Hard Pass

8 readers
0 users here now
Rules
  1. Don't be an asshole
  2. Don't make us write more rules.

View hardpass in other ways:

Hardpass.lol is an invite-only Lemmy Instance.
founded 10 months ago
ADMINS

hard pass chief

1
 
 

https://archive.ph/wKj0m

Some Amazon employees said they were still sceptical of AI tools’ utility for the bulk of their work given the risk of error. They added that the company had set a target for 80 per cent of developers to use AI for coding tasks at least once a week and was closely tracking adoption.

2
3
4
5
 
 
6
 
 

crickets

"A nation that allows the powerful to escape justice is not a nation of laws," Mace said. "It is a nation of exceptions. And the exceptions always seem to apply to the same people."

7
 
 
8
 
 
9
 
 
10
 
 
11
 
 
12
 
 
13
296
lmao (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
 
 
14
 
 
15
16
 
 
17
 
 

Post ContentTo show you how ridiculous the opinion is, the Court said that I’m not allowed to charge even $1 DOLLAR to any Country under IEEPA, I assume to protect other Countries, not the United States which they should be interested in protecting — But I am allowed to cut off any and all Trade or Business with that same Country, even imposing a Foreign Country destroying embargo, and do anything else I want to do to them — How nonsensical is that? They are saying that I have the absolute right to license, but not the right to charge a license fee. What license has ever been issued without the right to charge a fee? But now the Court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our Country, a much more powerful Right than many people thought we had.

Our Country is the “HOTTEST” anywhere in the World, but now, I am going in a different direction, which is even stronger than our original choice. As Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his Dissent:

“Although I firmly disagree with the Court's holding today, the decision might not substantially constrain a President's ability to order tariffs going forward. That is because numerous other federal statutes authorize the President to impose tariffs and might justify most (if not all) of the tariffs issued in this case...Those statutes include, for example, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232); the Trade Act of 1974 (Sections 122, 201, and 301); and the Tariff Act of 1930 (Section 338).”

Thank you Justice Kavanaugh!

In actuality, while I am sure they did not mean to do so, the Supreme Court’s decision today made a President’s ability to both regulate Trade, and impose TARIFFS, more powerful and crystal clear, rather than less. There will no longer be any doubt, and the Income coming in, and the protection of our Companies and Country, will actually increase because of this decision. Based on longstanding Law and Hundreds of Victories to the contrary, the Supreme Court did not overrule TARIFFS, they merely overruled a particular use of IEEPA TARIFFS. The ability to block, embargo, restrict, license, or impose any other condition on a Foreign Country’s ability to conduct Trade with the United States under IEEPA, has been fully confirmed by this decision. In order to protect our Country, a President can actually charge more TARIFFS than I was charging in the past under the various other TARIFF authorities, which have also been confirmed, and fully allowed.

Therefore, effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged, and we are also initiating several Section 301 and other Investigations to protect our Country from unfair Trading practices. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

18
 
 
19
 
 

...when Abraham Lincoln gave his Gettysburg Address, the words “Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” did not refer to the signing of the Constitution but rather to the date of the Declaration Of Independence.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” it said. Those concepts did not make it into the Constitution, because leaders in southern states did not believe in them. Instead they believed in property rights, which included the ownership of slaves. Richardson explains:

In Lincoln’s day, fabulously wealthy enslavers had gained control over the government and had begun to argue that the Founders had gotten their worldview terribly wrong. They insisted that their system of human enslavement, which had enabled them to amass fortunes previously unimaginable, was the right one. Most men were dull drudges who must be led by their betters for their own good, southern leaders said. As South Carolina senator and enslaver James Henry Hammond put it, “I repudiate, as ridiculously absurd, that much-lauded but nowhere accredited dogma of Mr. Jefferson, that ‘all men are born equal.’”

In 1858, Abraham Lincoln, then a candidate for the Senate, warned that arguments limiting American equality to white men were the same arguments “that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world…. Turn in whatever way you will—whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it is all the same old serpent.” Either people — men, in his day — were equal, or they were not. Lincoln went on, “I should like to know if taking this old Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon principle and making exceptions to it…where will it stop?”

. . .

...illegal immigrants. That phrase performs essential political work. It marks a population as outside ordinary protection. It reassures everyone else that detention is targeted and procedural.

But detention systems do not remain fixed to their initial category. In Germany, early camps held political enemies. Later they held others. The infrastructure did not change. The classification did.

In the Soviet Union, the Gulag expanded through administrative redefinition — new offenses, broader categories, larger quotas. Infrastructure makes expansion easier than restraint.

...Once physical capacity exists, using it becomes easier — politically, legally, bureaucratically. Expansion rarely arrives as a dramatic announcement. It happens through incremental adjustments — new enforcement priorities, revised definitions, widened discretion. Each change appears limited. The cumulative effect is not.

The early presentation of Dachau shows how normalization forms. The system appears orderly, rational, controlled. Harsh realities are hidden. The language is administrative. Observers see what they are permitted to see. By the time the full character of a detention system becomes undeniable, the infrastructure is already permanent.

The guards are trained. The facilities are staffed. The budgets are embedded. The public is accustomed. And most people still believe it exists for someone else. And once places to concentrate detainees outside of the normal legal system reaches scale, they become enduring instruments of state power that can be deployed against anyone.

A detention network built at this magnitude is not a temporary response. It is a structural shift in what government can do. You do not build a system this large for a moment. You build it for an era.

20
 
 
21
1
this (stockroom.wandering.shop)
submitted 1 minute ago by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/memes@lemmy.world
22
115
lmao rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone
23
24
 
 
25
 
 

Microsoft has quietly changed how Microsoft 365 Copilot works on mobile, and it’s going to upset most users. If you use Microsoft 365 Copilot as your default viewer for documents, spreadsheets, and presentations, and try opening any file, you’ll notice that Microsoft 365 Copilot now sends everything to Copilot. Worse, it auto-uploads files to OneDrive.

The Microsoft 365 Copilot app was originally called “Office Hub,” and it was a simple document viewer before it was upgraded with editing capabilities. This app has been around for a decade now, but it has undergone two major rebrands.

view more: next ›