay. Now go to File Explorer and right click to create a new text file and try to name it “con”. That’s three letters: con. You can’t do it. Not allowed. Because CON has been reserved (in every directory on every drive) for piping to and from console since MS-DOS 2 or so. (I think 2 is when they stole pipes from Unix)

Okay. Now, open just about any kind of desktop window and double click in its upper left corner. In > 9 windows out of 10 that action still closes the window even though the “close window” button was moved to the upper right corner by Windows 3. Even though a bunch of modern applications don’t even have any icon there at all any more.

A former Navy physician found that riders were experiencing as much as nine Gs of acceleration as they went through the loop.

v² / r is a bitch.

Without the monocoque, I doubt it can pass modern crash safety tests. Nor is there any safe place to install air bags.