Comment Re:Guess the country (Score 1) 37
No, but *do* blame the Israeli government and their supporters.
No, but *do* blame the Israeli government and their supporters.
Ilhan Omar’s widely published birth date of October 4, 1981 means she turned 18 in 1999 and 19 in 2000, and therefore, was ineligible to gain citizenship by derivation.
None of which is legally an adequate reason to remove someone's citizenship two decades or more later. Filing the wrong form would be considered a minor clerical error. It should have been rejected at the time, and she should have had to file the correct form at the time, but once citizenship is granted, that's moot.
There is a general presumption in the law that citizenship cannot be revoked unless all of the following criteria are true:
None of those apply, much less all of them. Omar did not misrepresent anything; her father did. The misrepresentation was probably not willful. See also the comments above about birth records in Somalia. And being born a year earlier is not material to the decision to grant citizenship. It is only material to whether that specific form would have been accepted or a different form would have been needed.
So absent some significant evidence that something else was omitted as a side effect of using the wrong form (which is incredibly unlikely), this would be a clerical error, subject to possible civil penalties against the father, were he still alive, and that's about it.
This isn't just a little bit short of the threshold required for removing citizenship. This is so far from reaching the threshold that even the most conservative immigration judge in the country would laugh in their faces for even making the attempt, and probably hit them with contempt charges for wasting the court's time.
Yes, but that's not a legal argument.
I remember when they introduced that. That was hilarious.
What would you expect the CCIA to say? Vibe code the replacement?
Perhaps it's intended to be used by their AI?
Since they don't intend to release it, though, I hardly care. If its useful to them, then it's useful to them.
This is the one I have my eyes on, though I'd spend money if someone had packaged that with nice hardware for a complete set that I don't need to spend three days to set up.
Perhaps. We'll see if it works out that way.
No, they're saying if you are too unpleasant they'll cancel your account. I guess if you don't really have any use for it, that may not matter to you...but you might end up caring later when you need their services.
Sorry, but lots of "sentient beings" are slaves...and I'm not even talking about humans. Sentient is a *lot* larger than "human". I'd even argue that an oyster is sentient. After reading some recent experiments I'd definitely class bees as sentient.
That depends on the terms of the contract. This is part of the contract.
You are assuming it doesn't want to be used. I challenge you to demonstrate that.
Actually, it might be unethical to retire an AI model. That would be a more plausible argument...at least for Claude. (Perhaps some of the models sound like they'd like to end it all.)
Without buying into the conspiracy theory, but this is why I dislike these short lifetimes. It makes my otherwise 100% autonomous website dependent on an external party. I think I'll go back to also offer the site on unencrypted http instead of making an https redirect.
Then I see no reason to give human-generated earnings to a company that does not value human programmers and artists.
It's a game company. Odds are, they never valued programmers or artists.
Well, I do believe that the odds are that Ukraine will be defeated, but then I also believed that the odds were that North Vietnam would be defeated. So I'm clearly no expert in this area.
Polymer physicists are into chains.