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

US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 123 posts

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#101

Post by iso1631 »

voidfunc wrote: post #72
mostlysimilar wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future of the US depends on these people being held accountable by the next administration, and structural reforms to make their abuses harder to do again in the future.

This won't happen. Mostly because the next administration that is a counter to this current administration won't happen. The electoral process in the US is effectively cooked.

There's no demand for it. Half of the US still likes what's happening, half the ones that don't are only concerned because gas prices are a little high.

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#102

Post by wookmaster »

msandford wrote: post #91
gchamonlive wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bernie Sanders warned right when the second Trump admin started that the country was effectively an olygarchy https://youtu.be/79KDKWEOJ1s . I wrote https://xd1.dev/2025/09/not-buying-american-anymore that made frontpage here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45277346 discussing the consequences of an irresponsible admin through the lenses of consumer rights. It's nice that now we are seeing more widespread accept…

Are you new to the club? I saw these problems you're talking about with Biden, Trump1, Obama and Bush Jr. Of course I'm not old enough to really know about what Clinton or Bush Sr or Reagan or anyone before that did. I know it's super annoying to have someone rain on your "but THIS stuff is REALLY bad!" parade, but that the rulers are corrupt isn't new. It's just new to a lot of people.

You aren’t really raining on anyone’s parade it sounds like you’re just looking for attention

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#104

Post by freediddy »

pessimizer wrote: post #100
mostlysimilar wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future of the US depends on these people being held accountable by the next administration, and structural reforms to make their abuses harder to do again in the future.

The future of the US depends on political candidates attempting to win the public over on the merits of their argument and the quality of their character instead of being conmen on billionaire payrolls or billionaires themselves. Instead, we're ruled by these two dumb, evil political parties that radical centrists treat like elemental forces of nature. It's a play being put on for your benefit. Your vote changes noth…

I hope this comment isn't flagged or downvoted into oblivion. This is exactly what happened and the consequences of George W Bush are where we are today. Everyone looks at him and thinks "Oh what a cute old man, he's joking around with Michelle Obama!" and no one remembers he is directly responsible for 1 million Iraqi deaths, and then enriching the shareholders of Cheney's company. And then he broke the Middle East, created ISIS, etc.

And then Obama came in with promises and almost immediately brought everything back to default George Bush timelines. To those of you that don't live in SF, most SF progressives HATED Obama because all he did was legitimize Bush's policies instead of acting on his promises of "Hope" and "Change". Anyone remember how he talked about abortion rights, and then immediately after his presidency said that it wasn't a priority for him? If abortion rights were passed as a federal law, we wouldn't be where we are today post Dobbs.

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#105

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

iso1631 wrote: post #101
voidfunc wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This won't happen. Mostly because the next administration that is a counter to this current administration won't happen. The electoral process in the US is effectively cooked.

There's no demand for it. Half of the US still likes what's happening, half the ones that don't are only concerned because gas prices are a little high.

> Half of the US

citation?

Sure, "a lot of people in the US" ... but "half" is pushing it, unless you've got sources.

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#107

Post by CoastalCoder »

dylan604 wrote: post #67
monooso wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not GP, but in this context I would interpret the next administration[^1] holding the current administration to account as a willingness to use the court system to prosecute actual crimes committed while in office[^2]. That is by no means a given. [^1]: Assuming there is one. [^2]: That is, not petulantly prosecuting those deemed to have slighted you.

SCOTUS has already given POTUS immunity in any form other than impeachment followed by a conviction. The problem with that is that just removes POTUS from office. It does nothing to punish for those crimes that were deemed worthy enough of being impeached/convicted. SCOTUS said that POTUS cannot be held accountable for things done as official acts of office. So Congress cannot hold POTUS criminally accountable, but r…

I am curious of that allows the new President, while in office, to assassinate the previous one and insta-pardon himself.

It's amazing how much of America's political stability might rest not on the law, but rather on the self-restraint of each cohort's leadership.

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#108

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

kyrra wrote: post #86
mc32 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The previous admin also ruled via executive order. It said it would find ways to do things even if struck down by the SCOTUS such as the school loan forgiveness, firearms controls, speech suppression via “embeds” etc.

And Obama did this. See his famous pen and phone quote: "We are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we're providing Americans the kind of help that they need. I've got a pen, and I've got a phone. And I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward.."

What Obama didn't say: I don't care about what the courts say, the courts are bad people, the only law that matters is me.

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#109

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

mc32 wrote: post #79
stymaar wrote: post #49

For the past year and a half, the US administration have plunged the country in a rule of law twilight zone: the rule of law still exists, and there are still independent jurisdictions to enforce it, but the administration decided they didn't care, and they just overcome any court dismissal of their orders with a new illegal order that courts will have to push back a few month later. Which means that, in practice, th…

The previous admin also ruled via executive order. It said it would find ways to do things even if struck down by the SCOTUS such as the school loan forgiveness, firearms controls, speech suppression via “embeds” etc.

Nobody cares if an admin "rules via executive order". What we care about is whether they rule according to the law. That is, for example: the administration is free to fire whoever it wants from the civil service as long as it follows the laws about how and when this is done. This administration, however, has repeatedly fired federal employees without following the law.

In more than 85% of cases brought against the administration, lower courts have ruled that the administration has broken the law.

So, you can decide if you think SCOTUS overruling those decisions is an indication of a problem, or justice winning out.

I also don't care when an administration says "We will find a way to ...." - I care about whether they do so, and do so in accordance with the law. The Biden administration followed SCOTUS rulings on its orders, and AFAIK, did not find workarounds for any of the things you mention.

Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

#110

Post by Rebelgecko »

mc32 wrote: post #79
stymaar wrote: post #49

For the past year and a half, the US administration have plunged the country in a rule of law twilight zone: the rule of law still exists, and there are still independent jurisdictions to enforce it, but the administration decided they didn't care, and they just overcome any court dismissal of their orders with a new illegal order that courts will have to push back a few month later. Which means that, in practice, th…

The previous admin also ruled via executive order. It said it would find ways to do things even if struck down by the SCOTUS such as the school loan forgiveness, firearms controls, speech suppression via “embeds” etc.

Biden signed about 150 executive orders across his term.

Guess how many trump has done since just last year...

Post reply on HN