skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Will it reinfect persons who has already been infected?

At present time, a number of studies show that reinfection in people with naturally acquired immunity is relatively rare (see supporting excerpts below).

That said, the delta variant (and most other variants of concern) have mutations that confer partial immune escape . We can expect that such variants will pose an increasing risk to both the vaccinated & naturally immune. [5][6][7]

The virus can mutate faster than the scientific literature can establish consensus - I suppose we'll be facing a degree of uncertainly for a while to come.

> "A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals." [1]

> "Reinfection is rare in the young and international population of Qatar. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months." [2]

> "To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to synthesise the evidence on the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 reinfection over time. [...] Reinfection was an uncommon event (absolute rate 0%–1.1%), with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time. [...] These data suggest that naturally acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post‐infection. However, the applicability of these studies to new variants or to vaccine‐induced immunity remains uncertain." [3]

> "Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was examined among 52238 employees in an American healthcare system. COVID-19 did not occur in anyone over the five months of the study among 2579 individuals previously infected with COVID-19, including 1359 who did not take the vaccine. [...] Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before." [4]

[1] SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8040523/

[2] SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positivity protects against reinfection for at least seven months with 95% efficacy https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33937733/

[3] Quantifying the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 reinfection over time
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8209951/

[4] Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v...

[5] SARS-CoV-2 immune evasion by the B.1.427/B.1.429 variant of concern
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2021/06/30/scie...

[6] mRNA vaccine-elicited antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and circulating variants
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03324-6

[7] Reduced sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 variant Delta to antibody neutralization
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03777-9
Law firms like Mossack Fonseca exist specifically to solve this kind of problem.
And non-governmental creators and spreaders of misinformation love calling out the government for the same as an apparently effective cover for their own lunacy.

False official narratives are only one slice of the mucky pie.
I’m just some guy, but I have been in tech long enough (40 years) to learn that just because a technology exists doesn’t mean that it will be popular. So it’s no surprise to me that it hasn’t yet reached mass adoption. I have seen some really great technology cast aside. And usually for valid reasons from the market’s point of view.

I personally don’t see where VR is going to provide enough value—-and by that I mean in saving labor, money, resources or providing pure pleasure—-for mass adoption in legitimate markets. It is cumbersome, it looks silly, it’s unsettling and uncomfortable and it’s not really that great of an experience in my opinion.

However—-and I hesitate to say it—-it may become a bona fide substitute for certain kinds of “friendship”. That would seem to be the killer app, in more ways than one.
Why is it that no popular browser seems to have a simple, built-in "block autoplay" setting that actually works?

Firefox - no

Safari - no

Chrome - no
My opinion is that politicians want control of public opinions to better avoid criticisms, flaws and holes in their platform coming to light. If calling a politician a "failure" or "idiot" could cost you or your business & workplace major funds, why would you risk putting that to print?
What about GPT-f? It's a language model that proved theorems in the metamath formal system.
I found the book "The Beginning of Infinity" shattered this objectively incorrect world view (and a few others). :)
I think lots of people needed to bank when they weren't working so banking hours needed to get extended. The banks that filled that need saw increases in customers and most other banks had to do the same or lose customers.
> This is the problem with your argument. You're looking at it from the developer's perspective, rather than the user's

The developers need to make the apps, otherwise there's no marketplace. Gotta satisfy both, albeit imperfectly.

> As a user, all I have is your word (which is worth nothing if I don't already have a good reason to trust you).

That's not true at all. Experts can audit closed-source software to see if it's phoning home, etc. An App Store (like Apple's) can have strict rules where developers will be banned if they do malicious things. You can install tools to monitor apps. Apps are sandboxed to prevent access. You have much more to go on than just the developer's word.

> As a user, source code access is important, for a number of reasons

Sure, it would be nice as a user to have the code. Most app developers simply won't give it to you.
Off-topic a bit:

The word pan is far too overloaded as is: a metal cooking utensil, a camera going across, sorting gold from dirt, to conclude or end up (it panned out), to criticize sharply. Can't we use something else?
> World historic criminal? Kissinger seems undeserving of that title considering the age he worked in.

I'm not understanding the rationalization? I keep parsing the sentence as either 'He's too old to be a criminal.' , or 'He existed in an era that was horrible, so give him a pass.'

I don't consider either rationalizations to be worth contemplation, honestly.

I'm not sure if 'war criminal' is a title with expiration, nor do I think that such titles should be normalized by comparing it to some of the most tumultuous times in human history.

The only other group of people that shrug off 'war criminal' titles as easily as Kissinger are US presidents; that feels telling to me.

He has a long and storied history of being a horrible person , but being exceedingly successful at it.
>Both of those have kids around more often than you'd think,

I might know that. You might know that. But does the average yuppie DINK who is looking to move out of the city and into one of these developments know that? These seem to be positioned as the suburban equivalent of luxury condos and targeting the same demographics with their messaging.
How is FIRE “leeching off people’s hard work”?
Why only "for now" ? To me, compartmentalization is the future, as proprietary apps and platforms become ever more locked down. You'll have your "business device(s)" that engages with that world, that you're forced to compromise your Freedom for in various ways. And you'll also have your Free computers that run subversive freedom-preserving software that you can treat as trustable extensions of your own mind.

Back when everyone had a single device, trying out Linux used to be such a trepidatious affair because you had to write down all the installation steps, make sure you had the install media in good order, and hope that you'd come out of it with a computer that still booted some OS. These days $20 will get you an independent machine capable of running Linux, and you can tinker to your heart's content without affecting your existing environment.
Well, the average person does gain something from being able to shop and bank at all.

If you are required to be in the office from 9 am - 5 pm Monday-Friday and grocery stores and banks are only open from 9 am - 5 pm Monday-Friday (or even 8 am - 6 pm if you live in an area where long commutes are normal) you're effectively excluded from banking and shopping entirely.

This seems to be a systematic means of excluding people in some places in Europe. Stores and banks in some places were only open from 8 am to 5 or 6 pm Monday - Saturday. Orthodox Judaism forbids work (including house work) on Saturday, so Jewish people working 9-5 jobs had very limited access to services.
Interesting theory.

However Apple has no such agenda and yet Safari has probably the worst bookmark/history management of them all. So it seems to be a question of product management priorities really.
In my case, I would gladly WFH 100% as it gives me more free time and also it gives me responsibility on how to manage my own work without having judging eyes all the time over me, also it gives me freedom on how to arrange my workspace.

BUT, company culture must be results oriented because otherwise stress could burn you out!
Thank's for the support.
The existing plot shows numerous roads and existing infrastructure. In what way do they mean "from scratch"?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/2025+E+Apache+Blvd,+Tempe,...
ActiveX is from. 1996, and java applets are from 95. I'm not sure if those technologies were capable of much back then, but the web used to be a much more diverse place before traditional plugins got purged and replaced by Javascript; I'd argue that javascript would be the worst way to do any kind of interactive website back in those days, because almost everyone was on Windows and the alternatives were so much more useful.
That argument just makes no sense. Apple already controls your device and software.
At least Google's policy with Gmail has always been clear: we give you free email, you allow us to mine your data. Same with Android and their other free services, more or less.
Apple, on the other hand, is doing a complete about-face. People may have bought into iCloud (and the ecosystem, in general) due to Apple's stance on privacy, and now this?

> With Apple's system, a single false positive would never even leave the device.

"Apple's system" may change overnight and signal every single match, however. They likely will, if they ever start believing that false positives are de facto impossible.
In theory having the vin means not needing to provide any option info? It’s not like a vin is secret. You can see them through the windshield… Or is there some other security / value imbalance that I’m not aware of?
New Kind of Paper, Part Two
You are the product, not the primary user for Facebook. With this comes the spiral to create more engagement to be able to "sell" you more (selling your attention in the form of ads).

With this in mind it should come at no surprise that there is a possibility that Facebook promotes content based on its engagement, and not on its correctness nor its contribution to society.

I am interested if these researchers will post their learnings so far. Their message resonates with me personally due to the spiral I have seen among friends and family into Facebook content that is intentionally misleading (on all fronts, not just political or about vaccines).
I've looked at north carolina as a post-california destination. The crazy policy on PFAS in the water is really the biggest downside - https://www.pfasaction.org/northcarolina and many others.
I just don't see the value in using one for the trivial stuff (select from join where); the intermediate stuff is longer, more verbose, more DSLy (functions, aggregates, groups); and anything rarer/more 'advanced' is just missing.

The useful bit is de/serialisation from 'model' <-> query/record, IMO. Everything else is just limitation.
The UI is using jQuery 1.10.0, released in May 2013. I would be surprised if there have been many bugfixes or security updates on these.
Despite that I´m an avid pro-cannabis user, yes, I do agree that we can live without it. That´s the best way to be healthy I guess, but well, us humans found ways to transcend mere animal life, so we might enjoy the trip then.
> This typically goes in hand with other neglect.

UPnP is on by default, yeah
"Regular firmware updates"

Archer C7 v4's last firmware update, Dec 2019. Archer C7 v5's last firmware update, Jan 2021.

Might be solid, but I guess "regular" is relative.
Yep, devoting an hour to watching such activity certainly makes one wonder.
How to Interview to Get Results
Why not count farmers as part of the workforce?
Based on how they redesign the installation process, its seem vendor-installed OS is the move here. So this might be the OS that came with the computer
I have to ask, do people really click on these things? I have never once clicked on a cookie banner. I mostly leave them alone neither accepting nor denying. In most cases I read the page using Reader mode, so other than seeing them flash in at the bottom for a second, I don't even see them. When a page doesn't work in Reader mode, I still ignore it and don't interact with it, even when it takes up half the page. If I'm prohibited from viewing the page without it and Reader view doesn't work, I hit the back button and leave the page. Who is clicking on these things and accepting them? Can anyone share their acceptance rate? I'm seriously curious how many people accept them and why. I've almost never had any bad consequence of ignoring them other than poor website design, which is usually a given even without them.
I would caution you not to look up “foot” if you don’t want to be further upset.
Well, real people won't choose any random 10 characters as a CSPRNG would do. Even when picking words from a dictionary, instead of four words, most people would probably just use one (or maybe two). For those are more inclined, they might mess with the capitalisation and sprinkle some numbers to make it "more secure" and adhere to certain password policies. This does not really contribute to the odds as you might expect.

Anyway, the point is, people are terrible at generating (and remembering) secure passwords. By ruling out the default password just means it is not going to be the most insecure one, but the chances of the custom password being secure is still pretty low.
Hard to say what their motivations were. I'm not Jack Dorsey. If I were being cynical I would think their main motive was to buy out and kill a competing platform. After all, it's much simpler to record soundbites than type them out. In the long run, if left to its own devices, Vine might have slowed Twitter's own growth and displaced it.

Another possibility is that the purchase was justified to Twitter's investors as adding a Youtube-killer to the portfolio and when that didn't pan out, Twitter decided it wasn't worth financing nor was it worth letting go and killed it before it got a chance to demonstrate its value on the market.

However, I'm more of the position that the Vine buyout was a hedge against Facebook after the latter had acquired Instagram a few months in advance of the Vine purchase. If Snapchat CEO Evan Speigel is to be believed, Zuckerberg has a history of making we'll-buy-you-or-break-you deals[1]. It seems like Vine was in a position where if it didn't sell early, it would quickly go bust on its own or be reduced to a 404 by a Vine-like feature implemented on Facebook proper. Combined with the Twitter's urgent need for a competitive advantage, Vine would have more leverage in a negotiating with Twitter in a mutually defensive bid against Facebook than it would standing on its own. But once it no longer became necessary to hold on to Vine anymore, either because of the Periscope purchase or because Facebook was no longer considered a threat, Vine was no longer worth keeping alive.

However, these are all speculations. So take everything I have with a heap of salt.

[1]https://www.businessinsider.com/evan-spiegel-and-mark-zucker...
For any Arch based users, I made an AUR entry for this;

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mpv-visualizer/
Especially when you’ve got companies like Tesla buying $1.5B. All it takes is one more midsize corporate CFO getting redpilled and converting a chunk of the treasury into crypto.
That absolutely is how the real world works. I'm not well-off myself, I keep track of prices, and this recently happened in my own town.
The Ethereum core devs didn't unilaterally decide to roll back the blockchain, that's not how the governance system works. The majority of the community decided to return the funds, the dissenters left and formed Ethereum Classic. The community decides what is law, not the code or the devs.
It’s also pretty easy to get `echo` to say things that are incredibly racist and sexist.
There are still quite a few exchanges with only fake KYC (accept any burner email/any country) as long as you fund and withdraw only crypto. Sometimes with withdrawal limits, which you simply program into the bot (create new accounts every time you hit the limit).
Is it fine ? As a user, I consider that it's OK for websites to track my activity. This is true for every single website in the world. Is there any way for me to indicate that preference anywhere in the current framework ?

The complain here is that it's too complex to opt out of the tracking. But I have no way of opting out of that fake "protection" framework, which I consider to be useless and wrong. None at all.

As made extensively clear by the pencil pusher who came up with this grand idea of mandating an interruption for every single website I visit: those are my data. I want to have the freedom of letting websites track me if they want to, I don't need them to ask me. Give me any way to do that, and I'll be happy. But that was explicitly prevented.

The EU seems to think they know what's best for me, and won't let me make my own choices. It really doesn't, and rather than accepting that fact and giving me the freedom they claim to defend, they would rather annoy me.

So I'll keep on clicking on "Accept All" for the years to come cursing the hours of brain time lost to make a dude feel important.
I'm not sure what counts as a cycle? Does say running it to 70% remaining for 10 days then recharge at night count as 10 cycles?

If so than the actual total lifetime max miles would be way shorter for most city people. Unless IDK if Tesla has a smart setting on their charger or something to maximize cycles at the risk of running out of range.
> All I see is soulless pre-fabs. It looks like you're living in a shopping mall.

Spot on. Like a town from Greece or Portugal, Spain, Italy, Mexico... but with a dystopian feel.
-draft
This has the first part (window tabs as columns plus drag&drop management): https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tab-organizer/gbao...
Did you read somewhere that Facebook didn't have the right to do this?

There's a difference between legality and ethics.
> It’s possible the truth falls somewhere in the middle here.

Only if you believe Facebook has authority to decide what users do with the data Facebook shows them on their own machines. I find this suggestion repellent, the same as if I bought a copy of the New York Times, and afterwards the newspaper tried to forbid me from sharing which ads I saw on its front-page.
I was in Utah for a while and thought Daybreak looked great. Glad to hear that residents like it there. If I ever move back it’s towards the top of my list of areas I’d be interested in.

Outside of a few neighborhoods in Salt Lake City, Provo, and rural areas, I feel like the vast majority of Utah is the epitome of American suburbs, and all the issues that come with that, so I can see why many Utahns might scoff at something different like Daybreak.
This does not match my experience using TikTok.

I have an heuristic I follow whenever content I do not want appears on my FYP. I immediately scroll. I don't let the video get 10 seconds in, I absolutely do not let it finish. I do not swipe left to see other videos by the same creator. I do not click on the comments to see what other people are saying about the content. The second I realize I do not want content like that I swipe it away. If I get a series of such content I close the app and don't open until the next day. This has been 100% successful in removing unwanted content categories from my feed.

Alternatively, the opposite behavior is extremely effective in getting more content related to the current video. I let the video play all the way through or even play multiple times. I swipe left to see other content by the same creator and maybe watch a few of their other videos. I read the comments to see what other people are saying about the video.

It's pretty obvious if you think about it.
> Maybe the reason you don’t see a certain demographic doing big numbers on a platform is because the users on said platform are not interested?

With a platform as popular as TikTok… no way does that fly.
That's what happens when mafia running things there only cares about filling their pockets from deforestation which messes up local ecosystems.
In Vue 2, you'd just write this as:

<span :style="{ color }"> Color is: {{ color }}</span>

Simpler than this new syntax, for this particular example.
The city is pushed by the natural expansion of the tracks due to heat.
When splitting out a segment it’s adjusted.

Over $1 billion in past 4 quarters. Rides prints money.
Yes, there are things to criticise the WHO for (the initial advice against masks, and the delayed acknowledgment of aerosol/airborne transmission you allude to). But that often misrepresented tweet is not one of them I'd say.
"Effective and stealthy manipulation" were your words I believe. Short hop from there for someone else to go further.

We just watched people spend 3-4 years claiming that 50 Russian internet trolls were responsible for beating a billion dollar presidential campaign. The "smart people"! At some point you have to add up the mass values and ask if this adds up, or if we're just making excuses for ourselves.
The Amiga pioneered this with datatypes.
>why can't they just raise prices until they're no longer selling at a loss?

because competition exists. Same reason your local bakery can't sell bread at 50 bucks and make their owners millionaires. In a market economy you don't get to 'set prices' at arbitrary rates until you don't make losses.

Right-hailing companies have no differentiating features, there's dozens off them, they also have to compete with taxis, and if Uber was to raise prices someone else would eat their marketshare until they've got the same problem and they've all competed each other into the ground.

The entire flaw with the company is that building you an app that lets you hail a car isn't actually providing any surplus value to the tune of tens of billions of dollars and the only thing that keeps that illusion running is dumb Saudi money having nowhere to go
Motorola U: When Training Becomes an Education (1990)
Eh? Couldn’t you just as easily make a traditional web app that’s just another client? Why does it need to be an SPA to use an API?