Reposted byAlex Hern
I know no one cares, but isn't breaching capital controls illegal?
www.ft.com/content/7b60...
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Republican|Oklahoma District 1
Kevin Hern
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 517
Yes77%
No19%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 1
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Kevin Hern
U.S. RepresentativeRepublicanOklahoma District 1
SoupScore
Kevin's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 16 sponsored · 30 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
He lives in an information environment where if you go to tower hamlets you will not meet a single person who is British, and where even small rural villages are being overwhelmed by asylum seekers in local hotels, with councils giving them free houses
I think if you spell out the implications of his belief - that one in five people in the UK have arrived in the last five years - he would have said “yes, that sounds right.”
Something that feels important about the Ratcliffe comments is they aren’t simply innumeracy. Everyone has problems with this sort of thing at times, because we have no intuitive feel for the difference between very large numbers. But this seems distinct
I mean, no-one has to sell books to me and if the profit doesn’t equal the faff then I can see why you wouldn’t
Yeah I’m slightly hmmmmm about an excuse that lines up with pre-existing practices and doesn’t really make that much sense. Would be curious if the books are printed in the US for one
Trying
Overseas tycoons such as Elon Musk would be barred from giving substantial donations to UK political parties under new legislation to block companies making gifts if they do not have British owners or make sufficient revenue in the country
www.ft.com/content/f4ed...
Is it tariff bullshit? The US doesn’t charge on exports and we’ve not done retaliatory stuff
I'm not a lawyer but it really seems to me like the Supreme Court just decided that the obvious meaning and intention of statute law doesn't count. Wouldn't be the first time!
Somewhat baffling Supreme Court ruling today, which seems to hold that statute banning computer programs from being patented doesn't apply if the computer programs require hardware to run. Which is… all computer programs? supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc...
Anthropic: “behold! I have created the philosophical zombie from the seminal question of consciousness ‘how can you tell a philosophical zombie isn’t conscious’”
"what if AI never fixes the hallucination issue and gets put into production use anyway despite the fact that it occasionally misfires" oh yeah that would be bad
"What if AI fixes the hallucination issue and is seen as more reliable than humans in areas where precision and accuracy are valued" 😬😬😬
think i've hit a turning point recently and the worlds where AI gets better and fixes its problems are now more concerning to me than the worlds where it doesn't
i quite like the way you're all reinventing the icon of early 00s messageboards, the two-axis political compass
TÖDLEIN, THE SILENT ARCHER
Move 6” | Wounds 4 | Save 5+ | Bravery 10
MELEE: Bony Grasp (3”, 2 Atks, 4+/4+, -1 Rend, 1 Dmg)
RANGED: Deathly Arrow (18”, 1 Atk, 3+/3+, -2 Rend, D3 Dmg)
ABILITY: Inevitable Shot - Unmodified 6s to hit auto-wound
‘Tödlein’, Death as an archer.
Made from pear wood.
Dated to before 1519; artist: Hans Leinberger
www.khm.at/kunstwerke/t...
This is the most freelance journalist experience you’ve ever uttered
would you say, duncan, that he is toast
i always like headlines like this that can answer with a big ol map
Reposted byAlex Hern
In case you want a prestigious certificate on your wall theagat.co
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History517 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
517 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Retaining Divisions B and C | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Retaining Division A | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-07 | H. Res. 780 (119th) | Motion to Discharge | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-07 | H. Res. 977 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-07 | H. Res. 977 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Call of the House | PRESENT | — | — | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 498 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 498 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 845 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 845 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 1366 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 1366 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 3492 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 3492 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 6703 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 6703 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 3616 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-17 | H. Con. Res. 64 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-17 | H. Con. Res. 61 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-17 | H. Res. 953 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-17 | H. Res. 953 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-16 | H.R. 3632 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-16 | H.R. 3632 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-16 | H.R. 4371 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-16 | H.R. 4371 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-16 | H. Res. 951 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-16 | H. Res. 951 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-16 | H.R. 3187 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 284 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-12 | H.R. 3668 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-12 | H.R. 3668 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 2550 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H. Res. 432 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3898 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3898 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3638 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3628 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H. Res. 939 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | H. Res. 432 (119th) | Motion to Discharge | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | S. 1071 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.