volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@Linux_Is_Best@mstdn.social ah, so you do not think anyone should or does need an indivudal to act as a gatehouse to the Fediverse, and then you're going to act as a gatehouse to the Fediverse?

@bigheadtales that's not what I'm suggesting, nor is it my position.

@pomCountyIrregs Yep, and that's the GIANT unsettled question and the heart of this: Who gets to decide the finding of fact that is in dispute?

There are other disputed issues here, but that's the big one.
@RememberUsAlways

@freemo Yeah, so the judge oversees the entire trial, including everything from discovery motions through depositions that happen outside the courtroom.

If you think the behavior might have been managed by the judge inside the actual courtroom then it also applies outside the courtroom.

Of course, a judge can't go overboard and address behavior that has nothing to do with the trial, but that's why they have the appeals process to check the power of the judge to address stuff outside of their trial jurisdiction.

Here it sounds like Trump's been losing, though, with other courts agreeing that yes, these judgments were properly working to make sure the trial functions smoothly.

@bigheadtales yeah, such fascists, promoting the concept that maybe just maybe the people have more of a voice in their government.

This is why all the shouts of fascist! come across as so out of touch with reality.

@smurthys correct.

Basically, it requires a majority to act, and without a majority there is no action.

Without action there's no overturning of the lower court, since that would be an action.

@MugsysRapSheet no, the one has nothing to do with the other.

States independently operate their election systems under their own rules.

Heck, the trials don't even accuse Trump of what CO and ME have settled on, just to highlight how separate the processes are.

@joshadell but Trump has no authority to do that in part BECAUSE of SCOTUS power.

@RememberUsAlways I imagine the appeal would be based on the reasoning she laid out to support the decision.

Should it be shown that either her reasoning is faulty or her factual basis is incorrect, the decision would be a violation of due process under state law, which is a federal requirement, and the appeal would have teeth.

It's one thing to say that under state law I have discretion, but another to say I used my discretion based on x, y, and z, which turned out to be faulty.
@pomCountyIrregs

@RememberUsAlways remember that Bush v Gore didn't itself allow vote certification, but rather it disallowed a lower court from interfering.

That's a technical difference, but a very important one here.

@petersuber after watching conservatives respond to ranked choice voting in Alaska, it became really, really clear that they didn't understand what it was or how it worked.

They're not so much forgetting anything as they're simply misinformed about what it is they're attacking, which is a shame.

@freemo The idea is that this isn't a judge restraining free speech as much as maintaining order in his court, including the parts of court proceedings that happen outside the literal courtroom.

If a person was in the courtroom during the trial and wouldn't sit down and shut up when it wasn't their turn to speak, the judge could respond to that, right? It wouldn't be seen as a free speech violation, but rather just the judge giving others their chance to do their jobs?

Same thing here.

It wouldn't be punishment over speech--it would be jailing as a way to prevent interference with the court proceedings.

@mjgardner I assume no such thing.

But hashtags, **to the extent that they're used**, do give you finer grained control over your own experience than cws **to the extent that they're used**.

@mjgardner you can't focus on blocking hashtags for topics you don't want to hear about?

@IanSudbery I think you're missing how vitally important these theories were.

Special relativity did not come out of the blue. Rather it was an extremely difficult mental leap brought on by extremely critical gaps of knowledge as theorists had struggled mightily to figure out how to fit together different parts of the model of the universe around them.

Same with general relativity: you describe it as cleaning up minor details, but those minor details loomed very large! They weren't exactly minor.

It's been my experience talking with philosophers that someone is telling them these really incorrect versions of what physicists are doing today and have been doing for the last 100 years. It says if there are standard textbooks out there that are just plain factually incorrect about what the field has been doing, and this has been leaving philosophy students with really incorrect ideas about how it works in practice.

@tobychev @dlevenstein

@Wikisteff I would say at that point the horse has been out of the barn for generations.

It's not that the conspiracy you describe would do much the same thing in practice. Rather, it would be a symptom of the same thing already having happened in practice, at which point we would no longer have been living in the United States for a while. People just would not have recognized it formally yet.

Furthermore, the supreme court at that point would no longer be acting within its own authority, so it's not like they would have the authority to make such a declaration.

But like I said above, for the conspiracy you described to be practical we would have had to, collectively, long before have abandoned the structure of the United States.

@mok0 @georgetakei

@icedquinn I've tinkered with those features over the years, but in general library management tools never made the workflow convenient enough to justify the extra steps for me.

It has some powerful potential, but doesn't seem like it had enough to overcome the inertia of other container formats that worked well enough.

@LewisHarrington it's not entirely legal in the US, and that's causing a lot of problems.

@GatekeepKen careful: there's a good chance that if they were generating their own power they would be doing it with smaller, less efficient plants.

It could actually make the problem worse.

@gerrymcgovern