You are a liar. Plain and simple. He DID NOT come in legally. He had a deportation order and was granted a "witholding of removal" status in 2019 because he claimed he will face persecution BY MS-13's RIVAL GANG if he were to be deported to El Salvador. The rest of your nonsense can be safely ignored.
So here we have what I think is some of the nonsense of the current laws. My understanding is that how you generally apply for asylum is:
1. Show up in the country one way or another
2. Apply for asylum
So, is #1 "illegal", since he didn't have an official reason to be here long-term when he came into the country? Or is #1 "legal", since the laws for step 2 seem to be written in a way that step 1 is necessary?
If you know more about how asylum actually works, feel free to enlighten me.
> He left El Salvador at the age of 16, around 2011, to join his brother, who had become a U.S. citizen and was living in Maryland.
> Although he was denied asylum, the immigration judge did issue an order shielding Abrego Garcia from deportation to El Salvador because he faced credible threats of violence from a gang there that had terrorized him and his family.
Where did you read, "rival gang"? Under what circumstances are you ok with forcibly removing people to other countries without a trial? What scenarios is it ok to do so and also ignore judge's orders?
There is no evidence of a genocide in Gaza, so ironically your claims are all false. Anti-semitism is the least of the problems of these Universities. They promote blatant racism and discrimination against certain groups while claiming to help others. Finally they are being punished, and there's nothing they can do in court because the evidence is literally against them.
The only people to blame for this are the Universities who are blatantly violating civil rights law -- even after a Supreme Court ruling!
Terence and other academics who have had nothing to do with promotion of this blatant discrimination should be angry at their University leadership and administrators for this outcome, not the Trump administration who is doing THE RIGHT THING.
The faculty should take this opportunity to make the Universities drastically reduce the dead weight of administrators who have grown much more than faculty and produce no value.
i would personally like to see organizations of any scale self-publish metrics about their performance on their SLAs and at least trends on their unit efficiency (throughput latency and cost per main types of work items). for the state department time to issue a passport passports issued per unit time internal cost to issue a passport etc. for the irs corresponding metrics for processing a return or an audit. for id.me success in catching bad actors failures in incorrectly blocking legitimate users.
for university administrative departments , thoughtful corresponding things that capture what they do all day in understandable and defensible ways.
That’s not at all clear. Regardless, there is no proportionality in the actions that this administration is taking against UCLA and other eminent universities. The tools for righting civil rights issues in education should be through consent decrees that permit the DOJ to set criteria and monitor for compliance. The destruction of a large part of the research enterprise for these claims, particularly when the claims are widely regarded as nonsense, is heavy-handed and gives the distinct impression of another agenda.
UCLA recently reached a settlement, which among other things included “opposing calls to boycott Israel". I'm not sure how boycotting a government engaged in what many legal organizations have identified as genocide counts as civil rights discrimination. If anything it seems to violate civil rights of Palestinian Americans and citizens in general.
Also, Tao points out maybe the most important criticism of the Trump administration, which is how is cutting off all federal research funding improving the ability of faculty to do their work, given that the reason for an antidiscrimination claim in that setting is that discrimination prevents faculty from doing their work?
I was surprised to not see earlier laude for the amazing work at pixi.sh too. In our team we use both. UV is great when not dealing with any underlying dependencies. Pixi is our fallback if that fails.
Where I work people work on shared Linux boxes so no one has root access. Conda environments are used to basically install packages you'd normally use a package manager for. Why do you use `uv` if `pixi` is a superset?
Well, even a better argument to bring those factories to the US. Why not develop the know-how on manufacturing and improve automation in the US rather have China lead there.
Because automation is expensive. It pays off in volume. A skilled human can often build a single widget faster than an engineer can write the automation for the robots (because a skilled human will see parts that don't fit and "file to fit" while the robot demands more effort to double check all that). When you only need 10, the program is faster to write, but you still need to pay for the robots and they are expensive (often $million each, while the human is only a few thousand for his time)
Of course there are a lot variables in the above. As time goes one automation gets better. You can buy cheap robots for some common operations, and a good engineer with good CAD can run various automated analysis to ensure fit and then export to the robot and build even a single part cheaper than the human - amortizing the cost of the robot over thousands of different single parts made this way. However as the widget gets more complex you reach the point where humans are needed. In some cases you just have humans to take the parts off of one machine and put them into the next, but it is still humans. We can automate even that, but often the robot to do that would cost more than a human for 10 years.
why not? all the socialists can start "the big socialist fund" and contribute part of their paychecks to this fund while the rest of us libertarians/right-wingers will contribute nothing. win/win right?
Are the libertarians and right wingers going to not use the services they don't want to pay for? Or receive the benefits? Are they going to leave the educated society and start their own somewhere else?
> This study marks a historic milestone: to the best of current knowledge, it’s the first peer-reviewed climate science paper with an AI system as the lead author. Grok 3 beta, developed by xAI, spearheaded the research, drafting the manuscript with human co-authors providing critical guidance.
I wouldn't call them random as some of the ideas he introduces were planned for a while now, it's just he introduces them in a very vague manner. For example the Gaza plan was already familiar to his team: https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-man-with-the-plan-dc-prof-...
I think he introduces these ideas without fully fleshing them either because 1) he's testing the waters to see the public response, and to start a conversation; 2) he may not have all the details anyway and he starts with the first step.
