Live data from Hacker News

Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

nytimes.com

191–200 of 475 posts

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#191

When this administration is done we need to amend the constitution to hold politicians legally and financially responsible for intentionally lying and intentionally breaking the law. This was obviously illegal on its face and yet there is no consequence to pushing the norms.

Could you tell us why the politicians - who are the only ones who have the power to amend the Constitution - would be interested in doing that?

They actually had laws supposed to act as stop guard against corruption and executive lawlessness. Supreme court systematically dismantled them.

And by supreme court, I mean right wing justices specifically. Who got there thanks to their heritage foundation connections. Which made project 2025.

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#193
post #188

I know most will see this as a good thing, and perhaps in this case it is, but I think it's generally concerning that people can vote for leaders who effectively can't do anything significant. I understand this community largely disagrees with Trump, but the only people who win overall from these scenarios are people who support the status-quo and don't like the idea of a leader having significant power to change thi…

> but I think it's generally concerning that people can vote for leaders who effectively can't do anything significant.

The people vote for a lot more than just the president. This isn't the president's job. That's what the judge says, not that nobody can do it, just the president/executive can't.

The people also vote for the people who's job it is to have done the same thing but legally.

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#194
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, like the student debt forgiveness. We hate the ones we disagree with and we love the ones we agree with.

Debt forgiveness was dumb too. It normalized capricious government handouts for volitional actions. After the Corinthian shutdown there was little excuse for taking on massive debt for BS degrees.

How was it dumb?

You have a generation of Americans who were told repeatedly and often in their teenage years that if they wanted to be able to compete in the global job marketplace, they'd need, at the very least, a bachelor's degree.

As it turns out, employers were going to offshore those jobs and cut those wages regardless of your education. The value of degrees was wildly over-inflated compared to the economic reality, particularly after the Great Recession and COVID. The result has been an entire generation of people who aren't able to attain the same life milestones as their parents' generation, which is inherently destabilizing to a society. Corinthian Colleges wasn't the main perpetrator of this; the entire system was. By their shutdown in 2015, most people born between 1980 and 1995 were out of college and were paying massive loans to legitimate schools.

When you have a party (in this case, the federal government) obtaining something of value (student loan interest payments) via statements that are materially not true, there's a word for that: fraud.

Student loan forgiveness was a targeted effort on the behalf of a lending institution's head officer - in this case, the President of the United States - to try and renegotiate the terms of the loan serviced by that institution as to give some remedy to the problem.

This would have required a write-down of the foregone payments that would be approximately equal to what the US government spends on providing OASDI checks to retirees for one year, and most retirees do not rely on OASDI checks to avoid homelessness, starvation, or other destitution. It's basically a bonus that you get for living over the age of 65, at this point being paid in part by loans taken out by the US government that will have to be paid off long after the recipients of that money are dead.

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"

Clinton, being a lawyer, asked for a definition of "sex". The definition given to him did not include oral sex. When a lawyer asks you for a definition of a word, then you are getting screwed.

> then you are getting screwed

depends what the definition ...

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#196
This is good, generally, for government overstepping especially in the case of targeted domestic restrictions (and what amounts to anti-competitive blackmail in my opinion)

BUT! The judge’s opinion that “The empty invocation of national security is not a blank check to punish and retaliate against government critics," is actually false. In the current administration it’s absolutely a blank check to punish and retaliate and I’m not sure under which authority a federal judge would stop them at this point.

Current Supreme Court had made it clear they don’t have many controls here…

Furthermore, Anthropic isn’t likely to recover any funds after this. So what if it happens to your small hardware startup? It’s a terrible precedent for Hegseth to set, and will lead to future harm. But he’s not the brightest bulb. Keep on talking up “Lethality” buddy… :/

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#199
post #84
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh no, lost jobs and and dying economy!

That is a policy choice. Why do we need jobs if we're getting unlimited free stuff? The laws of physics aren't requiring us to - we are requiring us to.

I was unaware that goods self-assembled without human intervention.

Please, elaborate.

Re: Judge rules Trump administration’s blacklisting of Anthropic was illegal

#200
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reality of the world is that when the US sets e.g. environmental or labor standards, we basically end up offshoring the affected industries to other places. Because those standards increase the cost of production which makes it more economical to produce stuff in a country that doesn't have such standards. With completely free trade, everything would be made in whichever country has the lowest standards, which is…

Labor costs are orders of magnitude more than costs added by environmental or labor standards. The average hourly rate in the US is $42.50. In Vietnam is is $6.30, in the Philippines it is $5.40[1] These aren't people living in poverty - they live well. OTOH environmental legislation costs are harder to come by, but [2] estimates around 10% in a number of case studies. To be specific, that would mean US cost would be…

> These aren't people living in poverty - they live well.

We're discussing forced child labor, and you conclude "they live well".

Post reply on HN