Hello @OrteilGenou@lemmy.world was curious why you downvoted this - happy to chat out any difference of opinion/correct any errors in facts/etc and perhaps even change my mind about something.
Updated On
2025-11-20T15:43:38Z
Domain Status
server hold
server update prohibited
Suggesting that the DNS registration expired earlier, 9 days ago.
Alas, GoDaddy only gives a name - Chris Price - and no other useful contact info like an email address or phone number that can be used to reach out.
Of course, well-known also only found out about piefed.au in late October, while there's evidence of it being around for much longer than that - e.g. https://lemmy.ca/post/45609571/17024992
This makes me think that the admin planned to shut it down, and abandoned it approximately one month ago - but the hosting provider simply kept it around until now.
I speculate that this is the fault of the United States. The scholar, a US citizen, is entering from the US, and as per the article CBSA has concerns regarding "national security" - we know that the CBSA and the US CBP work closely together, so if some top level US official ordered the CBP to pass the "national security threat" along, that'd explain CBSA's behaviour.
Specifically, why they were concerned in the first place (because they had to take the tip from the US gov't seriously for fear that they'd lose cooperation on actual important matters if they didn't), why it took so long before the scholars were released (because they needed those four hours to make sure that they covered all their bases in case the CBP or another part of the US gov't came knocking again and asking why the scholars weren't arrested or detained), and also why CBSA can't more clearly explain why the scholars were targeted in the first place (because the working arrangements between the CBP and the CBSA, and between the security departments of the governments of Canada and the US more generally, require a considerable level of secrecy).
The article also mentions,
Kanji said that prompted them to reach out to different high-ranking officials in an attempt to get Falk and his wife released.
I like to think though that this wasn't strictly necessary and that CBSA are the good guys who would have still done the right thing in the end, after of course thoroughly documenting the obvious - why the US's tip was off and there actually was no real threat.
It's not clear from the article if diplomatic relations between Lithuania and the PRC are fully called off or not. If they are, I don't see it as the best possible move from the PRC. It's just removing any incentive to prevent Lithuania from establishing full diplomatic recognition to the ROC.
Also, from the article,
Although Lithuania tried to restore diplomatic links with China after the new government assumed power late last year, it has remained insistent on not changing the name of Taiwan’s representative office in Vilnius.
I wonder what was tried. If the current government in Lithuania really wants to do this, and the name alone is the sole sticking point, it seems like a solution like this might work out:
Sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the ROC that the word Taiwan in the name specifically means and is short for Taiwan island (where the city of Taipei is located). Then offer to sign another MOU with the PRC.
I'm not sure if it'd work, but it's a potential middle ground compromise.
Around the downtown core there seems to be a reduction in density which is curious, and I’m not sure what drives that
Having lived both right on the subway line and in the some areas just outside the downtown core, I may be able to add some insight here.
Basically, that whole area of land feels car unfriendly. Hard to find parking close by and lots of congestion. But living on the subway line this never felt like an issue since there was a good alternative - one typically doesn't need a car for day to day living in downtown Toronto in my experience. Also, for things like getting groceries or stuff from a corner shop, things are so clustered together that there's usually something within walking distance of where you live.
Much further away in the GTA, you definitely need a car. But congestion is not so bad (at least until you finally need to head into the city proper) and parking nearby is quite more comfortable as well.
So the areas outside the core have the worst of both worlds - you get much of the lack of space and congestion that you get in downtown proper, but also a lack of viable public transportation alternatives.
Of course, I'm one of them. Just remember, you're asking my dad to work without pay. It's a fight we believe in and support, and we were prepared to hold on for longer. However, I can't deny that things are starting to hurt.
The TLDR here is that while Dems didn't win as big as many hoped, they did not walk away empty-handed.
and then folded like a wet paper towel
As I wrote, there's going to be a mid-December fight for a vote on the ACA subsidies and then a potential shutdown at the end of Jan 2026.
It's not a fold, the fight's not lost. It's a tactical retreat to regroup and continue the battle.
You know what people do care about? They care about the Dems being feckless losers
The other point is that it was only 8 Dems who broke ranks in the Senate and 6 in the House. There are 47 total Dem Senators and 213 Dems in the House. It hardly makes sense to cast all Democrats in this space when it's such a tiny minority who broke ranks.
after the elections
I'll grant you this. I recall reading that some blue Senators were ready to do a deal earlier, but were convinced to wait until after the elections.
who pretended to care about saving the ACA
So the fight is about the enhanced subsidies. ACA will continue to live without them. ACA isn't going to die or anything.
But even if we consider the enhanced subsidies - having a month to prepare for a vote and another month plus change to prepare a plan to retaliate in case the vote fails. These don't seem unreasonable.
On the one hand, it's fair to say it's not enough or more should have been done. But I don't think these are the actions of people who merely pretend.
“Standing up to [Orange Voldemort] didn’t work.”
– a winner, according to you
To be honest, I'm leaning towards it being more of a draw in one battle in an ongoing war that isn't over yet.
Now, with the GOP and MAGA having taken such hits with the issues of SNAP funding during the shutdown, perhaps this wasn't the right time. Perhaps holding out a bit longer would have gotten more concessions without bringing up a realistic desire to end the filibuster. Also fair.
in exchange for nothing they can point to come midterms.
yeah no they lost
That's the whole point of my post - they do have a win that they can point to, even during midterms. They put a stop to federal worker layoffs while the budget is being negotiated. To repeat the quote,
Instead, Kaine secured a guarantee that the Trump administration would not conduct any more mass federal worker layoffs — at least until Jan. 30. The bill also requires the government to reinstate the employees it let go during the shutdown, with back pay included.
If you disagree, please explain to me how the above is not a win for Democrats and a help to them come midterms.
As for your other points,
The party leadership needs to be
I might have worded it differently, but yeah ... I'd agree that if the leadership had actually had some kind of plan and proper endgame to this, Dems might have been able to win even more.
They look weak because they are weak
Well, the recent election wins might beg to differ. But midterms will definitely answer this. What's up next: the mid-December ACA vote fight, and then another budget fight (and perhaps shutdown again?) at the end of Jan.
entertaining to contrast the way peoplr ... at my govt
Which gov't is this?
for delivering like society-wide political improvements
What are these improvements? The whole statement here is very vague.
the way westerners have fallen over their “left wing” for delivering nothing since the fall of the USSR
Well, it's not zero. It might be too little, but that doesn't preclude it from being of a smaller value that's still greater than nothing. (Case in point: federal aid for college and SNAP both post-date.)
The ACA ... was a project by and for insurance companies from ppl like Mitt Romney before
Yes, this is accurate. Massachusetts had a state-wide version of the ACA that was led by Romney before the ACA made it national. This was a major talking point prior to the 2012 election, with it being pointed out how ironic that Romney was against the ACA when he helped invent it.
Part of the idea was that by being based on top of an originally Republican plan, it would be a plan that could cross the aisle and win bipartisan support. This part didn't entirely pan out (though perhaps it's possible that when McCain killed skinny repeal back in 2017, this aspect of ACA helped him do so).
Compared to a true single payer like in Canada? Sure, I'd agree with that. (Well, "pathetic" might be a bit too strong a term.) Better to say that as much as it improved things, the ACA didn't go far enough.
Considering that the current admin appears to be actively seeking to hurt their constituents though, no wonder there was such a drastic fight just to try and maintain the status quo.
However, like your situation here, I occasionally have to read it for an answer someone else gave to some problem I’m working.
Back when I first left, I moved on to kbin.social - and oh boy, a lot of us were there. Back then, the answer to some of this was to archive the answers found on spez's site and then share or repost on kbin.social itself, so we could rebuild the communities - or at least provide alternative communities.
As bad as spez’s animal is, it is far better than the meta monster in this regard.
True, agreed. In fairness that site does a lot of things right - a permabanned account can still read everything, it's not much different from being logged out. And you can still grab a copy of your data after being banned fairly easily by making a GDPR/CCPR request (even if you aren't covered by either law). That's more than I can say for all my stuff on kbin.social for example (I can recover a small amount on other instances but there's a lot that never federated off of kbin.social which I presume to now be lost for good.)
Edit: And Facebook - I luckily didn't have to deal with this but I've heard of folks having to file lawsuits to get their family pictures back after a bot bans them. So yeah, miles ahead.
As bad as Reddit is, I am thankful that the alternative location for these answer[s] is [there instead of] Facebook.
Being in Canada, I can say that the way Facebook attempted to heavy-handle the "pay for news" bit - including suppressing news BEFORE the law changed - left a very sour taste in my mouth. I agree 100% - but Facebook really did set the bar low here.
At least Reddit can still be read-only without any kind of account or sign in.
Well, take the case of u/awkwardtheturtle. Permanently banned with no appeal and no way to reach a human for help who can actually do anything. (It's quite possible awkwardtheturtle was deserving, but I know of many great former kbinners who were in the same situation. Often for no apparent reason, or if there was a reason, it was related to supporting the blackout and the protests.) So in some policies they're just as bad.
It's great as a read-only site, but if you need to ask for help...
Remember that spez's site only recently became profitable. If they're better than Facebook, part of it may be that they're smaller and weaker as a company, so in some ways they have to be nicer. Less monopoly.
And also .. Twitter? I liked the original edition, they seemed very fair and principled. But we all know what happened to Twitter in the end. And spez likes Musk a lot including how Musk runs former Twitter (see for example https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/reddit-blackout-protest-private-ceo-elon-musk-huffman-rcna89700 ), so I can easily see him supporting the sale of the company at some point to someone worse.
Basically, the TDLR is that I agree with you - but I also would caution that we can't be comfortable with having information live only on spez's site.
So actually this caused quite a bit of chaos this past Friday. Folks who were traveling, say on a quick weekend holiday, suddenly found out that they had to rush back into the US before midnight. Then the administration walked it back, so some of these people who paid premium for last minute flights are now SOL. Another example of how not to run an administration.
Lorrianne G. ... added subsequently that she is also worried by the frequency with which businesses in her hometown north of Toronto have become owned by newcomers.
“All of our Tim Hortons are no longer owned by white people,” she said.
So I meant to write in the above comment that while not every case of quiet quitting is malicious compliance, and not every case of malicious compliance related to employment is the same as quiet quitting, there is definitely room for overlap - a situation where one is both quiet quitting and performing malicious compliance. I thought that this was such a case.
After reading https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/e285ec96adf8d443/5868d536-full.pdf I'm backing away from that. What the new whistleblower report seems to allege is that Reuveni was ordered to make statements to the court that he knew were wrong and misleading, and he outright refused - which is honourable but it's non-compliance rather than malicious compliance.
He also actively sought to confidentially relay the situation to folks higher up on the food chain in order to get them to push back against this, which is probably too much effort to count as quiet quitting.
Yeah, it's really strange that Sonny's citizenship application is still pending after two decades.
Reasons are mentioned in the article:
I ask Sonny why he thinks his own application for citizenship has taken over two decades.
"It's racism," he replies immediately.
At one point his file was lost completely, and he has now been told his case is "pending".
Insaf's case is similar.
"I arrived here at nine months old, and maybe at 33 or 34 - if all goes well - I can finally be an Italian citizen," she says, exasperated.
Her parents finally got Italian citizenship 20 days after Insaf turned 18. That meant she had to apply for herself from scratch, including proving a steady income.
You're correct of course in that a big part of the problem is that it seems only adults can start the process, as per https://immigration-italy.com/how-to-get-citizenship-in-italy/ there aren't separate provisions for minors to naturalize, the usual naturalization pathway requires things that normally only adults or emancipated minors would be able to provide, and minors whose parents naturalize are automatically naturalized too.
This is unrelated, but something I found while looking up the links for this post. Another instance where spez's site is full of bad information : https://archive.ph/lkk4M
"I was born in China and adopted ... and I do have US citizenship and a certificate of citizenship"
"You forgetting there’s two sides to deportation, the US has to kick you out and China has to physically accept you, and you aren’t a Chinese citizen anymore, so you not gonna end up in there on a whim."
The case of PRC citizens like Xunmei Li above demonstrates the current unwritten policy of the PRC here - if a former PRC citizen has their new citizenship revoked, the PRC usually treats that as annulling the event that caused the loss of Chinese citizenship. So basically, if OP were to end up in the unfortunate situation of being denaturalized and deported, OP would likely revert to being a Chinese citizen in China.
(Though this does depend on the relations between the two countries staying level-headed - if Drumpf causes them enough chaos, the PRC may well decide to allow the reversion of Chinese citizenship but still say "no, thanks" and prevent the deportation by simply refusing to accept the OP.)
Good that it's been blocked by an injunction. The only thing is that I'm a bit sad to hear that Harvard reported that they complied, but the silver lining is that it means their court case should be that much stronger when pushing back against the "insufficient" claim.
He already could dox them if he wanted to, all that information is already accessible to him.
Interesting question actually... for sure the SEVIS records already have what the President wants to expose, but would he personally be able to see these records? I think we know, for example, that when Biden was President, he wasn't able to view or release his predecessor's tax return even though the IRS has it.
I don't know how those IRS protections compare with the SEVIS ones (and would find it plausible if it turns out the IRS is the one with the stronger ones), but I'd certainly be interested in learning more about it either way.
He needs to make it seem like someone’s fighting him on it when nobody really is.
Agreed, this makes sense and is the most likely answer. The other aspect though is even if he could get the records from SEVIS, doxxing from that (likely in violation of laws and pre-existing regulations) would be a serious thing. Now, openly doxxing from Harvard's own report would likely also create legal issues - but from a practical standpoint there might be fewer controls on drumpf and his underlings in releasing this info if it was successfully obtained in this way. On the other hand I feel like this is giving drumpf too much credit, he's made far dumber gaffes before.
One final thing. Of course, there's slightly more plausible deniability here ("oh no some jilted employee at Harvard must have posted the copy of the report after Harvard was forced to write it and send it to us, we didn't do it"). All the more reason for Harvard to resist any such demands to the very ends of the Earth...
From the docs at https://maxautoclicker.blogspot.com/ (which I had to read using 12ft.io due to the ads redirecting otherwise) it seems that this tool supports updating the mouse position as well,
Position of mouse click (defined or any location)
Thus it shouldn't be too hard to set up the required scrolling if someone in the future is still interested in trying this out...
WTH. Who voted for him again?
... Oh. Right.
Hello @OrteilGenou@lemmy.world was curious why you downvoted this - happy to chat out any difference of opinion/correct any errors in facts/etc and perhaps even change my mind about something.
Hmm... it seems https://well-known.dev/sites/piefed.au last saw it around as of four days ago (saved for posterity at https://archive.ph/hjDuK ), but now I'm getting NXDOMAIN from chrome, so the registration just vanished.
Which is interesting because checking with GoDaddy WHOIS says, https://ca.godaddy.com/whois/results.aspx?domain=piefed.au
Suggesting that the DNS registration expired earlier, 9 days ago.
Alas, GoDaddy only gives a name - Chris Price - and no other useful contact info like an email address or phone number that can be used to reach out.
Of course, well-known also only found out about piefed.au in late October, while there's evidence of it being around for much longer than that - e.g. https://lemmy.ca/post/45609571/17024992
However, when I look, I can't find evidence of federation happening more recently than one month ago - e.g. https://al.lemmy.hostux.net/l.hostux.net/u/Linearity@piefed.au
This makes me think that the admin planned to shut it down, and abandoned it approximately one month ago - but the hosting provider simply kept it around until now.
Wow. It's terrible to see how much things have reversed in the 14 or so years since Wukan ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wukan )
Edit: As back then there was an effort to actually address grievances and come to a harmonious resolution for everyone involved.
I speculate that this is the fault of the United States. The scholar, a US citizen, is entering from the US, and as per the article CBSA has concerns regarding "national security" - we know that the CBSA and the US CBP work closely together, so if some top level US official ordered the CBP to pass the "national security threat" along, that'd explain CBSA's behaviour.
Specifically, why they were concerned in the first place (because they had to take the tip from the US gov't seriously for fear that they'd lose cooperation on actual important matters if they didn't), why it took so long before the scholars were released (because they needed those four hours to make sure that they covered all their bases in case the CBP or another part of the US gov't came knocking again and asking why the scholars weren't arrested or detained), and also why CBSA can't more clearly explain why the scholars were targeted in the first place (because the working arrangements between the CBP and the CBSA, and between the security departments of the governments of Canada and the US more generally, require a considerable level of secrecy).
The article also mentions,
I like to think though that this wasn't strictly necessary and that CBSA are the good guys who would have still done the right thing in the end, after of course thoroughly documenting the obvious - why the US's tip was off and there actually was no real threat.
Interesting. So if English Wikipedia is accurate, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwanese/_Representative/_Office/_in/_Lithuania then there's certainly plenty of room for diplomatic relations to grow. Currently the office is still a TECO, in contrast to, for example, the full on embassy in Vatican City (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embassy/_of/_Taiwan,/_Holy/_See )
It's not clear from the article if diplomatic relations between Lithuania and the PRC are fully called off or not. If they are, I don't see it as the best possible move from the PRC. It's just removing any incentive to prevent Lithuania from establishing full diplomatic recognition to the ROC.
Also, from the article,
I wonder what was tried. If the current government in Lithuania really wants to do this, and the name alone is the sole sticking point, it seems like a solution like this might work out:
Sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the ROC that the word Taiwan in the name specifically means and is short for Taiwan island (where the city of Taipei is located). Then offer to sign another MOU with the PRC.
I'm not sure if it'd work, but it's a potential middle ground compromise.
Having lived both right on the subway line and in the some areas just outside the downtown core, I may be able to add some insight here.
Basically, that whole area of land feels car unfriendly. Hard to find parking close by and lots of congestion. But living on the subway line this never felt like an issue since there was a good alternative - one typically doesn't need a car for day to day living in downtown Toronto in my experience. Also, for things like getting groceries or stuff from a corner shop, things are so clustered together that there's usually something within walking distance of where you live.
Much further away in the GTA, you definitely need a car. But congestion is not so bad (at least until you finally need to head into the city proper) and parking nearby is quite more comfortable as well.
So the areas outside the core have the worst of both worlds - you get much of the lack of space and congestion that you get in downtown proper, but also a lack of viable public transportation alternatives.
As per https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-people-work-for-the-federal-government/ it's about 3 million people who work those jobs. Assuming an average family size of four, that's about 12 million people who would care. I'd hardly call that nobody.
Of course, I'm one of them. Just remember, you're asking my dad to work without pay. It's a fight we believe in and support, and we were prepared to hold on for longer. However, I can't deny that things are starting to hurt.
The TLDR here is that while Dems didn't win as big as many hoped, they did not walk away empty-handed.
As I wrote, there's going to be a mid-December fight for a vote on the ACA subsidies and then a potential shutdown at the end of Jan 2026.
It's not a fold, the fight's not lost. It's a tactical retreat to regroup and continue the battle.
The other point is that it was only 8 Dems who broke ranks in the Senate and 6 in the House. There are 47 total Dem Senators and 213 Dems in the House. It hardly makes sense to cast all Democrats in this space when it's such a tiny minority who broke ranks.
I'll grant you this. I recall reading that some blue Senators were ready to do a deal earlier, but were convinced to wait until after the elections.
So the fight is about the enhanced subsidies. ACA will continue to live without them. ACA isn't going to die or anything.
But even if we consider the enhanced subsidies - having a month to prepare for a vote and another month plus change to prepare a plan to retaliate in case the vote fails. These don't seem unreasonable.
On the one hand, it's fair to say it's not enough or more should have been done. But I don't think these are the actions of people who merely pretend.
To be honest, I'm leaning towards it being more of a draw in one battle in an ongoing war that isn't over yet.
But also consider this: what would be the Republican BATNA ( https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/best-alternative-to-a-negotiated-agreement-batna.asp ) if Dems refused, forever? Unfortunately there's a good argument to be made that it's dropping the filibuster.
Now, with the GOP and MAGA having taken such hits with the issues of SNAP funding during the shutdown, perhaps this wasn't the right time. Perhaps holding out a bit longer would have gotten more concessions without bringing up a realistic desire to end the filibuster. Also fair.
Do remember that Dems did face pressure as well, https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/10/30/federal-union-shutdown-q-a-00629794 - in a way it's amazing that so few defected. But on the flip side, better leadership and planning might have allowed Dems to stay the course for longer and gotten better concessions for this battle.
My point is the same - even if Dems could have done a better job, they didn't walk away empty handed. Therefore they didn't lose.
That's the whole point of my post - they do have a win that they can point to, even during midterms. They put a stop to federal worker layoffs while the budget is being negotiated. To repeat the quote,
If you disagree, please explain to me how the above is not a win for Democrats and a help to them come midterms.
As for your other points,
I might have worded it differently, but yeah ... I'd agree that if the leadership had actually had some kind of plan and proper endgame to this, Dems might have been able to win even more.
Well, the recent election wins might beg to differ. But midterms will definitely answer this. What's up next: the mid-December ACA vote fight, and then another budget fight (and perhaps shutdown again?) at the end of Jan.
Which gov't is this?
What are these improvements? The whole statement here is very vague.
Well, it's not zero. It might be too little, but that doesn't preclude it from being of a smaller value that's still greater than nothing. (Case in point: federal aid for college and SNAP both post-date.)
Yes, this is accurate. Massachusetts had a state-wide version of the ACA that was led by Romney before the ACA made it national. This was a major talking point prior to the 2012 election, with it being pointed out how ironic that Romney was against the ACA when he helped invent it.
Part of the idea was that by being based on top of an originally Republican plan, it would be a plan that could cross the aisle and win bipartisan support. This part didn't entirely pan out (though perhaps it's possible that when McCain killed skinny repeal back in 2017, this aspect of ACA helped him do so).
Also worth nothing that this model isn't unique to the US. The Netherlands has universal healthcare with private insurance as well, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/international-health-policy-center/countries/netherlands
Compared to a true single payer like in Canada? Sure, I'd agree with that. (Well, "pathetic" might be a bit too strong a term.) Better to say that as much as it improved things, the ACA didn't go far enough.
Considering that the current admin appears to be actively seeking to hurt their constituents though, no wonder there was such a drastic fight just to try and maintain the status quo.
Back when I first left, I moved on to kbin.social - and oh boy, a lot of us were there. Back then, the answer to some of this was to archive the answers found on spez's site and then share or repost on kbin.social itself, so we could rebuild the communities - or at least provide alternative communities.
True, agreed. In fairness that site does a lot of things right - a permabanned account can still read everything, it's not much different from being logged out. And you can still grab a copy of your data after being banned fairly easily by making a GDPR/CCPR request (even if you aren't covered by either law). That's more than I can say for all my stuff on kbin.social for example (I can recover a small amount on other instances but there's a lot that never federated off of kbin.social which I presume to now be lost for good.)
Edit: And Facebook - I luckily didn't have to deal with this but I've heard of folks having to file lawsuits to get their family pictures back after a bot bans them. So yeah, miles ahead.
Being in Canada, I can say that the way Facebook attempted to heavy-handle the "pay for news" bit - including suppressing news BEFORE the law changed - left a very sour taste in my mouth. I agree 100% - but Facebook really did set the bar low here.
Well, take the case of u/awkwardtheturtle. Permanently banned with no appeal and no way to reach a human for help who can actually do anything. (It's quite possible awkwardtheturtle was deserving, but I know of many great former kbinners who were in the same situation. Often for no apparent reason, or if there was a reason, it was related to supporting the blackout and the protests.) So in some policies they're just as bad.
It's great as a read-only site, but if you need to ask for help...
Remember that spez's site only recently became profitable. If they're better than Facebook, part of it may be that they're smaller and weaker as a company, so in some ways they have to be nicer. Less monopoly.
And also .. Twitter? I liked the original edition, they seemed very fair and principled. But we all know what happened to Twitter in the end. And spez likes Musk a lot including how Musk runs former Twitter (see for example https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/reddit-blackout-protest-private-ceo-elon-musk-huffman-rcna89700 ), so I can easily see him supporting the sale of the company at some point to someone worse.
Basically, the TDLR is that I agree with you - but I also would caution that we can't be comfortable with having information live only on spez's site.
So actually this caused quite a bit of chaos this past Friday. Folks who were traveling, say on a quick weekend holiday, suddenly found out that they had to rush back into the US before midnight. Then the administration walked it back, so some of these people who paid premium for last minute flights are now SOL. Another example of how not to run an administration.
This got me thinking about the fediverse more generally, but as that's off-topic I started a separate thread in https://thebrainbin.org/m/PoliticalDiscussion/t/1097560/How-the-recent-h1b-drama-got-me-thinking-about-the
I think this really says it all.
So I meant to write in the above comment that while not every case of quiet quitting is malicious compliance, and not every case of malicious compliance related to employment is the same as quiet quitting, there is definitely room for overlap - a situation where one is both quiet quitting and performing malicious compliance. I thought that this was such a case.
After reading https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/e285ec96adf8d443/5868d536-full.pdf I'm backing away from that. What the new whistleblower report seems to allege is that Reuveni was ordered to make statements to the court that he knew were wrong and misleading, and he outright refused - which is honourable but it's non-compliance rather than malicious compliance.
He also actively sought to confidentially relay the situation to folks higher up on the food chain in order to get them to push back against this, which is probably too much effort to count as quiet quitting.
Yeah, it's really strange that Sonny's citizenship application is still pending after two decades.
Reasons are mentioned in the article:
Insaf's case is similar.
You're correct of course in that a big part of the problem is that it seems only adults can start the process, as per https://immigration-italy.com/how-to-get-citizenship-in-italy/ there aren't separate provisions for minors to naturalize, the usual naturalization pathway requires things that normally only adults or emancipated minors would be able to provide, and minors whose parents naturalize are automatically naturalized too.
This is unrelated, but something I found while looking up the links for this post. Another instance where spez's site is full of bad information : https://archive.ph/lkk4M
"I was born in China and adopted ... and I do have US citizenship and a certificate of citizenship"
"You forgetting there’s two sides to deportation, the US has to kick you out and China has to physically accept you, and you aren’t a Chinese citizen anymore, so you not gonna end up in there on a whim."
The case of PRC citizens like Xunmei Li above demonstrates the current unwritten policy of the PRC here - if a former PRC citizen has their new citizenship revoked, the PRC usually treats that as annulling the event that caused the loss of Chinese citizenship. So basically, if OP were to end up in the unfortunate situation of being denaturalized and deported, OP would likely revert to being a Chinese citizen in China.
(Though this does depend on the relations between the two countries staying level-headed - if Drumpf causes them enough chaos, the PRC may well decide to allow the reversion of Chinese citizenship but still say "no, thanks" and prevent the deportation by simply refusing to accept the OP.)
Good that it's been blocked by an injunction. The only thing is that I'm a bit sad to hear that Harvard reported that they complied, but the silver lining is that it means their court case should be that much stronger when pushing back against the "insufficient" claim.
Interesting question actually... for sure the SEVIS records already have what the President wants to expose, but would he personally be able to see these records? I think we know, for example, that when Biden was President, he wasn't able to view or release his predecessor's tax return even though the IRS has it.
I don't know how those IRS protections compare with the SEVIS ones (and would find it plausible if it turns out the IRS is the one with the stronger ones), but I'd certainly be interested in learning more about it either way.
Agreed, this makes sense and is the most likely answer. The other aspect though is even if he could get the records from SEVIS, doxxing from that (likely in violation of laws and pre-existing regulations) would be a serious thing. Now, openly doxxing from Harvard's own report would likely also create legal issues - but from a practical standpoint there might be fewer controls on drumpf and his underlings in releasing this info if it was successfully obtained in this way. On the other hand I feel like this is giving drumpf too much credit, he's made far dumber gaffes before.
One final thing. Of course, there's slightly more plausible deniability here ("oh no some jilted employee at Harvard must have posted the copy of the report after Harvard was forced to write it and send it to us, we didn't do it"). All the more reason for Harvard to resist any such demands to the very ends of the Earth...
Yeah, they should clarify that being at the G7 and also being a convicted felon is unusual.
From the docs at https://maxautoclicker.blogspot.com/ (which I had to read using 12ft.io due to the ads redirecting otherwise) it seems that this tool supports updating the mouse position as well,
Thus it shouldn't be too hard to set up the required scrolling if someone in the future is still interested in trying this out...
I've done similar things in the past, though my go-to is xdotool - https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/trusty/man1/xdotool.1.html - since in addition to simulating the mouse it can also simulate the right keyboard presses.