Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 249 posts

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#121

Post by tegiddrone »

amazingamazing wrote: post #92
llamaimperative wrote: post #2

The specific law that Trump is very obviously breaking is the Securing Inspector General Independence Act of 2022, which says Congress must be notified 30 days in advance and given "substantive" rationale for dismissing inspectors general. This law was passed specifically in response to Trump breaking the antecedent law, Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, during his first term. Will the "party of law and order" do…

[flagged]

Thanks for shedding some light on this element of the story. I like to keep references like this when mustering support for action.

What does bipartisan even mean? I've seen my state lose a republican congressperson who, while I disagreed with, called out trump on disrespecting branches of gov during first term and since been replaced with a pro-trump congressperson. The checks and balances are eroding and the citizen response has to be strong.

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#122

Post by mattnewton »

MarkLowenstein wrote: post #36
mattnewton wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Her role was to enforce animal welfare laws. Simply investigating if those were upheld in extremely public examples of cutting chimps heads open who later died, doesn’t appear political to me.

[flagged]

What other high profile companies are putting hardware into the heads of chimpanzees? I am not aware of any.

And even if it was politically motivated to investigate, the evidence would have to be made public and Musk would have had a day in court to challenge any enforcement actions. Surely the inconvenience to Musk’s legal team and the court system is worth determining if potential charges had merit rather than Musk deciding?

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#123

Post by nickff »

llamaimperative wrote: post #25
nickff wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A number of (especially recent) administrations have performed a large number of legally questionable acts which were often structured in such a way as to be difficult to challenge (the CFPB comes to mind). Trump’s innovation seems to be taking this tactic to an extreme, remarkably early in this administration.

Say more about how the CFPB was illegal? It was created by an act of Congress.

There are/were a number of issues with its structure, some of which are described in the lawsuits mentioned on its Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Financial_Protectio...

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#124

Post by smitty1e »

llamaimperative wrote: post #32
smitty1e wrote: post #26

I gather that I'm further right than much of the HN crowd, having been on the edge of the Tea Party movement &c. The presence of the Citrus Caesar and the billionaire boys is due to substantial, ongoing problems. The U.S. Government, like any code base, has accrued much cruft over the last century. Whether or not DJT has any lasting positive effect isn't knowable yet. The risk of this current course being a cure wors…

A third thing to keep in mind: law is law and must be followed.

That's an excellent going-in position. Given sufficient complexity and overlap, frictions arise. Hence all of the allegations and lawsuits and appeals and so forth.

The voters are the ultimate judge, and typically end up with a government that reflects them, warts and all.

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#125

Post by Red_Comet_88 »

roenxi wrote: post #120
khazhoux wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see an electorate that wanted to cause harm. I see an electorate that thought anything is better than a black woman in charge. :-\

It rings a bit hollow when the single most popular president in recent history was Obama. If the US can cope with him what is the problem with women supposed to be? Harris was an unusually weak candidate; the primary system is supposed to shake people like that out and the Democrats were left in a disadvantageous place after bypassing it. One of the reasons Trump is getting all these historic wins is because the US D…

Indeed. If the DNC had allowed Bernie Sanders to run against Trump, Sanders would very likely have beaten him and Trump would have remained a reality TV star. Instead, they pushed Clinton on Democrats just like they pushed Harris this cycle. The corruption within the DNC is very much to blame for Trump.

I refuse to accept the childish assertion that the majority of American voters are card carrying members of a radical political system that was defeated last century. This is just an emotional response to a reality that one does not want to accept.

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#126

Post by khazhoux »

Terr_ wrote: post #111
khazhoux wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone who decided not to vote literally relinquished their voice in the matter. They simply don't count. They were "OK" with whatever others decided. Their opinion has as much weight as my dog's (and I don't even have a dog!).

> The people spoke very clearly [that] they wanted this. > [Nonvoters] were "OK" with whatever others decided. Those are not the same thing! Stop contradicting yourself in order to sanewash Trump.

Not a contradiction at all. And this isn't about "sanewashing" Trump.

There is a set of people eligible to vote. There is a set of people who do vote. Anyone in the first set who chooses not be in the second set, is no longer included in statements about What The People Want. You snooze, you lose.

The time to say whether you want or don't want a President is in November. You stay quiet then, you don't get to complain in January "This isn't what I wanted!" To stay home by choice is be OK with whatever outcome others decide.

And those others spoke clearly that this is the outcome they wanted.

Honestly, my head hurts at the apologism over non-voters. If you don't vote, you don't count!

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#128

Post by kevstev »

codr7 wrote: post #102
kevstev wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my big struggle with all of this. His first term I felt America was duped by a con man so protested and made a fuss on social media. Americans saw the first four years and astonishingly decided they wanted more of it, by a decent margin. So while I absolutely hate what is going on right now this seems to be what the people wanted. I question each day whether that needs to be respected or we should resist. I a…

Don't live in the US, but I got the impression that a lot of people actually saw positive change in their lives in the first round, which is a pretty good reason to want more. Do you honestly believe your news is being spun any less?

Yes I read high quality news sources- the WSJ, NYTimes, foreign affairs and a few others like the national review and mother Jones from time to time. I hear this argument a lot and my issues with Trump were from the primary source- his own words and tweets.

The economy was already humming when Trump first entered office and despite his best efforts it continued to do so through his term.

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#129

Post by llamaimperative »

smitty1e wrote: post #124
llamaimperative wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A third thing to keep in mind: law is law and must be followed.

That's an excellent going-in position. Given sufficient complexity and overlap, frictions arise. Hence all of the allegations and lawsuits and appeals and so forth. The voters are the ultimate judge, and typically end up with a government that reflects them, warts and all.

There’s nothing complex about “IGs cannot be dismissed without 30 days notice to Congress.”

And no, judges are judges. That’s why they’re called that.

Re: Phyllis Fong, who was investigating Neuralink, "forcefully removed "

#130

Post by llamaimperative »

nickff wrote: post #123
llamaimperative wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say more about how the CFPB was illegal? It was created by an act of Congress.

There are/were a number of issues with its structure, some of which are described in the lawsuits mentioned on its Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Financial_Protectio...

Its constitutionality was literally upheld in SCOTUS

So no, not really. You have a list of complaints from the regulated parties.

Post reply on HN