volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@TCatInReality Biden doesn't need immunity or demands to do that.

The DOJ works for him. Biden already has the authority to conduct such an investigation.

Always has had.

@BostonGlobe

@SCampbell hm? What's my task?

If you care about Trump, and I'm not saying you should, and I would actually say you probably shouldn't, here's what it is.

@donm

@SCampbell

Again, just because whoever you're getting your information from is not relaying that to you doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

TO BE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR I think he's an awful human being that has no place anywhere near the presidency, but I also recognize that one reason that he has purchased with his base is because he does have genuine belly laughs.

And the reason I'm emphasizing this is because if we want to counter the guy and oppose him we have to realize that his voters vote for him because of those moments, many of them at least.

It's like refusing to see one of the major weapons that an enemy has.

Yes, the guy has genuine laughs. Oftentimes they are the laughs of a complete idiot who doesn't know anything about the world, but that's part of how he connects with voters.

We need to appreciate that so we can counter it.

@donm

@jonny in that case I'm not sure what problem you're running into, because I have no problem getting a lot of data out of IPFS.

I would understand if you're not able to receive giant files from the system. That's not really what it's for.

But I get bits of data out of it all the time, so if you're not, I can only imagine you have some sort of user error happening on your side.

@mhoye

@donm Well right, that fits within my confirmation bias argument.

This is the huge difference between he never laughs versus the subset of information that I get from my sources don't show me him laughing.

That's the whole point.

@ScruffyJunco

So how do we work on addressing that problem?

@jstatepost @lexfri

@tinkel That's not how the US government works, though.

Presidents don't have such unilateral power.

This is yet more self-serving sensationalism out of propublica.

@Free_Press spinning pretty hard to portray those as insults.

Or maybe you're just thin-skinned? Maybe people in Montana aren't?

@jonny Oh no, not at all.

Working with databases you tend to avoid files in the first place because they are so constraining. If you need to package data up into a file, you can do that with whatever front end you have. It's not really the business of the database because the database doesn't know what file format you want to use.

No, IPFS is not about sharing binary blobs. It's about, you can share your temperature reading or the timestamp of some politician's quote in an interview or whatever, and when you query that you get back the temperature reading or the timestamp, not some binary blob. That's the power that it gives you.

The real value of IPFS is specifically that it looks deeper into the data underneath binary blobs, allowing you to access content directly.

@mhoye

@MugsysRapSheet The Supreme Court already ruled against Trump, though, sending the case back for prosecution.

So yeah it's not acts committed while in office. It's official, legal acts that cannot be prosecuted. Yeah, the Supreme Court said you can't be prosecuted for legal things. It's really not that crazy ruling as so many misleading writings have been trying to spread.

So this court has already refused to defer to Trump and has cleared the way for prosecuting him. It's right there in the ruling.

Again, it wasn't a crazy ruling, it basically just said a president can't harass somebody with the justice department.

@nazokiyoubinbou @knittingknots2

@joelvanderwerf ordering the Watergate burglary would be clearly with in the category that the Supreme Court ruled should be prosecuted.

@jonny

Ah, there is a major problem with the name that speaks to your complaint above, but it's not what you think.

IPFS is actually not a file system. It's a database. Above you talked about downloading files from it, which is like embedding files inside a field in an SQL table. It's just not really what the system is designed to do, and for some reason they chose a name that completely misleads as to what it is.

It's an axe I grind that the developers have terrible PR. They really are bad at communicating with the general public about what they're doing, about what it even is, and this is part of that.

The real offering of IPFS is not to be some sort of BitTorrent replacement. If you just want to transfer files, use torrents. That's the right tool for the job. IPFS on the other hand lets you look deep into data with structured key value lookups and all of this other stuff. That's why there's so much overhead, it has all of this database functionality in a system optimized for managing small bits of interrelated content, not Black box files.

I have no idea why they did not call it IPDB but there you go.

@mhoye

@ginaintheburg what? No, that's not what that means at all.

@Captain_Jack_Sparrow nah, we've had quite a lot of ridiculous impeachment motions lately.

But we keep voting for those congresspeople so I guess democracy is working out fine.

@dontreportme No, that's not quite what the ruling held, and yes the podcast does seem to get this wrong as well.

What the ruling found was NOT that it was a problem for the opponent to get more money, the problem was that the more money was triggered by the first person spending some, thus penalizing that campaign spending.

In other words, it's not the contribution to another's speech that's the problem. The problem is that your speech is what triggers the contribution, thereby penalizing your speech.

I hope that clarifies things. It's a significant distinction at the core of the case.

@cdarwin

@Jam123 Well then I would respond that the key is making sure people are aware that they can't trust what they're being sold as news.

And yeah, maybe more and more people are realizing that, but there's still so many who do put their trust in untrustworthy sources and make significant decisions based on falsehoods because they don't realize.

@MoiraEve@mastodon.world

@Downshift Walz has taken positions where he is eager to stick his nose in other people's business.

So it's kind of funny to see that hashtag.

If only he was of the philosophy of people minding their own business then maybe I'd be interested in voting for him.

@MoiraEve@mastodon.world part of the problem is that different news sources are reporting factually different versions of what happened, so a lot of people that are criticizing Walz do so based on a different set of claims.

Personally I don't know or care about this, but I definitely see how different people are coming to different conclusions based on different reporting.

@jcclement@mastodon.social EVERY president wants to concentrate powers in the executive branch, or else they're not doing their job. The US system was specifically designed based on the idea that different parties will balance each other out by working in their own interests, that's how they check each other's powers.

If the president doesn't want to concentrate powers in the executive branch then he would allow the other branches to get too powerful. Instead, the present is supposed to want to concentrate powers while the legislative and judicial branches refuse that because they want to concentrate the powers in their own corners.

That's a fundamental part of maintaining the balance in the US government.

The Supreme Court has been adamant in saying that no one is above the law. People talking about writing legislation to reverse the Supreme Court don't seem to understand what the Supreme Court actually said, and they are instead being misled by a bunch of special interests and politicians looking to score points.