skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I would hardly call myself anti-science, but I (and I imagine many on this forum) get frustrated at bad science. Things like shampoo adverts, lottery number predictions.

So I can see how for, some people at least, statistics which measure the probability of you dying from COVID are lumped into the same category as the probability of England winning the World Cup. It seems like the whole this is made of arbitrary guesswork (though I realise it isn't, at least in the case of the former).

Then there is the problem of the media mis-interpreting science. So we have the never-ending compilation of headlines from "Chocolate/Coffee/Bacon is good/bad/irrelevant for your health". Again, these are much more about getting views than sharing information, but there's a consequence of sowing mistrust in science.

And then we just have people not quite understanding complex statistics. "Nate Silver predicts 90% chance of Biden winning election" seemed to be interpreted by many as "Nate Silver predicts Biden will get 90% of the vote". There's been loads of this around COVID stats. It confuses the hell out of me - I've found myself listening to the same episode of "More or Less" twice, in an attempt to really understand it. So I search for a simple explanation and stumble on someone giving a simplistic - but wildly wrong - interpretation, but I'm too stupid to realise it's wrong.

Finally, many reporting on science use it to justify their political views. So we have "climate change stats predict sea level will rise by x%" (science) followed by "therefore it is scientifically proven that we must spend $x billion" (politics). Clearly, the first is a different type of fact than the latter, but if you disbelieve the second you may find yourself doubting the first as well, because they're asserted by the same people. When the assertions are more subtle, this is really difficult.

As a Christian (more of the Benjamin Franklin variety than Joel Osteen), I find the trend to set up science as some kind of ultimate authority on everything to be just as troubling as those use The Bible for the same purpose. Ultimately, both of these rely on the same flawed human tendency to want simple answer to complex questions. As so many have said before me, science is about "what and how", religion is about "why", but the questions and answers are just as complex in both cases.
About 10 years here and hundreds of different addresses given out. I get surprisingly little spam. Most spam I get comes to addresses that were leaked in data breaches, or email to my old gmail address which is forwarded. I'd say maybe 5 of them have ever started getting spammed.
Agreed. As one example, take Amazon banning Parler from AWS. That clearly isn't a positive move for revenue (at least ignoring any potential shady behind-the-scenes kickbacks they could have gotten for doing so), but they did it because it aligned with many of their employees' ideology (among other reasons).

(As an aside Parler was idiotic for not running on their own hardware given they were billing themselves as the censorship resistant twitter, but that's neither here nor there)
iPhone 13 deliberately breaks 3rd party repair
Thought experiment:

Would you be making the same points if the debate was about ISIS propaganda? Or Holocaust denialism? Or content encouraging child exploitation? Viral videos encouraging suicides?

Wouldn't it be suddenly obvious that these videos must be taken down immediately, accounts banned and that platform owners are responsible? Or would you advocate for free speech and watch as the algorithm encourages more and more people to leave their home and join ISIS in Syria?

After all, people are free to make decisions and are responsible for their actions. Suicide doesn't harm anybody else, right?
Slime Mold Time Mold on how to be taken seriously as randoms on the internet
It seems the clients didn't even notice.
You get there via links in ads, social media promotions, marketing emails, etc.
Hey, I've been using RescueTime for the past 1,5 years and I wanted to thank you - it's really helpful :) It helped me improve my productivity by allowing me to pinpoint my biggest distraction factors.

As for feedback - I could definitely make use of the premium features, but I personally found the price too steep (being a freshman from Poland). Have you considered offering a student discount or perhaps even including it in the Github Student Developer Pack? Cheers!
The contradiction is that you are saying the government can censor Google, just not you. So in other words you want to give the government the ability to tell Google “put this on your home page” for any value of “this”.
What's the point of appealing to Mirrian-Webster? They're the tail, not the dog; nobody goes to one of their dictionaries to determine how a word or phrase is used.
I strongly disagree. If I made a mistake while driving a car that results in a crash, without a seat belt I could be responsible for the death of one or more individuals which could have been prevented if they were wearing a seat belt
I absolutely agree. I'm very much a whiteboard hand-wavier guy. I explain with gestures as much as I do with the actual drawing (might be an Italian thing too).

That said, this "pancake" problem reminded me of the old Wii head-tracking project.[1] There might be an interesting hybrid opportunity with that idea and 3d avatars. I feel like the head-tracking hack never really took off because it only worked as a solo experience. But since remote work is mostly us all individually sitting at a computer I could see it working better.

Combine this idea with a large dedicated monitor/tv and now you have something that would literally just feel like a window/portal to the person you're talking to.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw
People need to get it through their skulls that "tech companies" have _no place_ "moderating" scientific debate.

If you've ever found yourself typing "Should X give Y a platform?" you are part of the problem.

Be better, be a part of the solution.
Such judgmental bullshit. People like you are part of the problem and need to stop.

The vaccine is the fastest vaccine EVER approved. We have ZERO long-term data as to what it does. We have a long history of drugs that have long term side effects. For fuck's sake, there are a ton of blood pressure medications that have recently been taken off the market because they have cancer-causing impurities in them. Do you think they cause cancer in 1 year? Of course not. They cause cancer over the long term. Even the people who breathed in the dust from 9-11 took years to die from cancer related to that.

Do we know if the mRNA vaccine has any long term effects? We do not. If you say they are 100% safe long term, then you are lying. We simply don't have the data. We will definitely have the data over the next several years in what is now the world's biggest medical experiment in history.

And by the way, I'm fully vaccinated and I was vaccinated before you were. But I UNDERSTAND why people are hesitant. I was hesitant as well until I was presented with the vaccine and I said fuck it, let's go.

But I completely empathize with those that are hesitant. That's what we need more of, empathy. Not judgmental jerks who just prolong the schism between people.
https://archive.ph/BWrNK
>I'm not suggesting that science is "left" or "right," or that the left is blameless here

Science isn't necessarily left but the left is scientific and the right is whatever the left isn't.
Not anymore that it is an unshakable fact and it doesn't matter what you think. Go back in 1790 or 1810 and see yourself jailed as a traitor.
I'd agree with "1) this is a harmful idea and 2) reasonable people agree it is harmful", but not "therefore Twitter has a responsibility to remove that content".
LoC does archive web content.
https://www.loc.gov/programs/web-archiving/about-this-progra...
Why do so many successful people get up at 5am?
moreover, if you're not monitoring israel for news ahead of time, and waiting for "cited research" you're gonna be too slow.

I was ahead of the game several months about "vaccination not categorically preventing spread of delta" watching israel.
If advertising is responsible for actually getting them to get off their asses to take down antivax misinformation and potentially save lives, that's making advertising sound really good right now. Though that might be crediting advertising a little too much, maybe some employees in charge don't want to take part in spreading misinformation.
I expect the pushback on this to force change in how we deal with source code ownership and maintenance of software.

It would be nice if it didn't involve the government, but I fear it's going to end up as the necessary evil.
Are they conspiracies when they start becoming true though? I remember when the vaccine mandates and passports were a "conspiracy" at the begging of the COVID lockdowns. Now, here we are...
It's in the release notes [0].

> All colors are themeable and up to six colors can be configured.

[0] https://code.visualstudio.com/updates/v1_60#_high-performanc...
Yes, what is studied by scientists is based on preference (and therefore politics).
jfbfa
Uhh.. what makes you say that? What percentage of people who get covid actually get admitted to the hospital? What percentage actually die? Both answers are probably lower than you think.

You convincing her to get the vaccine probably fucked up her immune system and led her to getting covid. That scenario is equally possible at this point.
> How about referencing scientific sources rather than opinion pieces from political news sites.

The dude is a MD PhD who's been on NPR, NYT, etc. He's literally a scientist who is a source -- a scientific source.

But sure, we can talk journal articles.

Where is your "less than 2%" number coming from? I see this in the first Nature article:

> Of the 125 subjects exposed to SARS-CoV-2 according to the baseline ground truth definition, 101 (80.8%) participated to the May serosurvey. Among them, 93.5% (86 out of 92, 95% CI 86.3–97.6%), 84.2% (85 out of 101, 95% CI 75.5–90.7%), and 100% (92 out of 92, 95% CI 96.1–100%) had a positive result for Abbott, DiaSorin and Roche, respectively, whereas 44.9% (44 out of 98, 95% CI 34.8–55.3%) had a neutralising titre greater than 1:40 (1/dil). In November, 86 subjects (68.8%) were tested again, all of them except one (98.8%) tested positive to at least one serological assay.

They're saying that 44.9% of people infected had neutralizing antibodies at the level they recognize, right? They re-tested the same people six months later, and >98% of them tested positive for one assay. This doesn't speak to the 98% number you cite above. Maybe you're looking elsewhere.

I'm not going to be sealioned into going through studies if you can't point me to the section that supports your point.

Anyway for the article's 1/3 number, he also cites a study by the CDC, a fact which I guess you've chosen to ignore? https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/27/9/21-1042_article
ncxmnx
> A major aspect of a healthy society is trust. We need to be able to trust most of the informations that are fed to us in order to get information.

Another major aspect of a healthy society is distrust. People trusting anything they see written down is a major issue for a healthy society. This was rarely discussed when everything that was written down was controlled by the large media conglomerates, but it is becoming a huge point of contention today. Traditional media are furious that they are losing their unique ability to shape publish discourse, and are desperately lashing (there was a NYT article outraged that some site was permitting the creation of private rooms with no control of what is being discussed).
You can screenshare the rm2's screen while diagramming on it? Interesting! Any useful links for that?
where did I say the government can censor google?
Ok so I get that it could be quiet
difficult to write sentences which
must be of a fixed length. However
hyperbolically calling it the most
scarily/stunningly linguistic feat
is ridiculous in the extreme. I am
certain that a person sufficiently
motivated, could produce a similar
document. Comparing something like
this to the work of Mozart is just
nonsense. I mean, I couldn't write
a piece of music like Mozart if my
life depended on it.
Ah, I missed your last sentence. Either way, though, I still think there is a benefit to banning anti-vaxx content from general-audience platforms in that it stops people who are not necessarily seeking out anti-vaxx misinformation from being exposed to it in the first place. A great example of this strategy working is Reddit. When they ban a hateful subreddit (like r/fatpeoplehate) it tends to noticeably improve the quality of the discourse on the site in general for a period afterwards as people who were drawn to join Reddit just to be hateful will have less reason to be on it and also because fewer "ordinary" people are exposed to those hateful ideas limiting their spread within the "general" user base of the site. I believe the same approach works equally well with misinformation movements.
Yeah -- although Louisiana calls it a "Personal Driver's License", and New Jersey calls it an "Auto Driver License".
Which paves the way for the argument that many/most people also disbelieve the Holocaust, but they have to keep quiet because of the threat of government hanging over them.
The context was omitted for brevity, not ignored. It wasn't necessary to rehash the fine details of each example.

Have the WHO stated they deliberately withheld advice on masks to preserve PPE for healthcare workers? What you're talking about was one commonly held belief for why they did it, but a simple failure to give advice under conditions of uncertainty would also explain it.

The lab leak hypothesis absolutely has a bearing on public health in the future. You're right that even if the virus was leaked we can't unleak it, but debate about gain-of-function research and the safety standards of virology is critical to preventing future pandemics.

Can you go into detail about what harm public individuals caused?
Another reason to NOT by YouTube Premium, and leave my spare phone on autoplay when going out, so that youtube ad customers get to pay for supporting the biggest scam operation ever. 80% of the ads I get would never pass a sanity-check in my home country, such ads are simply illegal on our TV. But hey, the american is spreading scam ads, so lets just accept that.
The proposed solution of a different URI scheme exists. It's called IPFS.
Their opinion lacks the ability to be classified as political, to be honest. It is a scientific "opinion" that has been proven wrong, repeatedly, by actual scientific research, but also by mere observational fact.

No one has a right to harm another person. Knowingly transmitting an infectious disease, after being repeatedly informed that it is, indeed, an infectious disease, and that the victims, worldwide, total almost 5 million worldwide and continues to climb, and they still continue to spread it, that is what makes someone a terrorist: you harm, maim, and kill people to spread discord. Why you do it is immaterial, "I didn't know", "I didn't understand", "I was following orders", are not excuses in a court of law.
> Take eugenics, has suppressing that idea made the belief in eugenics worse?

Ideas like eugenics clearly have something to them that resonates with people, at least until they think hard enough about the ethics or logistics involved. There's a reason eugenics cropped up in the first place. So yes, insofar as you suppress a dangerously seductive idea, you do make it worse, because it takes actually explaining what the flaws were with the idea to shake people out of it.
The BBC is getting worse and worse sadly.
Lol, no. The water stops explosions. A direct hit by a 10 ton mass going at Mach 7 will destroy any ship. the Navy won't make tests for that because it's a foregone conclusion.
There may be several methods to upgrade Postgres, but this can be one of the most finest methods made available by Postgres community.
Flotsam, Jetsam, Lagan, and Derelict
"The accident came two days after government minister Francis Maude suggested that motorists take the "sensible precaution" of filling up jerry cans and keeping them in the garage."

The Tory party, always "sensible"...
The fake it part is calling something full self driving when it does anything but that.
You say that even though there is a thread on the homepage about big tech companies censoring things about COVID almost literally every day?

Here's the thread for today, currently at #2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28693060
By making everyone's immune system respond in the same way, you're making it more likely that if the virus escapes (mutates in a way that evades the immune system, by modifying its spike protein), then it will escape completely (for everyone vaccinated by mRNA vaccines).

The hope is that by doing that, the virus would also lose the local optimum of the current spike protein, and become much less infectious.

The alternative is, with "natural" immunity, you generate a much more diverse immune response across the population.
Multichannel Marketing Market, Technology and E
an unbelted traveler transforms into a meat torpedo during impact, which puts all other passengers in the vehicle at risk.

so maybe you can make the case of not getting into vehicles with unbelted persons, however, children among others, often dont have the choice.
> I'm really sorry you feel this way

The corporate wording for "Fuck you!".
I don't know if SAP contributes but Microsoft pays for C#, VSCode, and other open source projects. And further they support open source by providing github, github's free site hosting, and github's free CI.
(Personal opinion)

Constructing or incrementally updating an AST is not cheap. In particular, most ASTs are very fragile and there are characters when inserted at the wrong position invalidate the entire AST (e.g. prepending a C-like document with `/*`). Even prepending documents with `{` could render all nodes of the AST invalid, as they might get a different meaning (a class declaration might now be parsed as block statement).

The AST for the language of well-formed bracket pairs is very robust. There is no character that invalidates the entire AST.
There are characters though that invalidate all tokens, but there is a separate asynchronous (slow) method that updates them in the background and only then incrementally the bracket pair AST.
> This all depends on what you define as “leadership”.

See comment in sibling thread.

> Socialists aren’t a global society like Christians.

Surely you are joking?

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulo_Forum

- http://www.internacionalsocialista.org/viewArticle.cfm?Artic...

May I also point out that the greatest schism in Communist groups is over Leninism/Trotskyism, and how their divergences come exactly from the fact that one of them believes that Communism can only be achieved when (what you call) Socialist practices are applied universally?

> set of instructions to run on (like the Bible).

I let the silly comment about "Jesus being a Socialist" slide, but if you see the Bible as a set of instructions I'd suggest you actually go learn more about Christian Theology and Philosophy before comparing all Christians to fundies.
I'm aware of the restrict keyword, though its usage is not typical. It enables an optimization that fortran has by default, that was my point.

And yes, I already said that packages like blas have had massive amounts of work put into them and have lasting power.
Once again, we found a way to get rid of those we don't like by censoring them completely based on any utterance of a Topic or Viewpoint That Can Not Be Expressed Out Loud. Any open discussion or criticism on any sensitive topic could be enough to close down the participant's account, take away their right to be heard and even effectively erase them.

This is not a defense of any particular opinion as much as it is the right for people to be heard by those willing to listen and hopefully keep communication open to foster better education and understanding.
I have a similar friend, and whenever I provide links to peer reviewed articles, I’m told that I’m a sheep, and to search on DuckDuckGo, as they don’t hide the truth… so, a YouTube ban is going to do little to him.
YES!

What if everyone, or at least a bunch of willing souls, ran the following script on their on pc's:

1. YouTube-dlc every video you ever watch automatically in the background and save to NEW_VID directory

2. make a checksum of every file that comes into NEW_VID

3. Check by using the checksum if the file already exists on open platforms like https://joinpeertube.org, https://odysee.com or https://d.tube

4. If not, upload the file.

5. Delete the file.
> as you refuse to try to understand these people you will continue failing to impact their behavior.

You and I are not responsible for their behavior, and as a society we have entertained their petulance long enough.

I support vaccine mandates to increase the social costs for people who fail to perform their civic duty to be vaccinated. (Medically unable is a different story).
> That line of reasoning doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

A previous fundamental tenant of public health was candid communication.

Censorship goes against that - many activities through this - such as not promoting general health and wellness, diet etc, - go against past foundations of PH.

If people are questioning the legitimacy of PH, censorship reinforces that perception.
Youtube is a monopoly, and monopolies should be limited in the same way the government is, and for the same reason. This also applies to groups of otherwise independent businesses that operate in concert.

That, and adding political beliefs to the list of protected classes, is what is necessary to start the US healing processes. Until there is no other option but to talk with the people you despise, neither side will start doing it.
> So, in some sense of it, population size is a proxy for well being (at least for now).

It is only a proxy for as long as you ignore the last stages of demographic transition or haven't reached them - because in most countries with good health care and safe living conditions, the populations eventually stall or even decline, even though the quality of life doesn't necessarily have to (in lieu of bad political decisions being made).

That said, i do believe that child mortality is probably a more accurate indicator in that regard, since that would be directly correlated to how good the healthcare is and would remain low in the later stages.
The history of psychology psuedoscience being used to validate racial bias is undeniable. I'm sure there are groups on the far left throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but by in large the left complain about psuedoscience being used as a tool of white supremacy.
That is post-modernism [1], the tendencies of our era. Boghossian's commentary [2] published in 1996 is still relevant these days, though it would need to be put in context.

> Postmodernists like to respond [...] that both claims can be true because both are true relative to some perspective or other, and there can be no question of truth outside of perspectives.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

[2] https://as.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu-as/philosophy/documents/f...
It's National Coffee Day. Here's How to Level Up Your Coffee Game
Web Real Time Communications Market Share Market Size
> The current approach is to ban dissent for sanctioned topics

This is a fairly new approach.

>The right approach is always more information. People can think for themselves,

This has been tried for many years, i don't know how old you are but the Jenny McCarthy authism stuff is still around.