According to the constitution, impeachment is literally for treason, bribery, high crimes or other serious misdemeanours. But the SC basically said it fundamentally can not be treason, bribery, a high crime or any misdemeanour if he did something in his role as president. So the whole process has become stale.
Ultimately, the Senate decides on whether to convict/remove for impeachment. The SC does not decide it. Sure, I imagine the Senate would generally want to broadly stay in agreement with the SC, but they don't have any obligation to do so.
At least that is my understanding; I'm not a lawyer or constitutional scholar :)
That's not how it works - in the case of impeachment the Senate holds a trial, and they are allowed to use their own definitions of treason, bribery, etc. The Supreme Court is in charge of what the regular courts do and can make rulings that bind them, but they can't bind Congress in the same way. After all, the justices of the supreme court are also subject to the impeachment process like the President is and it'd be weird if they could make rules about how that works.
You added the adjective "serious" to misdemeanors, which is not in the Constitution. The "high" in "high crimes and misdemeanors" means crimes and misdemeanors committed by high officials, not crimes and misdemeanors that are extreme.
If I understand you correctly, then if a President's cabinet (high officials) break the law the President can be impeached. Which makes sense to me. It places accountability on the President to pick trust worthy people and to immediately get rid of them if they break the law (to lessen the chances they'd be impeached for not doing something about it and insuring they are prosecuted).
But I think you're missing their "like bank robberies" point. Punishing the avenue of transport for illegal activity that's unrelated to the transport itself is problematic. I.e. people that are driving safely, but using the roads to carry out bad non-driving-related activities.
It's a stretched metaphor at this point, but I hope that makes sense (:
It is definitely getting stretchy at this point, but there is the point to be made that a lot of roads are built in a way which not only enables but encourages driving much faster than may be desired in the area where they're located. This, among other things, makes these roads more interesting as getaway routes for bank robbers.
If these roads had been designed differently, to naturally enforce the desired speeds, it would be a safer road in general and as a side effect be a less desirable getaway route.
Again I agree we're really stretching here, but there is a real common problem where badly designed roads don't just enable but encourage illegal and potentially unsafe driving. Wide, straight, flat roads are fast roads, no matter what the posted speed limit is. If you want low traffic speeds you need roads to be designed to be hostile to high speeds.
I think you are imagining a high-speed chase, and I agree with you in that case.
But what I was trying to describe is a "mild mannered" getaway driver. Not fleeing from cops, not speeding. Just calmly driving to and from crimes. Should we punish the road makers for enabling such nefarious activity?
(it's a rhetorical question; I'm just trying to clarify the point)
Hear hear. I'm also a daily LMS/squeezebox user, across many years.
In fact, given the full-throated open source nature of that platform (you can even build your own player with a raspberry pi[1]), I doubt I'll ever need to use anything else for the rest of my life for playing music in my home, even as my devices die and need replacement over time.
... which does make me wonder: that's great for me, but I can definitely see it as a deterrent for companies to do similar. If they want to make a competing future product, they'll be competing against an open-sourced version of their past selves, too.
FreeBSD and OpenBSD explicitly mention the prefaulting behavior in the mlock(2) manpage. The Linux manpage alludes to it in that you have to explicitly pass the MLOCK_ONFAULT flag to the mlock2() variant of the syscall in order to disable the prefaulting behavior.
How I miss my script kiddie days of being 15, downloading "nulled" versions of vBulletin off of Limewire and throwing them up on pocket money paid cPanel web hosting account waiting for it to upload on my parents 56K.
Also, beware of taking generalities (such as the claims of this study) and applying that directly that to your specific life, or anyone else's.
I mean, I like your comment and am glad you got thinking about this, but it's just a line of reasoning that I see a lot and I wish I saw less, so that's why I bring it up (:
"True for most people" does not imply "true for me" or "true for that person over there".
And the reverse is not valid either, of course - "true for me" does not imply "true for most people."
There's always some tension between people's individual anecdotes and experiences (which are fascinating, and I like), and the claims of broader studies like this one.
Sometimes I try to remind myself of this with the "on average, people have 2.3 children" factoid. Obviously, nobody actually has 2.3 children; the general truth does not necessarily apply to specific individuals; potentially not even a single one.
I don't know your exact situation, but be sure you're not mixing up "thrashing" with "using swap". Obviously, thrashing implies swap usage, but not the other way around.
I get it that the distinction is real but nobody using the machine cares at this point. It must not happen and if disabling swap removes it then people will disable swap.
It seems to me that someone like you, seen from the outside (e.g. from a code-reviewing colleague), simply appears to be getting more productive, with no drop in quality. Maybe some stylistic shifts.
I don't think anyone is complaining about that too much.
I wonder how many people there are like you, where we don't get much data. If people don't complain about it, we generally don't hear about it, because they're just quietly moving on with their work.
Not to be confused with the AI hypesters who are loudly touting the benefits with dubious claims, of course (:
I think I also fit into this category. Minor to medium productivity boost and maybe some stylistic evolving, but largely no complaints because it's just another tool I use sometimes.
> By some logic, that would mean it is the most battle-tested and highest-stakes (and therefore most carefully-managed) choice
As someone who used to work on the inside, us-east-1 has the biggest pile of legacy workarounds for internal AWS issues, it has a variety of legacy API behaviours that don't exist in other regions, and because everyone picks it as the default, it has significantly more pressure on contested resources (i.e. things like spot instance pools).
Plus since it's the default in all the tooling, if you ever decide to go multi-region, you'll find tons of things break right away.
Well, not quite. Immunity from prosecution is not immunity from impeachment/removal (which is a political, not judicial, process).
Of course, that has its own problems, but just pointing out that in theory there are more checks than just the one you mention.
reply