Now we just take loans to purchase the train tickets.

That seems like a hollow win.

Yea, the rest of us run on timestamps.

Your comment suggests that you (1) didn't read the article, and (2) have no idea who Michael Burry is.

Not GP, but in this context I would interpret the next administration[^1] holding the current administration to account as a willingness to use the court system to prosecute actual crimes committed while in office[^2].

That is by no means a given.

[^1]: Assuming there is one.

[^2]: That is, not petulantly prosecuting those deemed to have slighted you.

SCOTUS has already given POTUS immunity in any form other than impeachment followed by a conviction. The problem with that is that just removes POTUS from office. It does nothing to punish for those crimes that were deemed worthy enough of being impeached/convicted. SCOTUS said that POTUS cannot be held accountable for things done as official acts of office. So Congress cannot hold POTUS criminally accountable, but removed from office to stop the criminal acts. Once POTUS becomes a citizen they are free. At this point, I can only see where the newly sworn POTUS would use their new pardon power to end the question as well.

However, all of this is very far away from the legality of quantum computing

> SCOTUS has already given POTUS immunity in any form other than impeachment followed by a conviction.

That's not exactly accurate and that nuanced difference may be the key to holding the executive branch accountable, now that we're in this disastrous state of the world.

Should have added IANAL, so any inaccuracies are definitely introduced by my layman's explanation.

What nuances are left then? What small amount of hope can be gleaned from the ruling?

Specifically, POTUS has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions that are within their constitutional authority, presumptive immunity from all official acts (but not absolute), and no immunity from unofficial, private acts committed by the president.

Congress could also pass legislature or constitutional amendments to revert the effect of that tragic decision, though of course those also come with their own sets of challenges.

(IANALE btw)

Congress can pass whatever, but POTUS would still have to sign it. Even this Congress is not veto proof

A future POTUS might be willing to sign it, though yeah, it doesn't help with the current situation. That would still need to be artfully litigated.

I am curious of that allows the new President, while in office, to assassinate the previous one and insta-pardon himself.

It's amazing how much of America's political stability might rest not on the law, but rather on the self-restraint of each cohort's leadership.

Let's not forget the complacency of this Congress. POTUS could not get away with this nonsense if Congress would do its job. The right has been working their way to this perfect scenario for decades with gerrymandering at the state level, Congress refusing to accept a SCOTUS nominee from POTUS holding out that the next POTUS would be their guy, and all of the other nonsense that has happened to get us to this spot.

There are many people to prosecute besides the POTUS.

You just identified what (some) people dislike about it. It's the disconnect between your final two sentences.

It would have worked fine with a much lower price and if it were badged as an Apple car.

That has not been my experience of Firefox on Linux.

Whenever I encounter a broken site, it's because I blocked some advertising scripts and the whole thing fell apart with a slew of JavaScript errors. I'm quite happy to avoid such shoddy sites.

Not my area of expertise, but this article appears to completely ignore several factors which were true when I was growing up as a leftie in 1970s UK (admittedly some time ago):

1. Some schools actively punished children for writing left-handed.

2. Pretty much every utensil was made for right-handed people. I don't recall ever seeing left-handed scissors, for example.

3. You learn by copying those around you. If your parents, teachers, and peers are predominantly right-handed (and are even actively encouraging you to be right-handed), then you're likely to toe the line.

I imagine the final point would remain a factor long after the first two are addressed.

That's some catch, that catch-22.

I see everything twice!

It's the best there is.

They have, but you don't need to let them get away with it.

As opposed to what happens in the US, you mean?

Come on. We all know in the US a chicken place would never hire you, you would be 'too overqualified'. You have to do 'consulting' work for scraps as a tech person for out of favor industries as your wardrobe slowly goes out of date/becomes threadbare.