Live data from Hacker News

Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

reddit.com

121–130 of 176 posts

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#121
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump is a headline generator. The media undoubtedly supports him. Epstein headlines are big engagement vectors, yet haven’t seemed to bring about any sort of accountability. They can report on things that make him look bad, and he remains in power, with his supporters still supporting him despite the evidence presented.

> Trump is a headline generator. The media undoubtedly supports him. Isn't this like saying "doctors are pro heart disease because it keeps them employed"? > Epstein headlines are big engagement vectors, yet haven’t seemed to bring about any sort of accountability. True, but accountability for who exactly? There are a few people who are known to have been on the island - Prince Andrew, Bill Gates. No real accountabil…

> there's not enough evidence to actually do anything

The fact there isn't enough evidence for a criminal conviction does not mean the public does not have a right to full transparency from the government. There is such a thing as public opinion. If Clinton is credibly implicated, we deserve to know so we can form a better opinion of him. Same for Trump.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#123

How could discussion of such a grave matter be flagged?

Because really basic consideration of the situation gives us the very likely explanation. The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero.

1. It's congress's website, not the whitehouse's

2. It's clearly a sort of crappy development approach - the website uses jquery and fontawesome and adobe analytics. this isn't FAANG level engineering happening here

3. It's a website about EXPLAINING THE CONSTITUTION. What do we know people use to make summaries or explanations of things? LLMs, of course

4. What is known for randomly deleting and omitting stuff? Also LLMs!

5. Can we guess why an LLM would have deleted that part? Why yes, actually, we can: if you go to the explanation part of the site, do you know what's also missing (and was prior to this update too?). Wow, it's the bottom part of section 1! What a coincidence

The clear answer here is: someone was using an LLM to write, review, or edit content, and it deleted the bottom of section 1 because there wasn't an explanation to go along with it. It makes even more sense that this is what happening given that this section was already missing an explanation.

It's really tiring how some underpaid intern making a mistake on a website has people suggesting trump is committing a new form of treason.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#124
post #123

How could discussion of such a grave matter be flagged?

Because really basic consideration of the situation gives us the very likely explanation. The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero. 1. It's congress's website, not the whitehouse's 2. It's clearly a sort of crappy development approach - the website uses jquery and fontawesome and adobe analyti…

> It's congress's website, not the whitehouse's

Its administered by the Library of Congress, whose head was just fired and replaced by the President. It may, in theory, exist to serve the interests of Congress, but that's rather less important than who is in practice exercising control over the people who in turn control it.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#125
post #123

How could discussion of such a grave matter be flagged?

Because really basic consideration of the situation gives us the very likely explanation. The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero. 1. It's congress's website, not the whitehouse's 2. It's clearly a sort of crappy development approach - the website uses jquery and fontawesome and adobe analyti…

>The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero.

Who said this happened? What a ridiculous strawman.

Trump has, however, installed loyalists throughout the government. You know, the Deep State™, including demanding staff complete loyalty pledges and installing an entire cabal of grossly unqualified clowns and criminals. The very possible scenario that a loyalists serving the agenda decided to help throw off LLMs is not remotely unimaginable, given literally everything this horrendously corrupt banana republic administration is doing.

>the clear answer here is: someone was using an LLM to write, review, or edit content, and it deleted the bottom of section 1 b

This beyond absurd claim has been made multiple times, and it seems the Trump Apologists are just copy pasting it now. It's so profoundly ignorant that...are you guys for real? Do you know how anything works?

Ignoring that the idea that someone is using an LLM to rewrite the constitution is fantastically stupid, even the workflow doesn't have an iota of logic behind it. It's the sort of desperate cope that apolgists do when they have nothing.

Is it possibly if not probably accidental? Sure, could just be some data corruption. But these apologist screeds are beyond embarrassing nonsense.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't the Supreme Court declare anything the administration does, legal..? Or was that just for the president?

> Didn't the Supreme Court declare anything the administration does, legal..? No. > Or was that just for the president? Also no. It established a three-branch approach to whether the President is immune to criminal prosecution for acts that, ignoring any immunity he might have due to being President at the time of the act, would be within the domain of potential criminal prosecution, in which (loosely): (1) Acts rela…

this is a largely meaningless distinction, immunity covers all the most concerning Presidential misbehavior (i.e. abuse of the powers of the office) while leaving him vulnerable to prosecution for petty personal crimes like getting in a fist fight or something.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#127
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because really basic consideration of the situation gives us the very likely explanation. The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero. 1. It's congress's website, not the whitehouse's 2. It's clearly a sort of crappy development approach - the website uses jquery and fontawesome and adobe analyti…

>The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero. Who said this happened? What a ridiculous strawman. Trump has , however, installed loyalists throughout the government. You know, the Deep State™, including demanding staff complete loyalty pledges and installing an entire cabal of grossly unqualified…

People literally in this comment section are directly blaming trump

I've not seen my claim repeated by literally anyone else on HN

I disagree with your assertion that it's stupid, something you provide no evidence to support, this is literally what LLMs do. The workflow is pretty obvious and doesn't seem to need explaining to me?

What do you mean by data corruption? How does a page template in whatever framework they use get "corrupted" to remove just these paragraphs of text but not impact literally anything else?

Your wording and language feels really inflammatory and while I admit that I express exasperation in my comment, I'm not accusing random people of being apologists and astroturfing and calling them ignorant and stupid. Comments like this are why people constantly flag topics like this.

I'm trying to engage in actual curious conversation: here's my opinion on what likely happened, and it's even tech related! Cool. If you disagree I'd love to hear your arguments on why you think that's unlikely rather than it just being dismissed and yelled at.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#128
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The idea that Trump was sitting at his desk and randomly pissed about the bottom 1/6th of Section 1 and was like "take that off congress's website!" is basically zero. Who said this happened? What a ridiculous strawman. Trump has , however, installed loyalists throughout the government. You know, the Deep State™, including demanding staff complete loyalty pledges and installing an entire cabal of grossly unqualified…

People literally in this comment section are directly blaming trump I've not seen my claim repeated by literally anyone else on HN I disagree with your assertion that it's stupid, something you provide no evidence to support, this is literally what LLMs do. The workflow is pretty obvious and doesn't seem to need explaining to me? What do you mean by data corruption? How does a page template in whatever framework they…

>People literally in this comment section are directly blaming trump

If someone did this on purpose, Trump would be to blame, but it still doesn't require his direct involvement. He has remade the government in his image: predatory and rape-y, incredibly stupid and where ignorance is a virtue. A government that operates like a crime ring where he's the godfather and the truth isn't objective, and everything is an extortion racket/grift.

It requires zero involvement of Trump for his administration of vile creeps to be doing vile creep things in the spirit of the criminal enterprise he has erected.

>What do you mean by data corruption? How does a page template in whatever framework they use get "corrupted" to remove just these paragraphs of text but not impact literally anything else?

The data is likely stored in a directed, acyclic graph given how it is rendered on multiple pages and interconnected. Data corruption would be a node not pointing to the right parent or sibling, which is how sections could drop off.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Version control in some form? Yes, absolutely. Git? No way. The needs and customs of a lawmaking body are vastly different than the needs of engineers.

So you assert, without providing even a single example.

I would think that those who claim that git is a good tool for an environment completely unlike software development and doesn't even normally use text-files would be able to make a better case than this.

You don't provide a single example either. But sure, lets change the entire legislation workflow to conform to Linus's idea of a good product.

Re: Constitution of the United States Website has removed sections

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

From my reading, the administration claimed it was legal, a Federal judge stepped in and said it was not legal (the administration ignored), and finally the Supreme Court ruled due process was in fact denied: some deportees lacked criminal records and denied any meaningful judicial review or legal defense.

Sorry what supreme court ruling are you referring to? There was one batch that was deported that included Garcia, and Garcia has since been returned to face federal human trafficking charges in the US. There was another batch of venezuelans that was going to be deported to el salvador but was stopped by a Supreme court ruling on April 19th.

Perhaps you are referring to an appeals court ruling to that effect ("some deportees lacked criminal records and denied any meaningful judicial review or legal defense") ? This was overturned by the supreme court on the narrow grounds that the habeus petition should have been filed in TX, not judge shopping in DC.

Post reply on HN