Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
411 points by stephenheron 1d ago 589 comments
Ask HN: Is there a temp phone number like temp email?
9 points by piratesAndSons 20h ago 11 comments
Stop squashing your commits. You're squashing your AI too
4 points by jannesblobel 1d ago 8 comments
Ask HN: Best codebases to study to learn software design?
100 points by pixelworm 3d ago 89 comments
Ask HN: Are AI filters becoming stricter than society itself?
29 points by tsevis 3d ago 16 comments
27 throw0101c 0 8/27/2025, 10:58:00 AM
> In a broader sense, however, today’s ruling is of a piece with this Court’s recent tendencies. “[R]ight when the Judiciary should be hunkering down to do all it can to preserve the law’s constraints,” the Court opts instead to make vindicating the rule of law and preventing manifestly injurious Government action as difficult as possible. This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules.[6] We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.
* https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a103_kh7p.pdf
One possible example, Texas is now redistricting in the middle of the decade to remove some congress people to give the GOP more seats. California started doing the same to offset Texas. You can bet if this redistricting gets to the Supreme Court, Texas will be allowed to continue, Calif. will be banned.
Everyone in the US knows that will happen. So this is on Roberts, allowing this court to do what it wants, not what is legal.
Are you fucking kidding me?