The very first line, before the fine article even begins, says that it's a guest post by Henry Cohn, so the summary is simply false.

How do you propose that this would work? Would Flock have access to each police department's database of active cases? That would be a cure worse than the disease.

Just wait until they connect it up to a Robin Hood game.

The colonies fought a war to ensure that the USA is not subject to the jurisdiction of the UK. The UK may not regulate US entities without the consent of the US government

That's a non-sequitur. The USA is not subject to the jurisdiction of the UK, but US citizens physically in the UK are, and companies based in the US but doing business in the UK have to comply with UK law as it affects their operations in the UK or accept the corresponding penalties as the cost of doing business there.

The Anthropic announcement of a counterexample to the Jacobian conjecture has also had some suspicions raised this week: arxiv:2609.05746 page 160.

The one I'm most interested in is the Hadamard conjecture. So far all we've had is a dump of some matrices at sizes which were previously open. This is an area where some people were putting in some effort, although it's a while since the last progress - in 2004, a couple of researchers published a solution for size 428. What we really want is to know (a) how exactly these new matrices were found: was it just throwing lots of computational power at known approaches or is there a new idea? And (b) is there a proof of the conjecture or just some gap-filling in the databases of known sizes with solutions?

The first sentence of TFS says

and instead see only posts from people and creators they follow

It's not about sorting but about filtering.

GDPR, Article 4, clause 2, my emphasis:

‘processing’ means any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction;

So your premise is in direct contradiction with the letter of the law.

What does citizenship have to do with it? Does your constitution say that foreigners can be considered guilty until proven innocent?

"The land of the free and the home of the brave" sounds like an intentional description of North America before European colonisation given the connotation of "brave" as "native American warrior".

The Villena treasure (9kg of gold stolen from a museum in Spain about two weeks ago). And there was a diamond necklace worth about $4m stolen from a Viennese museum shortly afterwards.

Oh, stop it. This is renaming a lake, not murdering millions

The situation with Guantanamo Bay is also clearly unconstitutional. It's right there in the word "constitution": that document defines how the nation-state (or confederation, if you prefer the legal fiction that the individual states are nation-states) is made up, what it consists of. The essence of the nation-state is geographically invariant: what varies with geography is how much authority it has to impose its essence. The argument that the US constitution doesn't bind the actions of the US outside its formal borders is nonsense, and to apply that argument to a place which is undeniably de facto under US jurisdiction is enhanced nonsense.

ICE is not CBP. Two different agencies