Just a district judge, so I’m supposing the Trump administration will file an appeal if they care, and will almost certainly get a preliminary injunction. The Ninth Circuit ruling will be more telling.
> Beer is cheaper from a super market but everyone I know prefers pubs.
It's a pretty frequent complaint that drinks at pubs, bars, and restaurants have become extortionately expensive, to the point that a lot of younger people are drinking less for that reason.
I avoid "bars" where the bar tenders only pour beers. I much prefer the higher end places where every drink is hand made in front of you where the quality of the bartender is everything. I recognize the skill and accept that the price of the cocktail will be set accordingly. There are places that make cocktails with the same ice they use for soft drinks from premade cocktails charging the same price. I do not go back to those ever again after I slog down the one drink. Luckily, I'm a freak where I didn't actually start drinking until I was in my 30s so I didn't have to suffer being broke at a bar.
Even outside of pubs and restaurants. Six packs and cases in the grocery store are all hugely inflated. Since I like beer, I got an old freezer and built a kegerator out of it and now buy my beer by the keg. (For now) keg prices are barely reasonable. $10 for a glass of beer at a restaurant?? Fuck right off with that.
One thing I’ve never heard a good answer to: If Anthropic is a supplier not to the Department of Defense itself, but to Palantir, why isn’t supply chain risk the proper designation (assuming the government’s concerns with Anthropic having authority over military missions is valid)?
As for whether code written with Claude Code should be so considered - if it’s just code that is subject to human review, I would argue that this use shouldn’t be a supply chain risk. But with Claude Code PR Review and similar products, the chance that an AI product (not limiting to Anthropic here) could own a load-bearing part of the lifecycle of a critical piece of code becomes much larger, and deserves scrutiny.
This admin technically can't do a lot of the things it does. They do it anyway with utter contempt for the rule of law. Congress is useless and gives them a blank check and the Supreme Court just stalls everything using the shadow docket.
I'm not sure that "supply chain risk" is even the right term to be discussing.
What Hegseth/Trump want to do is not just stop Anthropic models from being used by any military supplier pursuant to goods/services they are providing to the military, but rather say that if you do business with the military then you must not use Anthropic at all, even if that usage is entirely unrelated to your military contracts.
This is explicitly not what they have done, not how government contractors ever interpret this designation, nor something they could do even if they wanted to do.
It is also common corporate doctrine to use a subsidiary for government contracting to avoid having to evidence that a commercial vendor is utilized for government, so this won't even be 'annoying' for contractors.
ITAR and compliance frameworks (e.g. FedRAMP and CMMC) already mandate this for any non-US company, yet AWS commercial still has offerings in other countries and from non-US vendors, Palantir still has an IG business, etc.
I think Venezuela and Iran are more about restricting the oil to China in case of a conflict rather than providing energy for the US, although getting ahead of an anticipated demand increase from AI data centers is probably a contributing motivation.
I don't think interdicting Venezuelan oil in a US/China conflict would be too much of a challenge for the US, given... geography. It certainly doesn't require us to control the country or its oil industry.
For curiosity's sake, what exactly do you think Republicans will do to "kill the ACA"? I doubt they're going to introduce a bill that revokes the ACA in its entirety. They killed the mandate almost a decade ago and the marketplace healthcare plans have continued to limp along, depending on the state. What's next?
It’s simple. One of the original tenants of the ACA was to provide subsidies for most people earning up to what would be the upper middle class between this and the insurance mandates, it would prevent the death spiral where only the sick would sign up for it, making the cost go up until it was almost unaffordable to anyone and unprofitable for the insurance companies making them leave the exchange.
The first blow was when the Supreme Court killed the mandates. The second blow just happened when they killed the subsidies last year.
Not if the ACA continues its current “death spiral” where only the sick sign up making the premiums go up to the point where insurance companies just leave the plan.
No it wouldn’t. American Apparel used to (maybe it still does) make its shirts in a factory in Los Angeles, and its shirts were not noticeably more expensive than the likes of Abercrombie that made clothes overseas. AA couldn’t have competed in the lower end of the market, but their clothes were still not astronomically expensive because the factory was already heavily automated via machines.
The larger cost for a lot of manufacturing in the richest countries is permitting and regulation, plus the fact that the manufacturing knowledge cluster is concentrated in China now, making every part of setting up a factory there smoother.
Los Angeles Apparel is what you are thinking of (I believe owner of AA sold the brand and started this which is manufactured in los angeles). And their t shirts, blank t shirts not dress shirts mind you, are $28 or so depending on weight. Blank hanes or fruit of the loom t shirt made overseas can be had for basically an order of magnitude less than the american manufactured version.
Both of these methods have an undesirable side effect for me, which is that it immediately pops up the passcode dialog saying that a passcode is required to activate Face ID. Depending on the situation, that could be construed as an attempt to actively interfere with a police investigation, which could bring consequences of its own. It would be better if it silently dropped you to the normal lock screen, and only showed the passcode dialog when you attempt to unlock the phone normally.
Another thing I've often wished for with kids is a mode that removes all notifications and widgets from the lock screen - the only things you should be able to do is to unlock the phone and emergency calls. You can remove most notifications with the right Focus, but not notifications to control playing music/video apps, for example, nor any other widgets you happen to put on your lock screen.
The same passcode prompt appears after software updates, multiple previous failed Face ID login attempts, and maybe more.
Not a lawyer, but everyone has a password locked phone and its standard practice for device security. I'm not optimistic for a prosecutor winning on an interference charge.
> Depending on the situation, that could be construed as an attempt to actively interfere with a police investigation
IANAL but I highly doubt this would hold up in court with even mildly competent attorneys. Anyone can easily accidentally trigger it, I do all the time.
> Both of these methods have an undesirable side effect for me, which is that it immediately pops up the passcode dialog saying that a passcode is required to activate Face ID.
Must be an iOS 26 thing? I haven't dared upgrade yet. No immediate passcode dialog on iOS 18 if you follow the instructions above. It does pop up like you describe if you press the cancel button on the screen, but if you are whipping out your phone to play with the screen you're not exactly acting inconspicuously anyway.
Unfortunately GitHub doesn’t let you easily review commits in a PR. You can easily selectively review files, but comments are assumed to apply to the most recent HEAD of the PR branch. This is probably why review agents don’t natively use that workflow. It would probably not be hard to instruct the released versions of Opus or Codex to do this, however, particularly if you can generate a PR plan, either via human or model.
Lots of people know trans people (by which I mean people that have decided to take some visible action to transition) by now - the people in the boonies and flyover states have access to the same internet as everyone else, so a lot of people outside the most progressive cities have transitioned. You have to remember that trans had been at the front of the culture for 10 years (since Caitlyn Jenner) by the time of the 2024 election.
reply