whats_a_quasar

4 ms·

1.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
Yeah, I sorta expected the punchline to be "this 17,000 lines of code became 2,000" but it is still about the same quantity. Kinda interesting. Also interesting that the last change has by far the largest effect (4x reduction in t
2.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
This is such a nice piece, this is how people should write about AI. Specific, grounded to how the tools are actually being used, and quantitative. There is so much bad AI commentary that is incredibly vague, divorced from any actual use ca
3.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
It doesn't matter. Providing a PIN that will cause an officer to inadvertently delete data clearly is covered by the statute: "Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to mak
4.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
"At what point do you have to maintain property so the government can use it to testify against yourself?" For the duration of the border search. This guy is at risk because he caused the data to be deleted during a border search,
5.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
The language in the statute of what constitutes "destruction" is very broad and clearly covers IMO giving a self-destruct password to someone who you know will try to enter it. "Whoever, before, during, or after any search fo
6.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
Hmm. It looks like the government asserts that they can seize a device if the owner does not provide a password. This is a good point and answers my search v. seizure objection above. You say CBP is "empowered" to seize a device i
7.
by whats_a_quasar 2mo ago
Here is the indictment: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28513012-samuel-tuni... Here is the statute Tunick is indicted under: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232 Ther
8.
by whats_a_quasar 6mo ago
Yes, the First Amendment applies to all people within the territory of the United States equally. US law does not limit the political speech of non-citizens present on visas.
9.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
Fair enough, but it is also valid to be angry at your local law enforcement if they are acting against the community's preferences. Especially when local law enforcement is breaking state law in the process.
10.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
To your question - A state judge cannot be required to hold someone on behalf of federal agents. That's federalism 101 and settled law. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/sanctuary--supremacy--h...
11.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
"You can beat the rap but not the ride" is phrased like the judge actually did anything wrong. That seems very doubtful. This administration has shown they are not entitled to the presumption that they are acting in good faith.
12.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
Source?
13.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
Given the circumstances, the government absolutely does have an obligation to present its evidence up front. You cannot use federal agents to arrest officers of a state government unless the charges are rock solid. There is a strong public
14.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
This doesn't really have any fifth amendment implications. The prohibition against self incrimination reads "no person ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." That doesn't relate to
15.
by whats_a_quasar 1y ago
No, a "publicity stunt" is not the best way to describe this latest escalation in the Trump administration's campaign to destroy the rule of law in America. It may be deliberately flashy, but that phrasing very much undersell
16.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reddit Owners: Advance Publications (30%), Tencent (11%), Sam Altman (9%)
17.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
Definitely, and a lot of that haircut actually happened in between when the deal was signed and when it closed, too. That was right when interest rates went up and Musk tried to wriggle out of the purchase agreement. So it's a great ou
18.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
Oh yeah I totally agree with that framing. I find this fascinating intellectually because of the deal dynamics and worthy of critique but agree that the tone of some of the commentary is a bit silly. It's a really unethical thing to do
19.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
And also Sam Altman doesn't own either OpenAI or Reddit, lol.
20.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
What do you mean, what's going on? The judge rejected Musk's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Meaning that the suit against him is going forward. Which is the correct outcome, because yeah he's obviously guilty.
21.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
It's all private capital. The only people who are exposed to this deal are the banks who make loans to Musk and Twitter, and the investors who put capital in to take Twitter private or to invest in xAI. If one of those entities is mad
22.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
The commenter also included past presidents, which is silly. Once a president is a past president, he no longer controls that military apparatus.
23.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
Fair enough, edited to just revenue. But those are just datacenters bought with VC money - my intent was to say that xAI's resources are basically just the investment they've received.
24.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
As best I can tell the deal includes paying off $12 billion of Twitter debt. So that's real money, though that seems like it's basically all of the cash that xAI has raised, so if that's the case that's pretty wild. Edit
25.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
What's the source / evidence for that? If the xAI shareholders really are all fine with it there's no ethical issue. But they have to be basically unanimously ok with the deal. Even a small investor has the right to not have
26.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
The negativity is because he's using investor money in xAI in a related party transaction. He's negotiating both sides of the sale and it's not at all obvious the transaction price is a good or real price for Twitter. It may
27.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
The solar city acquisition was for "only" $2.6 billion. This deal is way bigger. I'm not sure what the Tesla valuation was at the time of that deal, but I have to imagine it's proportionally way bigger too. A $45 billion
28.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
Green cards cannot be yanked for constitutionally protected speech.
29.
by whats_a_quasar 2y ago
Looks interesting, I currently use Obsidian for personal planning in a similar way and am happy with it, and Asana for the team. How would you pitch the product compared to Obsidian?
30.
by whats_a_quasar 3y ago
Do you know what inner loop and outer loop traffic means here? Are they different sides/directions of the bridge? And it is tragic how close the police were to evacuating the work crews. I interpret that the officer blocking one entry

More ›