skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's a growing list of documents over the course of XMPP. It doesn't really prove anything other than... XMPP has been around a long time, and people continue to develop it.

People saying "look at all this stuff" is one reason the Modern XMPP project was born. To draw attention to the actually important things that developers need to read.

The XSF receives a lot of submissions each year. Many of these proposals never make it past the "experimental" stage. Others are only applicable in certain domains (IoT, etc.). Over time some of these become widely adopted and progress through the standards process. Some do not.

The XSF publishes annually the "compliance suite" which describes what clients and servers should be supporting in different areas: https://xmpp.org/about/compliance-suites.html
> Seems to me that a drug should be approved when all the side effects are known, results are well characterized among a large sample set over a sufficiently long time frame, and it is determined that the drug is "safe" in the absolute sense.

How long is sufficient? How large of a test group is sufficient?

In the "absolute" sense, there is no known drug that is safe. That is extremist thinking that only serves to muddy the waters of the actual debate, which should be: "how safe is safe enough?"

> we are not 100% sure it is safe

Note that "100% sure" does not mean "100%" safe. So how much safety do you need a 100% assurance for? How do you quantify the safety?

> that sounds really scary

How does this not just describe life in general? And how does that help policymaking? I don't think our species would have made it to the agricultural revolution if that was the overriding force for anything.

> it will not convince anyone who was not already convinced

This also strikes me as a poor consideration for any policymaker, as they likely know that at the onset to any such policymaking. This adds nothing new or interesting to the debate.
Re: images

Sending an image from one client software will always result in either an inline image or a link to the image being displayed in other client(s). However there are combinations of clients which won't expand inline images from each other (IIRC conversations.js 6.x and dino seem to do things slightly differently, while conversations.im views both just fine).

Then there's the fact that not all Jabber clients will convert to jpeg, so e.g. in my Dino chat history I have a bunch of WebP images that don't expand inline, but show fine on Gajim and Conversations.im
I do not agree with this at all, for what it's worth.
If Chrome blocks plain old HTTP, why would Firefox have to do the same?
> [...] They’ve lost my trust [...]

Exactly how I feel. I used to cautiously kinda trust Apple's so-called "commitment" to privacy, but this change just shows us that any such promises are purely theater.

Now that the damage is done, I doubt it can be undone, especially in my case. My opinion on Apple's credibility has crashed through the floor. In my opinion, they're now as untrustworthy as Google or Facebook.
Physics layman, but I agree as a computer scientist. It also sometimes feels like there are "optimizations", e.g., delayed-choice quantum erasure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_eraser)

I'm open to the idea that it's just me projecting what I understand onto what I don't.
There are people with long term issues starting right after vaccination. Not safety issues, which everyone and their dog studies, just multi-month constant pain that will not kill you but just disables you from your normal life for months, that is not solvable by regular NSAIDs, as usual, and that you'll get no compensation for from anyone.

I'm just interested in how common this is after vaccination, and perhaps when may this end, so I again spent a few hours yesterday to try to find some significant (N > 5000, preferably more) independent prospective studies of "mild" side effects like these of this vaccine.

So much vaccination going on, so why not just give every 5th person vaccinated in some large center a link and a code to enter observed side effects after 1 day, 3 days, week, and a month, and then maybe 3 months after into some website. Maybe ask for a phone number and call them to ask, if they don't fill the form in time. Even such a stupid study design would satisfy me.

No such thing on google scholar.

There are barely any studies that track side effects over time. It's almost all just binary X,Y,Z side effects after vaccine - yes/no. All studies I could find are < 1000 people or in that range.

The small amount of studies that actually tracked side effects over time, just track for 7 days and end with 4% people still having side effects after a week. One Czech study I found tracked side effects for a month! With 2% having still issues after a month. Well, good! No, not really, N<1000 again, and a biased survey style study.

Also the fucking irony of search returning about 5-10x more so called "hesitancy" studies per a side effect survey, despite me not search for it.

I'm fully vaccinated, and there's no shortage of studies about efficacy, so no problem there. But people that proclaim how well the side effects are studied, because of how many millions of people were already vaccinated just sound ridiculous to me now. Where are all the actual studies?

From what can be found it just seems that very little fuck is given about serious study of so called "mild" side effects, and some guidance given on how to mitigate them, based on results.

("no compensation for from anyone" is because my country actually passed a law that allows for compensation for covid vaccine gone wrong; but with no proof of some statistical relationship, this was just another bullshit anti-hesitancy stunt from the government, and will be of no real help to the affected)
> It boggles my mind why there is pushback on mandating kids to wear masks in schools.

It doesn't really boggle my mind, it's just that the conclusions it suggests about fellow Americans are really hard to swallow. There is a lot of political polarization in the US and cranking through the implications and reasons for ostensibly pro-COVID policies and attitudes is really disheartening. It's a schism that isn't healed easily.

If anything, an impersonal virus, an implacable, impossible-to-anthropomorphize, zero-upside health hazard could have easily been something for the entire world to unite against. Instead, we got more and deeper division and louder and more extreme and more destructive arguments. And we lost a lot of people and maimed even more. And the reason that couldn't happen: Money. The economy. Me. Freedumbs!

COVID exposed people's real priorities and objectives and showed how craven and myopic our political leaders really are.
Picking very difficult, specific topics like this to be interested in as a kid is pretty common.

Sticking with it—that's unusual.
Undocumented people have been able to get the vaccine in California without paying so you can get it and don't need to pay.
True, though sqlite is pretty universally lauded for their approach to testing. Perhaps not all platforms are tested by the Sqlite team, but if you run their tests on your platform, the coverage is pretty good.
No. Everyone deserves medical care, even if you and I consider the decisions that led to that care to be illogical. You are proposing a slippery slope. Currently you could say that we should turn the unvaccinated away but why not the obese? If someone is obese, generally it is a personal choice much like the unvaccinated. What about homosexuals that contract AIDS. I am all for vaccines and I even support businesses requiring their employees be vaccinated. But I am very much not for beginning to play the game where your lifestyle choices determine if we provide treatment. Everyone deserves to be treated to the best of the hospitals ability.
Thanks!
That's kinda what I was going for, glad it landed.
So succinct though, who's the wordsmith now eh?
Anyways,
Covid == Trump
The Base Layer for Success
Yeah the horror show that is learning every rando dev's personal CSS methods could be really painful.

When you just want to move a button ... "oh they're using bootstrap" often saved a ton of time, for things that really shouldn't take time.
> ESM modules are challenging to mock

> I definitely would say I understood require better

ESM modules are in many ways "harder" to use than commonjs, but I think this comes down to something slightly intangible but very similar to the static-typing -vs- duck-typing discussion (duck-typing is more obviously intuitive and quick-to-do-what-you want, but static-typing has more wide-reaching architectural benefits for scaling projects).

CommonJS is a more "intuitive" design: what you might expect someone to design first-time-around. ESM is a more thought-through design: the initial "hurdles" to its use bring long-term benefits.

> ESM modules are challenging to [...] monkeypatch

This seems like a feature though

> I feel like the ESM implementation is more "magic" than require

How so? I'd say I feel the opposite.

> importing a .json file

Is this supported by browsers or is it a NodeJS extension?
Eh, it had the same unglamorous fate as the robot from Evangelion.
My take on the difference (not a physicist):

Take that galaxy that just crossed our "observable universe horizon" so that we can't see it. If there is a civilization halfway between Earth and that galaxy, they can still see that galaxy. The galaxy can see that second civilization and so can we. There isn't a single fixed "observable universe" boundary in space, it's just relative to the observer.

With a black hole, it is different. There is no point that can see both sides while being seen from both sides,. If you are outside the black hole, you see nothing from within. If you are inside, then you can see the inside (this is speculation) and you also see the outside. It's a very clear boundary.
Scientific matter:
Vaccines save lives, protect people around you and improve your personal odds as well. (I am a biochemist)

Political matter:
What is the extent to which we want to allow people to make their own decisions when these decisions have an impact on the well-being of others?

Whatever your answer to the second question is (an exercise which I leave to the reader) is going to have an impact on the degree of inclusion and on the degree of accommodation that should be extended to people who choose not to vaccinate. Respect and love is possible and encouraged in all cases.

As a bonus, for further consideration...

Ethical matter:
What is the moral value of an ill-informed decision, and is the moral value of an ill-informed decision sufficient to support the principle of individual autonomy?
We have a known-safe vaccine that has been tested on millions of people. We have a known-deadly pandemic that has killed almost 4.5 million people.

While we are not QUITE as clearcut as parachutes, this is still an area where we can reasonably conclude that the vaccine is vastly safer than being unvaccinated.
"Tell that headline to the relatives of the dead."

How the hell is saying shit like this allowed on this website?!?!
Tell that headline to the relatives of the dead!?? Are you serious?
PTSD from downvotes and/or stereotypical responses?
This. I wish more devs tried to utilize modern css and js directly instead of relying on frameworks.

I try to do this for my own projects but there's gravitational pull toward frameworks in companies.
Serious illness, bad as it is, is a lot more predictable than fear/security driven social engineering, and when cover-your-smile is rolled into cover your cough, I'd expect unintended consequences, socially, developmentally. You must realize there are other problems than COVID, and some are much more important. Your Pascal's Wager about masks is a bit revealing vis-a-vis any certainty about the evidence.
Why should a University Professor (or some benefactor) have to spend (hundreds? tens) of thousands of dollars defending their naturally derived antibodies? The result of that effort didn't even result in a University making broad exception for those with "suitably up-to-snuff immunities", they just let the one guy teach.

I'm under the impression that the vast majority of mandates have exceptions for existing immunity, no?
I think this is a really interesting project. When I read about the helium vs hydrogen post, same as you, I started scratching things out for curiosities sake (I was more curious about how high you could reasonably go). Very exciting stuff. I've got a bunch of questions, feel free to cherry pick if you decide to respond.

How delicate do you suspect this will be? Will a bored or malicious person be able to cause harm with a laser, an air rifle with pellet or BB, or gun? In the event of a puncture what is the failure mode like? Are you worried about birds? Are you concerned about banditry? I know the last might sound silly, but you'd only really need to go to our grand-parents and great-grand-parents to find some train robbers.

I could see Hollywood making use of this for filming in remote locations. Or other situations where you need to get something heavy and oddly shaped up or over a mountain. Relief work as well where the roads aren't operable. Wouldn't surprise me if this had applications in agriculture either, if anyone is still using planes might be nicer to have an autonomous blimp instead. Maybe stuff like introducing fish to alpine lakes, if you've got good control of vertical height you could probably design a safe exit system.

Most of that is supposing that getting the blimp somewhere to then be used is easy. How is transportation of those things when not in use?
That's not what that study shows.
Isn't it like this with any serious subject? You need to have read quite a few books to get it?

One positive thing is that if you just pick up the university books/papers, there's no exam. You can just read them for understanding the concepts instead of for passing tests.

I picked up a book about relativity (both) years after graduating, and it was an interesting read. I won't claim to understand how Ricci tensors work, but it made sense at the time.
One obvious tradeoff blimps is lower speeds than what people normally expect from "air freight". You mention 60mph in your post, which seems comparable to trucks. Are your customers primarily interested in air freight for speed, or is it mostly avoiding the cost of a driver, or is it something else entirely?
Web development is not my job. I still use Bootstrap to very quickly make a passable UI for internal projects. I'm really glad not to have to spend time learning all that stuff.
No, it comes off as an argument that there are arguments to not take it. Which is a subtle, but important difference.
>Yeah, I don't get the cloud/device distinction

Maybe I can make it clearer.

It is like you are asked or demanded to install some antivirus on your computer, but this is not a typical antivirus , it is not scanning to protect you but to find evidence against you and destroy your life.

A list of facts, let me know if you disagree with the reality or my conclussion

Apple could have scanned iCloud already, why did they not do it so far? Either there is a super low number of CP on iCloud which implies this feature is not needed OR Apple was lazy, incompetent or had some other reason and let a lot of bad guys escape . I would conclude from this that Apple , if they really care of children, should freaking start scanning the existing iCloud images now.

From the above I am inclined to believe that this is not an action to protect the children, the reality does not fit, if there is so much CP on iCloud but Apple just woke up then WTF is that all PR about protecting children.
California’s Gig Worker Law Is Unconstitutional, CA Superior Court Judge Rules
It is a self made problem. Imagine if we tested people for every infectious disease and put them into crazy protocol-land even if they don’t have symptoms. Nothing would ever get done!

We need to accept that vaccines exist and work. It shouldn’t matter if the dude in the hospital has a positive covid test because everybody in that room can be vaccinated if they want to.

This mass testing created a bunch more problems than it solved.
As a rule, if a design is deemed too risky to use in times of war, it's probably unsuitable for civilian usage too.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but nuclear aircraft does really not look like it would be one.
No, kelnos, there exist unvaccinated that take all possible precautions not to be spreaders. I know people (asymptomatic supposedly non infectious but-you-never-know) who lock the car windows and airflow when they pass into inhabited areas; I know people that have broken shoes and are not going to a shop to replace them (I am not joking). Their cynicism is at level "if a particle roams the air and enters the window, tough luck..." - if you want to blame at that level, ok. (If you want to also note the damages for the shoe industry and all the equivalent, that would be understandable.)

Other people are much more leaning towards frowning upon the partytime people "let us hug and stay together and forget about it all". Those other people believe that if people had been careful, the damages would have been minimal. Using some of your words,

«the virus could be [...] controlled by now in any country with a sufficient» carefulness in the population.
Hm, I think that might be a bit too charitable - for what he actually said, 'yes, in addition to', there's not really a reason for an opposing party to share that? Waste of time? Class divide? I don't know what the angle would be. I think it's clearly supposed to sound like 'no more state healthcare'.

In the UK we have the NHS of course, but also people (or particularly companies) can opt to pay for private health insurance from the likes of Bupa. As far as I know the Labour (main left-wing pro-NHS) party has never opposed the option. Discounting national insurance contributions or diverting funds to subsidise it (so as to avoid 'double paying' for the NHS you don't then use) is a relatively popular Conservative idea that they probably would oppose - it's also probably way too complicated to ever make it even as far as a manifesto.
I am reminded of Slavoj Zizek's story about Niels Bohr having a horseshoe above his door:[0]

"surprised at seeing a horseshoe above the door of Bohr's country house, the fellow scientist visiting him exclaimed that he did not share the superstitious belief regarding horseshoes keeping evil spirits out of the house, to which Bohr snapped back: "I don't believe in it either. I have it there because I was told that it works even when one doesn't believe in it at all." This is indeed how ideology functions today: nobody takes democracy or justice seriously, we are all aware of their corrupted nature, but we participate in them, we display our belief in them."[1]

[0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8859145

[1] - http://brooklynbooktalk.blogspot.com/2010/02/its-ideology-st...
Reduced efficacy against asymptomatic and mild illness but still over 90% efficacy against severe illness and hospitalization hardly seems to warrant your level of ire.
I feel this. It is hard to be a quality-first person because the same kinds of coworkers and situations that create those thorny issues can’t recognize good solutions. Even a manager who is like you has to rely on your word and that can be hard to do proactively over long periods of time.

A frank conversation and/or a job search might be in order.
To read all the 1000+ comments in this thread you need to click More at the bottom or on links like this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28275509&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28275509&p=3

(Comments like this will eventually go away. Sorry for the annoyance.)
There are plenty of people who call themselves "frontend developers" whose skill set is: HTML, CSS + image editor (photoshop, indesign or whatever the current fad is).
Let’s be generous and assume that 5% of the overall code remains unsafe. That’s 95% of the code that doesn’t need to be checked extra. Additionally, that 5% is likely to remain static. With C any “securing” effort is a snapshot effort that bitrots quickly as more code is added.
> some hospitals in Texas have started using it during triage

This is false. The "leaked" internal discussion document has been repudiated by its author, and the group of hospitals discussing it.
> "I am sick and tired of people believing that their "rights" are more important than public health."

You're quite underestimating how quickly sweeping away humans' rights for "the greater good" turns bad. I'm sure China is justifying the Uyghur camps with your exact sentence.
Those are anecdotes not data.
A 0.0032% hospitalization rate doesn't pass the smell test. That's hundreds of times less than the reported fatality rate!
What you said changes nothing about the concerns the parent comment/s raised: which is, having the scanning on the device in any manner what-so-ever. That is the objection.

The fundamental issue is that Apple is crossing an important privacy line: my property (my phone) vs their property (their external servers).

It's identical to saying that because USPS (or any mail carrier) is allowed to scan mail that moves through their system, across their property, they should also be allowed to come into my home and scan mail there. Hey, they promise to only look at mail while inside the home, what's the big deal. It represents the same shift: my home vs their shipping infrastructure.

People would universally go ballistic if USPS/UPS/Fedex declared they were going to begin routinely entering homes to examine mail packages before they were sent out. No matter how you dressed that up (they only do it if you print a shipping label first, indicating preparation to send a package through their system), it wouldn't assuage anyone.
> box fan in a window

That's fine year-round in the south and southwest. Not so much in the rest of the country though.
When I got vaccinated I started getting surveys on my condition from the CDC. Daily at first, then weekly and monthly
Its a common turn of phrase in modern English. Everyone talks like that. I know its in vogue right now to assume everyone who doesn't agree with you is a bot or paid shill for some agenda seeking group, and maybe many of them are. But not everyone. People really do talk this way in every day conversation.

As for mine. I got my first shot in December. Probably one of the first in my area. Got second 2 weeks after. I think everyone should get it as soon as they are comfortable with doing so. There is such a thing as being unreasonably suspicious and antivaxxers fall into that pretty easily but there is nothing inherently wrong with wanting more than emergency approval. Furthermore, private companies can definitely make it a term of employment but I am strongly against the government requiring it. I am a firm believer that everyone has the right to be a dumbass.
Not surprised. I once bought top of the line Razer mechanical keyboard. The software if a steaming pile of crap and a known bug (random spamming of c key when pressing Ctrl + c) makes it unusable. Avoid.
I love IRC: it's the protocol that will NEVER die!
Interesting. Were you required to strap an escalator to your face?
> Presumably, a trivial software update down the line could expand its ambit to locally stored files.

Sure but this is equally true now as it will be after they deploy the CSAM detector.

It’s not a real argument against the detector.
To read all the 15000+ comments in this thread you need to click More at the bottom or on links like this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28274819&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28274819&p=3

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28274819&p=4

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28274819&p=5

(Comments like this will eventually go away. Sorry for the annoyance. The server is hurting today.)