skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
to claim otherwise is ludicrous.

Nonsense. From Arthur Ashe to Ryan White to Magic Johnson, there was continuous noise and encouragement around HIV prevention and research through the entire period. And narratives were manipulated then, too. Even into the early 90s, there was widespread public thought that HIV might be spread through saliva, even though the research was pretty clear it was spread almost exclusively via anal sex and intravenous drug use (and blood transfusions from an HIV+ donor).
> basically neither is caffeine

Then why does the FDA ban buying bulk caffeine [0]?

It seems like folks are also campaigning to ban kratom.

Basically even substances previously considered legal are under threat of being illegal. Remember even amphetamines used to be trivial to acquire.

0: https://www.newsweek.com/fda-bans-pure-bulk-caffeine-product...
Casey Neistat did something similar in 2012, although he returned something resembling a commercial video and not a blank canvas.

> After arriving at an agreed-upon treatment with Nike for its latest commercial, director Casey Neistat literally took the money and ran–filming a trip around the world on Nike’s dime, and presenting the footage as the ad.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxfZkMm3wcg

[2] https://www.fastcompany.com/1680524/how-director-casey-neist...
I don't know enough to have an opinion on marijuana's medical benefits, but in principle at least I agree. Unfortunately, "we live in a society, man," and that society requires that you find some way to transform I want into I have no choice before it'll let you do something it feels icky about. There are numerous examples of this that I won't list here because I don't want to digress into other hot-button topics, but I bet you can think of at least two right off the top of your head.

With that in mind I think starting with medicalization was a smart strategic move. The only other options were to make a lot of Americans less controlling, or to convince them that they're wrong, and, well... good luck with either of those.
I'm very skeptical that deplatforming effectively curbs misinformation. If anything it magnifies it via the Streisand effect. It kicks off headlines, "This is the _______ that big tech doesn't want you to hear!" Focusing on individuals like Spencer and Yiannopoulos is missing the forest for a couple trees. Look at how widespread these people's ideas, as well as anti-vaccine sentiment, had become despite (and perhaps, because of) attempts to crack down on it.
Ok, and you get this how through school boards who don't want to talk about slavery and want to teach creationism?

And in what timescale, 2 generations?
hey there friend
There's certainly an amateurish charm to old video game ads. Today, everything is pretty slick and there's a general base understanding of how to write copy and how to make ads look polished (probably thanks to the internet), but back then it was really a free for all.
Medical use of any drug is not "lame" when it's helping someone. I think the phrase you're looking for is "getting inebriated at work for fun is lame".
What's the difference? My family members who repost these things don't feel manipulated at all, by any of this. They agree with it, passionately.
Use Mosquitto on Windows server at home to transfer data from my energy smart meter to home assistant. Pretty rock solid and easy to diagnose issues via mqtt tools.
The point is, these trolls are stirring up discontent between Americans. Playing “both sides” against each other.
This is a very disingenuous argument.

The alpha gal carbohydrate introduced by a lone Star tick trains your immune system to reject it in the future resulting in the inability to eat red meats.

The alpha gal leaves your system very quickly, but the result of the (mis)-training of your immune system lasts forever.

Researchers are very clear that mRNA therapy may be useful for permanent treatment of a wide variety of conditions in the future. The material may not persist, but the effects certainly will.

The Israeli study indicates that natural immunity use up to 27x more effective than the vaccine against Delta. This indicates that something about the synthetic solution is inferior.

What other differences exist? Will any other immune abnormalities appear over time? That wouldn't be unusual. Were other systems altered due to unknown interactions? We still discover very important natural interactions every year, so this isn't far fetched.

What about your body only making limited, synthetic antigen antibodies instead of the better, more flexible natural ones in response to even more out of band gamma or mu strains? These are entirely unknown problems we're in the process of researching and for better or worse, we're the guinea pigs.

I don't see why those perspective is hard to understand. People with low openness personalities who tend to be risk adverse are going to respond very differently from those with high openness and lower risk aversion (not to mention differing knowledge).

It should be telling that doctors and nurses who have been watching covid patients die still often come to the conclusion that the vaccine isn't for them and is too risky.

I've been reading about coronavirus vaccine attempts since SARS. I've watched one attempt after another fail -- often in spectacular ways. The idea that a long string of failures suddenly meets with absolute success just at the correct moment defies belief. Those of us who took the vaccine should at least admit to ourselves that there's a non-zero chance things are wrong this time too (though hopefully not so spectacularly) but that those effects and effect rates are still lower on aggregate than the problems from covid.
They’re called “function components,” not “functional”, because they reside within a JS `function` as opposed to a class.

The word you’re looking for is side effect. The `use*` family of functions operate as hooks from the component into the renderer, so the renderer can easily see what dependencies a component has. This is accomplished by producing side effects.

The lifecycle methods are all well and good but there was an ergonomic problem with them with shouldComponentUpdate. No one wants to implement that function by hand when it involves whitelisting all props you want to produce a rerender, which is most of them. People would always write bugs. It’s much easier to create a list of dependencies a la second argument to useEffect.
Right. In Jobs world, that meant stuff like taking existing Chinese tech and making it into something with worldwide wow/cool factor.
That’s not the complete study.
Innate immunity in a world of many unvaccinated individuals is going to gradually reduce this virus to another variant of the common cold. In the mean time, the vaccinated like myself are going to harbor and evolve dangerous variants which will kill many of the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are the real victims here, since the vaccinated ones won't help the virus become more benign as effectively as those who develop innate immunity against it.
For some it's simply a coping mechanism, to survive the boredom of normal; for others it's medication to deal with chronic pain.

It's not that different from alcohol really, though definitely more healthy and less socially destructive.

But we have a messed up relationship with all drugs, it's all mixed up with religious bullshit and shame.
Likely targets would include high-level terrorists (think the next Osama bin Laden), adversary senior leadership, capital ships, and weapons of mass destruction.
> It seemed like a nice challenge - ePub files are not the most friendly format to process on an embedded device. Making it work in a constrained environment is good fun.

This is a cool reason.

Have you worked with any APIs for Project Gutenberg? I see there are a few projects out there like http://corpus-db.org/docs
I read this and think of Philip K Dicks novel “the penultimate truth” they will be very expensive. Real problems like just inexpensive preventative care goes wanting.
I really really could not disagree more. My anxiety attacks were much more about getting stuck in vivid loops thinking about really bad situations happening, literally anything like someone calling or knocking at the door. I know it isn't legality because I had my worst anxiety attack of all in _Amsterdam_. Weed makes some people have horrific anxiety attacks, I think nothing more needs to be said. I don't think it's because of the danger or legality. I smoked weed for years in comfortable settings and always had anxiety attacks (I was addicted even though I was panicking every time...) I know a lot of people who have had anxiety attacks even though they are in safe or legal environments
Yeah I don't mean due to the protocol, I mean due to application bugs where something adds a message to some queue and the thing that is meant to process it doesn't for some reason, and then nothing will ever realise.

Compared to callbacks / RPC for example, where you have a function call the either has to succeed or it has to fail.

It's not a deal breaker but I don't like it.
> Because of the way they are constructed, Randomized Control Trials will never show any benefit for any antiviral against COVID-19. Not Remdesivir, not Kaletra, not HCQ, and not Ivermectin. The reason for this is simple; for the patients that they have recruited for these studies, such as Oxford’s ludicrous RECOVERY study, the intervention is too late to have any positive effect.

This claim is egregiously false itself. Several RCTs have been done for early exposure to covid or for prophylaxis.

Just out of memory I remember studies for HCQ prophylaxis (doesn’t work), remdesivir prophylaxis (does work), and monoclonal antibody prophylaxis (does work).

The lies created by anti vaccine activists are already spread widely and apparently convinced you these studies which happened didn’t happen.

https://www.statnews.com/2021/09/22/remdesivir-reduces-covid...

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/08/regen-co...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638
For the risk of being a broken record, nobody claimed that reusable rockets were technically impossible. The argument was that they were rather financially unfeasible due to a limited number of LEO launches, so nobody tried (I lost the ESA study on this from the early 2000s unfortunately...).

I'd really love that myth of SpaceX doing the impossible with landing rockets to die. Also because they don't have to, they were the first to do so. That alone is really impressive. Whether or not it is profitable is impossible to tell until SpaceX is publishing audited financials.
Trivially true, as value isn't intrinsic in the first place.

Now do human lives.
Russia is on the way to turn into North Korea, they will block YouTube sooner or later.
OK. I read the entire article, so I was able to see those terms used in context, which I think is key to understanding what the author is trying to say.

The discussion around acquired immunity also includes vaccinations, as in "...will require increased global vaccination and acquired immunity" in the very first sentence, and "...a combination of vaccination and acquired immunity" later in the section discussing COVID. Vaccination was mentioned first both times. I am not sure what you're seeing here, but I am reading an acknowledgement that some people will not get vaccinated, not advocacy for non-vaccination or anything like that.

The discussion around mortgage foreclosures is a little less clear cut, to me, because it's commentary on data that may not show the whole story, and it assumes a familiarity with the subject that I don't have. I still didn't read anything close to "we must foreclose on mortgages and increase the homeless population," which I think is basically your take. Instead, I read an analyst commenting on data that appears to show the labor pool being impacted by ongoing COVID-relief policies, noting that COVID concerns may be trending down (again based on data), and then suggesting that we may need to walk back the relief policies to help address the labor shortage.
Unfortunately there's so many of these idiots they're clogging up the hospitals. I don't know why they don't just "do their own research" and die at home.
There are lots of brokers and Eclipse Amlen is coming soon:
https://www.eclipse.org/amlen/

(disclosure: I work on Amlen)
What else are you going to do, though? It's essentially guaranteed death otherwise. There's like a dozen people who've ever survived rabies without the vaccine, and they're all at varying degrees of impairment.
Google recruiting from Apple, Steve Jobs email from 2007
This may be a use case issue. I have a zigbee door contact that communicates to HA through Z2MQTT which turns on the light when the door opens. It turns on so fast that my wife didn't believe the light wasn't already on until I made her open the door from the inside. It is instant for all intents and purposes. So this delay may be relevant to the setup, more than MQTT itself.
As someone who has also gone through a kidney transplant I relate with you completely. I stopped visiting those websites because I too get overwhelmed with the content.

I have taken my life circumstance to share my story and ask others to sign up to become an organ donor. It can change the life of someone and you can truly make a difference not only for a person but an entire family.

I also look at this news as positive, Ill take anything no matter how slow the progress is. Decades ago before transplant techniques were developed my story would have ended (unless I had a twin) but its because of work like this I'm able to type this out right now. So perhaps a few decades from today someone will benefit from this technology and not have to go through what you and I did.

Ill add the link in for the National Kidney Registry who do great work and if someone wants donate their cause can do so.
https://www.kidneyregistry.org/
Beethoven's Ninth was apparently used to set the size of the CD, though there are disputes whether this was actually the case or corporate advertising.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322951358_Shannon_B...
Censorship is not a government action. It is literally filtering content and anyone can. You can censor yourself, a company could censor a band and change lyrics.

They run a platform that practices censorship. It is legal. Trying to say it is okay because they are a private entity doesn't wash and they should be called out. We could even band together and censor them.
When anything anyone does is "art" just because someone reacts to it in some way, it's just "person" not "artist".

My farts are art. I'm a fartist.
Should read "Activist tech company bans doctors and scientists."
You can now buy a keyboard that only copies and pastes
one major concern i have is when things like religion get blocked as misinformation, or the whole fake it til you make it crowd gets blocked. part of growing is seeing yourself differently than how you previously saw yourself, what is stopping youtube in 10 years from becoming stricter because of pressure from some new movement? imagine presenting your product in the most professional way possible and then getting flagged by you aunt who you never got along with saying the content is disinformation and you are just some try hard who can't code? or what about your dating profile? you decide to put your best foot forward by dressing nice and then you get flagged as misinformation? or here's one, what if the mainstream narrative is wrong? about something major? that most people consider the truth but its harming a certain minority group. if the internet existed during slavery times, and someone were to post a video saying black men and women are equal to white men and women and deserve to be treated equally, now you and i both know this is absurd but, that's because there was a lot of work done that changed the narrative. that work done was started by small groups and grew into a movement, imagine that movement today never getting off the ground because of it's seed content being plucked out of circulation due to it being "misinformation". sometimes social and science references are completely off, and for someone to question that mainstream narrative can appear to be misinformation for those believing a lie. don't tell me it doesn't happen; there are plenty of people who are gullible enough to hold a faulty mainstream narrative in place. look at all the crazy videos from last year and tell me if you think most people are intelligent enough to come to the right conclusions. no hate, it's just a reality.
Where I come from, people did not have the habit of wearing seat belts, even though, at the time, it was proven to help in case of accidents. The media was all over it but people still not wore them. Government then decided to make it a law to wear it and those not wearing would be fined. The law was really enforced and, eventually, everyone was wearing it and it’s a no brainer today.

If not for the law and the fines, the behavior of not wearing it wouldn’t have changed or, if it did, it would take much longer.

Edit: typo
Have any of the studies released data yet? I was under the impression that even the data from the short term studies wouldn't be released for another couple of years.
I bought a usb 3.1 gigabit Ethernet dongle for 15$ which seemed cheaper than trying to do a managed switch. On the rpi4 I can manage unencrypted traffic with a load average of near 0.
Not really because porn is evenly banned across the board.

This is more like you can only watch CDC approved porn films and if your porn doesn't align with our CDC guidelines it will be removed. Which doesn't sound like much support of free speech.
If you read the decision, it actually is the interpretation used by the Supreme Court there. You can actually see this in the next bullet that you cut off

> (b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court's interpretation of the operative clause. The "militia" comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens' militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.

You can also see this clearly in US v. Miller, where sawed off shotguns were allowed to banned only because they had no military use (at the time). The unorganized militia must be allowed to use military weapons, which is why you can still go out and buy all sorts of crazy stuff like miniguns if you have enough money.
Japan Faces Big Problems. Its Next Leader Offers Few Bold Solutions
What does that have to do with vaccine studies?
That's correct. The US government should have equivalents of Twitter, Google, Facebook and so on, though. And then speech on those platforms would be protected by the 1st amendment, including spam, pornography, and so on.
I'm not convinced we should think it's acceptable for you or I to decide who does and does not get exposed to information that will 'radicalize' them because you and I may have wildly different opinions of what constitutes a radical opinion. Humans sometimes develop stupid opinions, and that is OK. They're allowed to do that. They aren't allowed to act on those opinions in a way that constitutes a crime, which is why we go through the trouble of defining crimes in the first place. 'Precrime' thought policing seems like a pretty dangerous road to go down and one that is full of unintended consequences.
"It is a breach of contract, and breach of contract is part of the work,"

Being sued or prosecuted will also be part of the artwork.
> The idea that Uber is not profitable is a myth isn’t it?

I worked on the long-term forecasting team while I was there. At least 5-6 years ago, Uber was very, very far from profitable. I can't imagine much has changed enough for it to make them profitable. Maybe with the new CEO things changed but I'm doubtful. That company had a slew of issues.
Off the top of my head:

Fauci told the American public that masks don't work. My mom already owned N95 masks and got looked at like a crazy person because she was wearing one when shopping, ect. Then suddenly it became "the science" on the heels of all the research that already existed... Turns out it was a noble lie to protect the supply of masks while production caught up with demand.

It looks like Fauci lied about the lab leak theory for his own reasons, although I'm pretty out of date on that issue. Even if not Fauci we know that scientists with conflicts of interest all signed an open letter saying the theory is bunk and it was uncritically paraded around as "the science."

We were very clearly told "get the vaccine and you'll get your life back" but that hasn't even happened in paces like Israel with extremely high rates.

The vaccine was initially sold to us as something that would prevent infection, but that turned out not to be true. (I'm willing to concede this probably wasn't a lie but just something we learned as time went on, but it does reflect that they may have been overconfident and refrained from discretion because it was a pro-vaccine talking point)

Vaccine passports used to be conspiracies. Same with the idea that we'd have to get booster shots every so often to stay current.

And this is probably the biggest one: So many of the politicians pushing covid restrictions fail to practice what they preach outside of photo ops. The list is a mile long of local, state and federal politicians constantly violating their own restrictions. It lends credibility to the idea that none of them believe any of it.
Thank you for two specific mentions. I can't find any "dirt" on them off the bat, so I'll try to find where I've read about pre-European contact Native American tribes being not as sustainable as it's commonly held.

Incidentally, I've just found a 2020 paper claiming they did not have a noticeable impact on ecology before European arrived[0].

I currently have two competing hypothesis if it turns out I was wrong, and the various tribes did in fact lived sustainably. The first one is, they understood nature enough to live in a balanced way on purpose. The second one is, they just weren't large enough as a group to meaningfully upset the ecosystem around them.

I find the second slightly more likely given the information I have. But even if the first hypothesis is correct, there's still the question: would we like living like they lived? Are the lessons we could apply to lead sustainable lifestyles without abandoning the progress of science, and all the health improvements it brought?

> You don’t actually need the science to live in a way to see things in wholes, but the science can help.

I kind of disagree. Without the science, any kind of "seeing things in wholes" is limited to very small, local wholes, and/or lucky guesses.

--

[0] - https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200122123700.h...
Sadly the book uses MASM and I don't have access to a Windows machine.