Note that the argument about whether or not he is a gang member is beside the point. The White House concedes that he should not have been taken to El Salvador even if he is a gang member, but denies that the court has the authority to order the White House to make even the smallest attempt to bring him back.

The White House is saying that if they grab you and take you to a foreign country where you are imprisoned, that’s it. The courts can’t do anything. It won’t matter if you’re a law-abiding citizen or if taking you out of the USA was unambiguously against the law. Only the executive branch, the people responsible for your predicament, get to choose if and when they do anything at all to secure your freedom.

I don’t see how that’s related to excluding particular countries.

Edit: What I mean is that I don’t understand how you conclude

So if you aren’t exporting/importing from those countries they wouldn’t be included. It doesn’t even matter if there was a trade surplus.

based on the formula.

I get that eggs are in a lot of recipes, but people’s obsession with them is still surprising to me. There are so many other food to choose from.

Cuba, Belarus and North Korea were also not included

At least they’re being consistent. If Biden had excluded Russia along with those countries from some global economic policy, I wouldn’t be suspicious.

That’s not how it works. Stock prices don’t fall below the level that rich people are willing to buy them at, specifically because rich people buy them at that level.

I don’t have a dog in this horse.

Get thee behind me, anything beyond extended ASCII.

At least they’re not hiding that the solution is generated by AI, but the random usernames make me suspect that they’re trying to avoid blocking or banning.

I think that the variety of leftists here, ranging all the way from people who don’t hate voting for Democrats to literal Stalinists, is one of the peculiarities of Lemmy that I find interesting. With that said, actually engaging with any of the ones more like the latter than the former is, as you’ve experienced, unrewarding.

deleted by creator

The programmer’s answer?

We don’t support that use case.

On the one hand, murder for the purpose of terrorism is more serious than ordinary murder, but on the other hand I think they might be overreaching given that people on the jury are more likely to be sympathetic to the defendant than they would be to an ordinary murderer. I suspect the feds are more interested in making a strong impression now than they are in the ultimate outcome of a case that will go on for years.

Earlier this month a court ordered a halt to deportations carried out under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law previously used only in wartime. However, US media, citing administration sources, reported that the recent deportations were made under general immigration laws.

That’s all that the article says. We’ll see how the judge responds…

Oh my God.

You have left out galaxy brain giant IBM model M. (Not more keys, but thicc keys.)

It’s not just the size. It’s also the way the sound of typing will bother everyone else in the room.

that series of keypresses is that exits vim

One of the great mysteries of the universe. However, I can confirm that my power button also exits vim.

I’m spiteful enough that I would have returned my new laptop (despite needing it for a trip I had in a couple of days) if I hadn’t been able to bypass the account requirement by disabling the wifi.

What still pissed me off is that it would restart itself after downloading updates if it was left idle, and there was no straightforward option to turn that off. (I think I managed to break that “feature” but who knows how long that will work.) Turning my computer off is never acceptable unless I initiate it. It’s about as obviously wrong as walking into my house uninvited or borrowing my stuff without asking me.

Having $2,000 is better than having $2, but in practice I’m usually skeptical that plans to achieve an outcome like that will work out rather than failing and leaving both of us with $1. The manner in which the outcome would be achieved also matters - some of the plans seem to me like proposals to just steal the money and I object to that on moral rather than economic principles.

(I don’t mean to imply that people I disagree with think that stealing is OK, but rather that they and I don’t agree on the definition of stealing.)

I’m not one of those completely uncompromising libertarians who don’t want public roads - I actually think the government should be doing all the things you list, and I pay my taxes. I do prefer individualistic ways of doing things, but I’m pragmatic and there are many problems for which the collectivist solution is the only practical solution. When I say I’m fiscally conservative, I mean that I think society should be more libertarian than it is now, not that it should be absolutely libertarian.

I’m someone who actually calls myself socially liberal but fiscally conservative, and that’s because my primary concern (in the terms of moral foundations theory) is the liberty/oppression axis. In other words, I think leaving people alone is a good thing, and while it’s not the only good thing and it needs to be balanced against other concerns, we should still be doing it more than we are now.

Two caveats:

1. I’m socially liberal because a free society requires tolerating even the people you hate. This is hard, and even many people who consider themselves tolerant because they simply don’t hate a particular group aren’t (and often don’t want to be) tolerant in this sense.

2. I’m economically conservative because the freedom to act without government interference even in an economic context has great inherent worth (but I’ll repeat here that I don’t value it to the exclusion of all else) but also because the free market usually does a better job than central planning at making everyone prosperous. I don’t care much about wealth inequality - a world in which I have two dollars and you have two million dollars is a better place than a world in which we both have just one dollar.

Edit: in practice I always end up voting for moderate Democrats at the national level, both because I think social issues are generally more important than economic issues and because neither party usually does what I would want regarding economic issues. However, I have more options at the state and local level.