use https for features.
text: sort by
tags: modified
type: chronology
{433} is owned by tlh24.
hide / / print
ref: -0 tags: constitutional law supreme court date: 06-03-2020 01:40 gmt revision:0 [head]

Spent a while this evening reading about Qualified Immunity -- the law that permits government officials (e.g. police officers) immunity when 'doing their jobs'. It's perhaps one root of the George Floyd / racism protests, as it has set a precedent that US police can be violent and get away with it. (This is also related to police unions and collective liability loops... anyway)

The supreme court has the option to take cases challenging the constitutionality of Qualified Immunity, which many on both sides of the political spectrum want them to do.

It 'got' this power via Marbury vs. Madison. M v. M is self-referential genius:

  • They ruled the original action (blocking an appointment) was illegal
  • but the court does not have the power to make these decisions
  • because the congressional law that gave the Supreme Court that power was unconstitutional.
  • Instead, the supreme court has the power to decide if laws (in this case, those governing its jurisdiction) are constitutional.
  • E.g. SCOTUS initiated judicial review & expansion of it's jurisdiction over Congressional law by repealing a law that expanded it's jurisdiction by congress.
  • This was also done while threading the loops to satisfy then-present political pressure (who wanted the original appointment to be illegal) so that they (Thomas Jefferson) were aligned with the increase in power, so the precedent could persist.

As a person curious how systems gain complexity and feedback loops ... so much nerdgasm.

hide / / print
ref: work-0 tags: distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data Schmidt Cornell automatic programming genetic algorithms date: 09-14-2018 01:34 gmt revision:5 [4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [head]

Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data

  • There critical step was to use partial derivatives to evaluate the search for invariants. Even yet, with a 4D data set the search for natural laws took ~ 30 hours.
    • Then again, how long did it take humans to figure out these invariants? (Went about it in a decidedly different way..)
    • Further, how long did it take for biology to discover similar invariants?
      • They claim elsewhere that the same algorithm has been applied to biological data - a metabolic pathway - with some success.
      • Of course evolution had to explore a much larger space - proteins and reculatory pathways, not simpler mathematical expressions / linkages.

hide / / print
ref: bookmark-0 tags: code laws lawyers programming date: 11-28-2008 04:54 gmt revision:0 [head]

http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7187 -- has a very interesting and very well applied analogy between programs and laws. I am inclined to believe that they really are not all that different; legalese is structured and convoluted the way it is because it is, in effect, a programming language for laws, hence must be precise and unambiguous. Furthermore, the article is well written and evidences structured and balanced thought (via appropriate references to the real world). And he uses Debian ;-)

hide / / print
ref: bookmark-0 tags: DSP Benford's law Fourier transform book date: 12-07-2007 06:14 gmt revision:1 [0] [head]

http://www.dspguide.com/ch34.htm -- awesome!!

hide / / print
ref: notes-0 tags: entrepreneur MIT notes LLC tax law securities advice date: 05-22-2007 15:25 gmt revision:0 [head]


  • many good articles on setting up a subchapter S corporation (only taxed once, with limitations), LLC, obtaining good employees, dealing with securities and investment, etc!