813
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
813 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25119 readers
2026 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because we dont know for sure that its not some really dumb technical problem instead of yet another announcement of the intent to turn the US into a dictatorship.
A fuckup that specifically in line with what the Führer wants is no accident
What possible 'technical problem' could do this? It's not like the whole page has just gone offline. Specific sections of text are missing. And this is text that should never need updating.
They're doing annotated sections. If the backend loads sections or parts of sections separately, a corrupt database might cause a problem like this. Also could load each article into a buffee...and article I was too long to fit, so it got truncated.
There is a lot more opportunity for technology to break in interesting ways than most people expect.
Its also sometimes helpful to give an adversary a face-saving way to back down, and a technical problem can be a way to do that.
Section 8 stops at the same point on two independent pages. Is it possible they're both referencing the same source file? Maybe. But why would this ever get truncated? This isn't some dynamic page that will have to buffer blocks of text of unknown length. It just doesn't pass the smell test that the site suddenly can't display correctly a block of text that hasn't changed at all in over 200 years. And the sections that are deleted just happen to be those areas that Trump hates the most.
Regardless, we should screaming about this from the mountaintops. If there is one website on the federal government that you do not want to have displayed incorrectly, it's the fucking Constitution.
I’ve seen over confident jr programmers think that they got it all right and deploy code without checking plenty of times.
Remember “DOGE” is also an effort to update all kinds of servers and codebases to like nodeJS or whatever current flavor of server the new programmers think is cool.
I’m not going to say it might not be intentional, but Hanlon’s razor is still my default for now. (Not with the climate and DHHS pages though, that shit is fascist data manipulation for sure).
Okay, so explain this: why can I archive various random pages on congress.gov, but when I try to look at archives for the 14th amendment, I get complaints that I can't access it from 'this site' (archive.org)? I can view the live page, but I can't archive it and then see the result. I'm also having issue archiving the current Article 1 page (as mentioned further under this post).
Edit: To me, the 14th amendment issue hints that: a) that page in particular requires cookies and b) it intentionally won't load for/from archive.org -- but this is not consistent for other pages so it seems extra fishy.
Stop it. You're watching your rights being selectively erased so you can be deported while Trump gets private jets as bribes, stop it.
Stop what, making this post which alerted people to the problem?
They are coming up with ridiculously convoluted and unlikely excuses and downplaying the severity of it, this is an intentional assault on your freedoms and literal life in some cases, this isn't a stupidly designed application that gets portions of text through separate calls and quietly ignores when some calls fail and presents the output as if its complete.
It's possible that this combination of idiotic schema/application design and silent exception handling results in exactly the rights Trump is openly attacking being stripped out of the official .gov constitution document, but the odds are so incredible low why even hypothesize that? Why give them an out they didn't even attempt themselves?
"Exactly the rights Trump is openly attacking" includes "providing and maintaining a navy"?
Your confirmation bias is showing.
What? What could possibly convince you this is a technical problem?
Most likely, it's because they couldn't source enough electrons for the full text as they have to be imported at great cost and are hit with extremely high tariffs at the moment.
I mean probably something like that.
Because it chops off text from one point in a section to the end of said section. If someone fucked up editing the site, this is a possible result.
I'm not saying that's for sure what happened, but it's definitely within the realm of possibility since they fired all the competent people.
You don't have to be convinced that it is a technical problem in order to not be convinced that it isn't a technical problem.
I assume you are familiar with the concept of uncertainty.
You can’t seriously be this naïve… I mean, c’mon now