> she ruled that the court lacks jurisdiction to order "retrospective relief", forcing NSF to pay out previously cancelled funds, saying those claims should be brought in the Court of Federal Claims, which handles lawsuits seeking money from the federal government
So many times a court ruling will come down similar to this, where the judge, in correctly and impartially analyzing the situation, deems that whatever the plaintiff is seeking cannot be granted due to jurisdiction or some other basically administrative problem, but the mass media reports on in it in a way that makes it seem like it was because they thought the plaintiff “unworthy.”
It appears to me that administrative problems can be found any time you want. The court chooses whether or not they are sufficient to matter in this case.
As such, it is correct, but not impartial. They can choose their personal opinion and then retroactively find the justification.
It is incredibly clear in US Federal law that the ONlY court with jurisdiction in a contract dispute with the federal government is the Court of Federal Claims.
literally it would be breaking the law for this judge to adjudicate this case. That’s not judicial bias or finding a way to weasel out (as is done all the time with “standing”).
The reason Trump has been winning so much at the Supreme Court is because these lower courts have been breaking all the rules in their efforts to stop him. They keep getting struck down for breaking the rules.
Absolutely not true. Trump hasn't been "winning" at the Supreme Court.
The Trump administration has won exactly two cases at SCOTUS, which is Trump vs CASA and United States vs Skrmetti.
Every other "positive outcome" from SCOTUS has been the Supreme Court reaching down into lower court decisions and delaying/pausing lower courts' decisions in lieu of the Supreme Court actually hearing and deciding the case.
And in a growing number of these cases, there has been zero rationale provided for the reversal. None whatsoever. You cannot possibly make the claim they were for "breaking the rules." In fact, with the (very aberrational) lack of provided rationale, I'd suggest you can infer quite the opposite: SCOTUS's interventions are actually not readily defensible with any cogent legal argument.
In other words, you are a victim of the same ignorance discussed at the top of the thread. Trump's wins are not wins, they are SCOTUS using procedural tools to overturn lower decisions without having to hear evidence, consider arguments, or provide decisions themselves.
The legal system is too complex for your average reporter to understand. They operate at the level of stories rather than systems, rules, allocations of decision making power, etc.
I had a civil procedure professor once explain various federal court procedures in terms of the flow of cases through pipelines, and an evidence professor who explained the rules of evidence in terms of Bayesian statistics. But if you’re smart enough to understand that, you can make a lot more money doing something other than being a reporter.
Sometimes I agree, but in other cases a merely administrative problem ends up meaning there's no effective remedy. The judge also ruled that the plaintiffs can't get an injunction against the prospective claims the court does have jurisdiction over. If the government can illegally cancel your grants at any time for any reason, and months of court action isn't enough to get them restored, I think it's fair for a journalist to summarize that as "courts are letting the government break the law without consequence".
Intel Arc - Intel's dedicated GPUs, each GPU generation has a name in alphabetical order, names are taken from nerd culture.
Alchemist - First gen GPUs A310 GPUs are the low end, A770 are the high end. Powerful hardware for cheap, very spotty software at release. Got fixed up later.
Battlemage - Second gen (current gen), only B570 and B580 GPUs came out. They said weren't gonna release more Battlemage GPUs after these because they wanted to focus on Celestial, but probably went back on it seeing how well the B580 was reviewed and the B770 is due to be released by the end of the year.
Celestial - Next gen GPUs, they were expected for release early 2026. This article claims it was cancelled, but personally I think it's too late to cancel a GPU this late in production. Especially when they basically skipped a generation to get it out faster.
Are we just not teaching The Jungle, Silent Spring, etc… in school anymore?
Also, please enlighten me on where I can shop around for alternative tap water.
I’m being petty, and understand the linked article is more fear-mongery than what the actual situation is, but simply eliminating all regulation is not the solution, as history has shown.
or maybe it would reveal to the meditator that consciousness is nonlocal and what we perceive as our self is an illusion created by the systems of symbols and language which overlays our perception and through which existence filters and there is no self there is no other there is one whole and it is all conscious
I think it’s confusing particularly because it pushes the whole “zero setup” thing, then when you go to the docs to figure out what the heck the thing is it describes a long list of things one would need to do in order to set up a working physical machine running Kazeta and the cartridges etc... The website itself reads like it’s an app you can just download and run, while at the same time hinting that you’re gonna need to do a fair amount of physical stuff without really explaining the whole thing.
I read their website landing page but it’s still kinda confusing — what exactly is readyset? It all sounds like it’s a cache you can set up in front of MySQL/postgres. But then this article is talking about implementing joins which is what the database itself would do, not a cache. But then the blurbs talk about it like it’s a “CDN for your database” that brings your data to the edge. What the heck is it?!
ReadySet is basically "incremental view maintenance" but applied to arbitrary SQL queries. It acts like a caching proxy for your database, but it simultaneously ingests the replication log from the system in order to see things happen. Then it uses that information to perform "incremental" updates of data it has cached, so that if you requery something, it is much faster.
Naive example: let's say you had a query that was a table scan and it computed the average age of all users in the users table. If you insert a new row into the users table and then rerun the query, you'd expect another table scan, so it will grow over time. In a traditional setup, you might cache this query and only update it "every once in a while." Instead, ReadySet can decompose this query into an "incremental program", run it, cache the result -- and then when it sees the insert into the table it incrementally updates the underlying data cache. That means the second run would actually be fast, and the cost to update the cache is only proportional to the underlying change, not the size of the table.
It seems to be some sort of read-only reimplementation of MySQL/Postgres that can ingest their replication streams and materialize views (for caching). Complete with a really primitive optimizer, if the article is to be believed.
Covariant and contravariant indices would be the formal terms. I'm not really sure whether I've seen "upstairs" written down.
Sub/superscript... strike me as the typographical terms, not the meaning? Like $x_\mathrm{alice}$ is certainly a subscript, and footnote 2 is a superscript, but neither is an index.
Pretty much what I expected. Probably also depends on what kind of code you write. I assume somebody who writes kernel drivers would lean more towards computer friendly.
So many times a court ruling will come down similar to this, where the judge, in correctly and impartially analyzing the situation, deems that whatever the plaintiff is seeking cannot be granted due to jurisdiction or some other basically administrative problem, but the mass media reports on in it in a way that makes it seem like it was because they thought the plaintiff “unworthy.”
reply