2,245 karma · joined October 17, 2012
Website: https://mrosenberg.pub Github: https://github.com/rozbb Keybase: https://keybase.io/mrosenberg Email: michael (@) mrosenberg (.) pub
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/mrosenberg; my proof: https://keybase.io/mrosenberg/sigs/dR6U3ijr9MYZyBe0ueW6L90pU8Adb817jaeWietnOH4 ]
Surely the authors know that "statement of facts" has the ability to completely alter the interpretation of the rest of the content. Key questions are: why is this fact relevant in this context, what is the author conveying by bringing this in? Etc. To take a radical example, if one reads an article about a recent mass shooting followed by "statements of fact" about the declining population of whites in America, then one would reasonably conclude that the author is a white supremacist who implicitly supports the shooter. Non-white supremacists don't talk about the great replacement.
So the question is why would someone bring up the criminal record of an unarmed Black man who was extrajudicially killed by an officer of the state? What does this fact do for the reader? It's not hard to imagine what many would conclude. Editorial narrative is something I learned about in middle school, why are the authors feigning ignorance about its existence?
[0] https://github.com/navidrome/navidrome
[2] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/play-sub-music-streamer/id9553...
Why doesn't it mention for example that rising temperatures will likely kill thousands and create millions of climate refugees? And how specifically a country like the Maldives will prevent itself from disappearing underwater (hint: "just do what the Netherlands did" is not an answer). Why doesn't it address the fact that we all have microplastics in our bodies and have no idea what the long term effects are? Or that ocean temperatures are making aquatic species go extinct at a rate never before seen?
Those are all-cause death. The number of covid-related deaths were 2 in the placebo and 1 in the vaccine arms. There simply weren't many covid deaths during this part of the trial (probably because most of the participants were <55 years old).
For signing: signify/minisign
For encryption: age
For file transfer: magic wormhole
For encrypted messaging: Signal (or your choice of e2e encrypted messaging platform)
The article doesn't say so, but the approved vendor list is actually not determined by Cloudflare. They defer to the FIDO Alliance's Metadata Service [0], which maintains a list of certified suppliers.
Says who? I don't think that's true according to IRB standards in the US. Nor is it true for websites who A/B test according to the GDPR