steventhedev

Arrest him and try him for treason.

He has committed acts that adhere him to enemies of the United States and publicly admitted to this.

Having worked with data.gov extensively, this may be a huge nothing burger. The number of datasets fluctuates constantly, and ultimately the vast majority of those are just links to specific agencies. If you're lucky, they link the to actual data, but most of the time the link just goes to a landing page for the team that collected the data.

The project stopped running years ago, or I'd pull actual statistics on what was removed or if there's a shared keyword.

But running and syndicating articles based on two screenshots is not particularly useful. At least send in a FOIA request to find out which ones were removed.

Agree. The vast majority of people at those protests do not support Hamas as an organization and certainly not their methods. I simply believe they'll be accusing people at the rallies that did have Hamas/Hezbollah flags of guilt by association.

Yes. The narrow case is that if you express support for a designated foreign terrorist organization that is grounds for denying your visa, or revoking your status. So if you are on a student visa and went to a protest wearing a hamas headband and carrying the flag then you'll end up on a plane out of the US.

Where it gets iffy is the question about people who showed up to a protest and didn't know or see or agree with the hamas flags being flown there

Why choose self as the exemplar? It may be the "purest", but the list isn't based on "purest" or pascal would be the exemplar of structured languages.

At the very least, improve readability by moving the disclaimer from the last sentence of the section to the first.

Struwwelpeter

Edit: spelling

I don't think we're having the same conversation.

This EO is about going back over the visa documents for people who entered legally and reviewing them based on a changed standard.

The article is badly written with a sensationalized headline. The EO is written in standard legalese, and only related tangentially to the article. H1Bs likely don't need to worry too much, but postdocs on that visa who went to a protest may need to reconsider their political activity. The fact that CAIR is quoted should give you a hint as to how this EO is expected to be applied - towards international students on F1 visas - specifically those who have taken part of campus demonstrations involving symbols from foreign terrorist organizations (Hamas flag, Hezbollah flags, etc).

Beyond that, it may be used as a stick against postdocs working on politically charged topics like climate change.

Understanding the context and motivations of the administration is critical in planning how to survive the next four years.

Ignore it at your own peril.

Opengrep being the OSS fork of semgrep.

Not to be confused with opengrok.

So the actual EO doesn't call out H1B at all, so I'm guessing this is sensationalized as H1B is the most "visible" visa in recent news.

The context for this is likely the Moroccan national who recently committed a terror attack in Israel. He had a green card and that was supposedly part of the decision to grant him entry as a tourist to Israel.

That having been said, this will likely result in some international students getting deported whether deserved or not. Semi-intended consequences is what I'd call them.

If you think the insanity stops here - you haven't heard of February 29th, 1900

Clearly your gender field is a boolean. Which means it can be either true, false, null, or undefined. Except in javascript where for some reason it can sometimes be NaN, but only when you try to compare two people.