IHeartBadCode @ IHeartBadCode @kbin.social

Posts

2

Comments

750

Joined

2 yr. ago

When a civil action is removed solely under section 1441(a), all defendants who have been properly joined and served must join in or consent to the removal of the action.

— 28 USC 1446(b)(2)(A)

petitioners’ first claim, which is brought against Secretary Griswold,
makes it clear that the Secretary is not a nominal party.

— Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer ruling

The Secretary Griswold is joined and Trump did not have the Secretary sign on to the request to be removed. Therefore the request is deficient.

I no longer want to be.

Hey also. Gopher is also getting a bit of a hit, but mostly due to a new protocol someone came up with called Gemini. It's like Gopher a lot but has some (and I cannot emphasize this enough) very basic markdown.

You can find out more about it here. I recommend Lagrange for your client. Two places I like to go to are Station (gemini://station.martinrue.com/) and Antenna (gemini://warmedal.se/antenna/). BBS (gemini://bbs.geminispace.org/) is also a new one on the scene.

And the nice thing about Lagrange is that it also supports the Finger protocol which basically is a way to read the .project or .plan file on a given user for the indicated system. Those files for those that never used them allowed a user to type a short status update into them that folks could then poll at any given time. Basically "ye olde status update".

There's a person that serves a weather reporting system via a finger interface at (finger://graph.no/) and it works really well in Lagrange.

It's a motion to dismiss that was granted under rules of the court. The rules cited by the defendant (The Secretary of State) in the motion to dismiss:

• Rule 12(b)(1) — The plaintiff did not present enough evidence to show that they have standing to bring the matter before the courts.
• Rule 12(b)(6) — The plaintiff did not present sufficient factual matter to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face .

The court sided with the plaintiff that sufficient evidence was indeed presented before the court to indicate that the plaintiff did indeed have standing, BUT their argument brought before the court failed to state a claim under either the APA (the Administrative Procedure
Act) or the First Amendment. Thus the court has accepted the motion to dismiss the case, citing:

A concrete injury is “foremost” among the standing requirements

Plaintiff could state in concrete terms the injury to be suffered by those affected by the two avenues of injury they (the plaintiff) had indicated. The plaintiff is the one who brought up the first amendment and the APA but failed to follow through on the argument before the court in terms of actual injury (a court CANNOT assume injury even ones that sound pretty obvious).

More importantly the first amendment issue brought before the court couldn't be held. The court indicated that the Government has a vested interest (in the name of national security) to be all up in the business of people traveling here for work. But that the plaintiff did bring up a point about how that might also hurt their ability to work here, but failed to qualify it in their original argument (that basically means, "I don't think this is a first amendment issue but you've got a point if you want to try something else.")

The motion to dismiss is granted with perjury. The plaintiff cannot bring it back before the courts and cannot usually appeal the decision.

So yeah, the Judge sounds like he was interested in the issue being brought but the arguments that were critical to their case fell apart at the whole "for foreigners traveling here, the US has every right to monitor your social media accounts". The argument that seemed to pique the judge's interest was how that information might be used to remove business opportunities from people traveling here. Which is a good point because once a person is approved to work here in the US, the information obtained by the Visa application cannot be used to taint the work environment the person works in.

However, the plaintiff wasn't able to provide a concrete way of how that would happen (that was outside of the "we're arresting you and kicking you out" which the Government has a right to do). The thing is the plaintiff would need a way to connect the dots on how information obtained in the Visa might get back to their employer and then the employer keeps the person but alters their job based on that information released by the Government. If there is a manner by which that might happen, then yeah, that's a no-no.

There is not one ounce of honor or decency left in the Republican party

Oh that was already the case with buttery emails and before that birth certificate two, the long form-aroo. We all saw an exodus of long standing Republican Senators in middle of the road positions, because they saw the writing on the wall. Batshit crazy is the new GOP.

As a GenX myself, yes, I am a donkey.

Not only that Southern States are not uniformly composed. A lot of Republican power in the south comes from gerrymandering the large populations. That whole political border thing is less a thing when a particular group of citizens have just been given the green light to raze the State Capitol.

Seceding states themselves would have massive civil unrest, there’s just zero ways the States themselves would be sustainable. Not to mention that if say Texas tried it, it’s likely drug cartels would join in the looting and destruction of the State. So that State would be fighting something like a four prong war, by itself.

Citizens are a lot more educated today, especially in the large cities. They would absolutely take any secession as permission to burn the whole thing down. And a lot of the seats of Government in these States are in their largest city. Whatever political majority that MTG think she has to support her calls is fiction supported by electioneering.

scope of modern AAA video games is unsustainable

Helpful hint, it's not just video game programming. Those hijacked gas pipelines in the US, unsecured SCADA systems weren't because every sysadmin was falling asleep, it's because nobody pulling the trigger wanted to listen to the sysadmins screaming that blindly deploying shit without audits, was a bad idea.

In pretty much every single technological failure, there's usually a common thread. Someone did (or forgot to do something) in the name of profit.

You know really at this point, I blame God. Don't blame the ants, blame the person who picked out the location for the picnic.

I'm just curious where he's pulling the money for this legal team? It's definitely not from X's "profits" LOL.

Yeah that's literally UNENFORCEABLE. We just had a case last year that indicated that you can scrap data from sites so long as the data being scrapped isn't used for profit.

Additionally, scrappers cannot be legally held to have agreed to the TOS. Just simply typing an address in and then receiving a page back doesn't mean that anyone agrees to the TOS of the server that gave the page. For pretty much the same reason software couldn't enforce the "if you don't agree with the terms on the CD-ROM, then you cannot open the package the CD-ROM is in." So just because X wrote that in their TOS has zero bearing on if they can actually enforce that through the court system, which likely that's going to be a big NAH.

That's based off of the point of the gate-up/gate-down test given by the courts. If a normal person can find a random "tweet (are we still calling them that?)" by typing a URL, the gate is up, you cannot pick and choose who gets to enter. If you don't want a random tweet being scrapped the gates must be down. That means nobody typing in a random URL can ever access that tweet, they have to go through the gate house to gain entry to the resource. But gates down means that no one is going to link to a tweet because when they click the link, instead of seeing the related information, they get handed a login page. Which X has been trying that and news outlets bitching that they're not going to post tweets in their story if Musk is just going to block everyone.

The thing that X could argue is that someone is using their tweets for "profit" which is exactly the case they're trying with the ADL and the CCDH. They're trying to argue that these not-for-profits are profiting off of convincing ad buyers to not buy ads. Which, if that sounds crazy, OH BOY IS IT. However, Musk's lawyers have attempted to muddle the waters on what is "PROFIT". So grab some popcorn for that one.

The thing is that, I get Musk wants to hold tight copyright on the tweets and not surface a lot to others who might use that data for who knows what purpose. BUT you cannot have cake and have eaten it as well. Musk doesn't get the best of both worlds. He can put everything behind a wall and attempt to enforce his TOS, but that's still not really go to go well for his ADL/CCDH case. Or he can surface the tweets for the Internet to read. But he cannot have both. We've settled that in courts and Congress hasn't made any kind of motion in changing that standing.

Remember when Matt Gaetz stormed a SCIF? His justification was that they were holding "secret impeachment hearings"?

I led over 30 of my colleagues into the SCIF where Adam Schiff is holding secret impeachment depositions.

And the reality was that it was a briefing on how we had agents from the CIA inside low level positions of the Ukrainian government working with the Government that were watching Russian moles that also had positions in the Ukrainian government? And that Russia had found out that it was happening but hadn't figured out who it was so they were launching all kinds of operations to try and get some information on who to kill? And this whole meeting was to figure out how best to help those agents before they got killed?

Fun times.

And what's even better, you haven't heard peep from Gaetz about his "brave" storming the SCIF since. Because he almost got a bunch of people fucking killed with his stunt, was told he almost got a bunch of people fucking killed, and all that "brave" shit disappeared like a fart in a hurricane. So...

These ass-hats are putting people’s lives and national security at risk over this nonsense

It's not just this nonsense they're doing it over. They do it over all kinds of bullshit. And people like Gaetz do not vet shit and eat it up like it's the gospel. And nations like China, Russia, India, and what not know these fuckers will eat it up and feed it to them. They constantly bitch about "government conditioning" and other pyops bullshit, but they themselves are the major victims of it.

It's got to be a fucking uphill battle when you have a political party that's just eating foreign bullshit and calling domestic intelligence "weaponizing government". Our intelligence apparatus does not want these fuck wits handing our country over to someone else, but goddamn it, they keep having so little trust in the USA because, IDK, but all I can chalk it up to is that they are absolutely fucking morons. They just want "someone" to be wrong so they can stroke their massive ego dicks is the best I can figure out.

What's that mnemonic device for counterintelligence? MICE. There are four general things that will convince someone to betray their nation, "Money, Ideology, Compromising information, and Ego". And goddamn it, these fuckers get every single one of those tickled by the very fuckers that want to destroy this country. It has to be frustrating to see them time and time again sitting up there in the committee acting like some CIA agent that risked their lives trying to keep bad people out of our interests is fucking trying to destroy Donald Trump or some shit. Like, "MY DUDE. Bigger picture here Senator/Representative. Believe it or not, there's more to all of this shit than some megalomaniac asshat who was once President." Shocking!

I mean did we even want to try that method?

The method involves a chemical solution that dissolves and leaches gold at room temperature and is “environmentally friendly”

Strategic quotes deploy! If it's anything like the methods I've seen, then that's some really generous usage of the words environmentally and friendly next to each other.

Not to mention that because of the standing rules of the Senate, all you have to do is send an email saying you’re filibustering and any one person can bring to halt something all the other 99 Senators just want to move on to the next topic.

Literally this guy stands alone on this and the brain dead rules allow him and him alone to bring it all to a halt.

WD-40 used to come in big cans before it was an aerosol. And there has been spray bottles of it for some time too.

From what I remember, WD-40 is just mineral oil plus some hydrocarbons. The aerosol version is just so that tiny target straw works well, but you can literally just spray it on the work area and “rub” it in as it’s a penetrating oil for water displacement. In fact, I’m pretty certain that’s what the WD stands for, water displacement.

Oops all rope.