jon128

  15 U.S. Code § 7 - “Person” or “persons” defined 

  The word “person”, or “persons”, wherever used in sections 1 to 7 of this title shall be deemed to include corporations

  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7

  <3

  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-STYLEMANUAL-2008/html/GPO-STYLEMANUAL-2008-7.htm

  "The governments of the United States and one of each of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other".

  Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)


  "That there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a state, and the privileges and immunities of one are not the same as the other is well established by the decisions of the courts of this country."

  Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927)


  "The only absolute and unqualified right of a United State citizen (federal citizen) is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States."

  U.S. v. Valentine, 288 F. Supp. 957

But Apple will never sell that to me, as far as I can guess. Apple is not a good person.

It's already happened.

.

>> Judges are only subject to the rules and regulations that other judges and prosecuters decide apply.

The last thing a state judge wants is a federal lawsuit against him where a federal judge reviews accusations that he/she didn't follow essential procedure.

.

>> it's just random gibberish

The plentiful expert witnesses from math departments and computer science departments from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and the like who will gladly show up to defend their fields (albeit will want to be paid), would say otherwise, if that were necessary, which it's not, because like has already been pointed out at least twice now

  it already happened.

  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50264113

When you're in company that has a culture of sharing dank Helm charts you know you're in the right place.

Courts have generally accepted proof of existence that is established by proper entries to robust distributed immutable ledgers.

More important than courts are the people. If someone many states over has a serious crime committed against them, and they want it to be known they have been wronged in some way, I and others have a moral right to know about it.

Those who know of an ill that has happened and choose to speak about it should be heard.

If someone provides testimony in the form of a video or a written statement, the files can be available over any medium such as torrent, R2 bucket, IPFS, what have you, but proof of existence on a blockchain for the authenticity aspect, "this exact thing identified by this sha512 hash submitted at this time" and unchangeable, is imperative.

The blockchain part is imperative so somebody can't "just go back and change something" post-facto.

If you want to see an example of a court action going a different way due to what was written to a robust distributed immutable ledger, do a web search for "Craig Wright is a fraud posted by private keys he said he owned".

That is the Satoshi Blockchain referenced to and swaying a court on a cosmic scale.

.

>> A court could care less about blockchain hashes unless the society of lawyers and judges decide it is legitimate.

Facts are not determined by loose consensus decided by private societies. The standard is higher. Such private societies are also not a substitute for the legislature, nor could they be for determining a true fact.

Blockchains and their contents are rooted in math so they're not trivial to argue with. USA is rife with academia suitable to provide abundant expert witnesses for said math.

.

>> A court could care less about blockchain hashes

In practice this would lead to the case being escalated to a higher court. Or worse a federal lawsuit could be filed against a judge, which is not unheard of.

Judges aren't cosmically ultimate arbiters, they take an oath and have a duty and like anyone else who does, they are subject to rules and regulations for which there are real consequences for failure to abide by.

One of my buddies overheard this and set his joint down and said declaratively "yeah let's fuckin' do it". Good moment.

Both for technology and law.

Illiteracy is rampant.

Critical thinking is oddly uncommon.

It's unfortunate and unsustainable.

  <3

  cat  ./file  ./salt    |    shasum -a 512

I am not whatever internet meme you think it is you're thinking about.

I am in harmony with "the system".

I am a national as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(22)(B).

  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101

My literacy is not an excuse for your bigotry.

You should have stopped reading at the line that indicated you should stop reading, as you are not well-educated in law.

So arrogant bigotry, at that.

See the cases by/against Craig Wright who falsely claimed to be the originator of Bitcoin and not a mere contributor (and whether he made contributions that made a real impact is also in question). The Blockchain provided mathematical proof that Craig Wright is a fraud. The very private key Wright claimed to own was used to post on the Satoshi Blockchain: "Craig Wright is a fraud" which absolutely nuked Wright in court.

So, yes, in the biggest way possibly possible on a cosmic scale.

Proof of Existence has been used for evidence in courts for much less interesting things. It's been old news for a while now.

.

>> "It's proof because I said it's proof, and you have to trust me on that mr judge"

This objectively tells everyone reading this you don't already comprehend what SHA256 and SHA512 are, which is what you should be embarrassed of.

Not the part that these hashes posted alongside filenames of their respective files on the Satoshi Blockchain has been used for real-world applications for over a decade, which you should have uncovered in a web search I suggested you do in my previous comment, which you obviously did not do.

It's fine, everyone has to start somewhere. And you learned something today, unless this discussion has rustled your jimmies such that this opportunity for your learning and improvement is self-blocked, which given this is "Hacker News" and not Facebook, and we are total strangers to each other, would be even more embarrassing...

.

I will save this thread as a PDF and put the PDF's sha512 hash on the Satoshi Blockchain so that everyone for all eternity can know at around this time you posted dumb things in an arrogant manner on this thread.

You are living in a Blockchain era. This is how powerful Blockchains really are. Neat how that works innit.

  p a r a l l e l   c o n s t r u c t i o n

The notary part is absolutely essential. Renowned Blockchains are the ULTIMATE for this use case. Sorry that you didn't already know this and the other part wasn't already obviously to be assumed by you.

I thought I was posting on a site called Hacker News, I was obviously being too assumptive. I'll spell things out more elaborately in comments in the future.

Any detail or point shared in the previous comment is backed with citations of existing case law. If you have a pointed question about any of it, there is case law for it.

  "That there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a state, and the privileges and immunities of one are not the same as the other is well established by the decisions of the courts of this country."

  Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927)


  "The only absolute and unqualified right of a United State citizen (federal citizen) is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States."

  U.S. v. Valentine, 288 F. Supp. 957


  "The governments of the United States and one of each of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other".

  Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)

Claude is a service provided by a private company. Claude is not a king who can dictate to USA what its laws are.

Unless you are willing to do the necessary reading and comprehension yourself you aren't going to be equipped to meaningfully evaluate the substance of whatever "nice refutation". It's a lot of work.

I don't like people who describe themselves as "sovereign citizen" because the compound term is an oxymoron and those who self-describe as such universally are morons. But likewise, those who reach for such a slander (it's as nasty as calling someone the "N word") instead of presenting an argument of substance are just as bad or even worse in a way as one is foolishness and the other is bigoted insidiousness.

If you sincerely believe the "nice refutation" is true and correct, then sign a declaration under penalty of perjury for such. Otherwise all you have is piss in the wind.

.

>> Claude is getting pretty good with this kind of stuff

Given that you already wrote "sovereign citizen" without presenting any argument (and even to what, exactly) nor cited any case law in your previous comment, you're a long ways on your journey to being qualified to comment to Claude being "pretty good with this kind of stuff" one way or the other.

I have a driver's license too, but I only present it where having been pulled over in a car operated commercially (ie rented from a car company), but not ever in a car I actually own (not mere title to possess and occupy the property but lawful ownership of the property with the M.C.O.), and I didn't enter that simple contract through filling out the same forms you did but other government-provided forms.

You and I are not the same kind of American, not that there is anything wrong with that. The system is in harmony.

  18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law 

  Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both [..]

  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

Citizens of the United States, which means the entire family, most of the definitions in the link below, have a right to use the courts.

Unfortunately so many among us are functionally illiterate (unable to read and write legalize) and not educated in law so far too often this essential right goes not exercised.

The more competent attorneys can fully comprehend this comment posted here. But the uncooth among that line of business tend to not like a comment like this being posted, it's not good business for them.

Existing case law sets precedent that only those who can claim with standing as one of citizens of one of the several states, and not only a federal citizen (but also not a state citizen), have absolute and unqualified right to the first eight amendments. Some later case law extended and elaborated enjoyment of the first eight amendments to those who are only federal citizen (and not also state citizen), but didn't overturn the earlier notion that only state citizens have the absolute and unqualified right to the first eight amendments.

  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101

These detentions, even for the majority who have documented in writing a full assent to adhere to vehicle codes under public policy, are not legal.

Those who aren't well-educated in law can stop reading here.

A custodial arrest of someone who went to sufficent lengths to opt for not assenting in writing to adhere to vehicle codes, based on reasonable suspicion, would be unlawful, and in addition to the involved false declaration of an emergency on the road (which is a felony) would ipso facto be criminal in nature.

Documentation of dishonor has value in the public space. Blockchains for the win.

The reverse-proxies implemented in Rust (aided by Rocq of Rust) in my larger circles were written in-house for their respective platforms. These colleagues fall into the more classical definiton of engineer and "hacker". I know there are some open source reverse-proxies implemented in Rust out there but I am not yet personally familiar with them (by using and supporting them in production) and can't vouch for them.

I agree with xmcp123's comment generally. I know those guys (and some gals) use models for some static analysis of code but they don't use models to generate important code like internet-facing reverse-proxies.

I look forward to the implementations of reverse-proxies in Lean 4 which will be zero-bugs implementations, unless some macro level adjustments need to be made, and may enable the maximum possible utilization of the silicon involved even more so than Rust already does.

If a reverse-proxy implemented in CompCert C could yield some compelling result has been a recent discussion. I'm still personally getting familiar with CompCert C.

Up until the last couple of years from early-ish 2012, I used nginx for production traffic in a lot of places. I have instantiated so many K8s Ingress that were nginx and nginx has been a huge part of my professional and personal life.

Envoy being written in C++ has always given me a gut feeling to avoid Envoy. Aside from occasional SRE-ish support of Envoy (when someone else already instantiated it before I got there), I have successfully avoided it and occasionally successfully displaced Envoy with nginx. I was listening to an Oxide podcast just the other day where bcantrill commented about C++, something along the vibe of waiting for someone still somewhat early along their journey to see the light and move on to Rust.

There will never be a production Rocq of Go and if there ever is, then it wouldn't be the language we call Go today now would it. Go is for flash in the pan stuff that is only meant to.. go so far.