ashildr

Why even stop smoking if it does not stop 100% of all cases of cancer?

The more people are vaccinated the less people will become infected and will be spread the virus at any time. The less people are spreaders the less breakthrough infections can happen. It is a feedback loop and not really hard to understand.

> I will get downvoted... but really,

Can we pelase just automatically downvote all posts starting like this?

This would be an excellent data point.

They may perceive themselves differently, but I don’t think US diplomats are very useful targets for a mysterious weapon.

If Russia had a secret sci-fi weapon like this it would be very stupid (and completely useless) to waste it on US-diplomats.

If it exists, it is likely is an unintended side effect. Either something is more toxic than expected, more contaminated, or more physically damaging to people. Or the effect is quite common if one just looks closely at (a specific group of) people, because „healthy“ just means „not properly diagnosed, yet“.

> Reminder of the Thalidomide drug

Bringing up Thalidomide / Contergan in a discussion on current medicine is the best indication that you don‘t have the least idea on the topic. All rules and tests that eg the Biontech-Vaccine had to pass (and has passed) have been installed _after_ and _because_ of the Thalidomide catastrophy. Bringing up the topic of Thalidomide exactly disproves any point you are thinking you make, because the level of safety in medicine we have today has been raised to a level incomparable to what we had with Thalidomide.

What you are saying instead is: “Current medicine must be _very_ safe because todays‘ safety protocols are so much higher than what we had back then.“

Downloading the mp4 version of the archive worked fine for me. And I‘m in Germany :-)

Covid19 already has well-known short- and mid-term downsides for >> 1% of grown-ups infected. The hard “downsides“ are so dangerous that we had trouble to properly treat the sick.

BNT/Pfizer has so little short- and mid-term downsides that it is difficult to properly spot them statistically, even after about a half billion vaccinations.

Both may have long-term downsides, but: all vaccinations we know didn‘t have any long term downsides. The problems were either visible immediately or they were relatively rare so that they were only detected after a significant number of people had been vaccinated. The downsides of Covid-19 are not rare compared to that, for any age. There is no reason to consider the vaccine more frightening than Covid19. On the other hand everything about the virus SARS-CoV-2 and the disease Covid-19 is experimental because this virus has not been tried on humans until now! The infection it causes is way more complex than the immune reaction BNT/Pfizer causes and it definitely would not have passed a phase-1 study.

If you are afraid of BNT you should basically panic about Covid-19.

With that high number of young people dying of the flu back then you may say that the host mutated and became less susceptible to the original strain of the flu.

Since SARS-CoV-2 seems to be especially dangerous for people after reproductive age I don‘t expect the same pressure as with flu. It may influence our inverted age pyramid, though. And it may have influence on the number of highly educated people >50 and older people with disposable income. (I belong in this group)

This vector has been opened for a while. Companies are not allowed to provide E2E encryption anymore, they have or will have (see EU) to scan every picture they host or transport for you.

Encryption does not help, Apple still is responsible. If Apple intends to let the user store photos in iCloud (or send by imessage) encrypted, they either have to keep the keys, so they can decrypt and scan the photos or or to keep the user from uploading incriminating content. Apple found a third way: they will only get to reconstruct the keys if the user uploads too many pictures triggering alarms.

“other tech experts“ want to keep Apple from using End2End encryption so they have a reason why they don’t provide it to their customers. With Apple‘s approach Apple can only decrypt Data hosted with them if the (false) positives are over a threshold. It‘s a pretty neat way to implement a usecase so deeply wrong. All other companies protesting now want to keep access to userdata in the clear.

Apple‘s approach is the only way to - at the same time - act lawfully regarding to EARN-IT act in the US and provide E2E in iCloud.

I really hate these laws, but Apple is not the problem here. Read up on EARNIT and the EU laws currently in the works. All communication WILL HAVE TO BE SCANNED by the provider. Beating the drum against Apple will just lead to E2E encryption being forbidden. What needs to be forbidden instead is any access to communication.

https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EARN_IT_Act_of_2020 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...

The coffee-analogy was such a perfect example for wasting time on irrelevant optimization that I didn’t read on.

Even if the authors’ perspective in the rest the article may have been more useful, spending my time with other things felt like an optimization.

A plasma of H2O2 sounds like the definition of a reactive environment…

No.

You don‘t even own an iPhone...

Apple has been using a common charger from the first iPhone on, there never was an iPhone charger that was not USB.

Back the other brands came with a different, proprietary charger with a fixed cable for each model. Apple changed the cable once from the wide and weird dock-connector to the small and sturdy lightning port. That happened before USB-C was even invented.

As a long time Apple customer I‘m quite happy with their consistency here.

My first question would be: Why are things ultimately failing in QA? What infrastructure, knowlegde or interactions are missing to permanently reassure the team if the current state of their work will pass QA? Whatever product your team makes, it should not have relevant defects that only show up in QA.

Agile development is just a tool, not a magic incantation. For Scrum: Committing to a Sprint backlog makes no sense when the product still fails after the Sprint is finished. There should be no after . Done must be done - if it’s not you’re not doing it right. If possible I’d completely focus on fixing this point first.

(Background: Agile development, then coach since 10++ years. Now have a small startup building some niche BI software. (Interestingly coaching other people for money does not mean you’ll be doing it right yourself.))

> That's what makes dark matter so attractive to physicists.

I _really_ like what you did here :-)

> but physicists all seem to promote it

It does not seem like it to me (non physicist with some physicist friends from other fields who try to dumb down stuff to me).

In my world (SE) it seems like a proprietary binary that must be included for the rest of an open source product describing the observable universe to work very well. Everyone seems to hate it, but nobody wrote something better, yet. Every competing implementation fails to work in other areas that we already are using in production, extensively.

And when some professional, who read and understood the source code, starts talking about it, a lot of people voice stupid ideas that they would not have if they passed some lectures on the subject.

Edit to add: I envy physicists a little - the best thing for “them” to happen seems to be if something does not work in a very peculiar way.

Please add Germany to that list:

[Excuse me I’m not convinced](https://youtu.be/_k_QbpFl7RM)

That sentence is idiomatic now for many people I know. (WTF is wrong with my markdown here?)

This happens if people in power only speak a single language.

How can you demonstrate better that a product is in a healty and natural condition?

So by revoking Linus‘ license bitkeeper set in motion a development that would make bitkeeper obsolete. This is funny.

> Elon Musk preys on the hopeful and optimistic.

Drama queen.

ceasefire Thank you for finding a better word for “not angry” and for writing down the idea behind it. It’s the conscious, mutual decision to solve the problem later, knowing that sleeping safely together as a couple is more important.

This! We never went to bed angry in 20 years - if we were angry we always “made peace“ before going to bed so we could sleep - and wake up - assured of our love. Here you and us differ: If it‘s late we postpone finding a solution because we know we can pick it up the next day if it feels relevant. In an argument we never bring a list of former lapses. If something is relevant it has to be brought up, not collected.

A failed upgrade of GitLab? Can you give details - I got used to monthly Gitlab updates going very smoothly and now I’m a little afraid. What went wrong?

While I don‘t think that this is relevant for my personal thread scenarios, I think that this is unfortunate at least and Apple should change it with new hardware.

Sometimes it‘s like somebody is reading my brain. I was just considering to have a look into DNS to solve a particular problem with software-licensing / enforcement. It‘s still likely a wrong idea and not well thought out, but I‘m even closer to actually waste resources on it, now :-)