ridaj

A study of ~25,000 persons found stronger statistical correlations between the belief in having been infected and long COVID symptoms, than between serology tests of prior infections and long COVID symptoms. Except for the persistent loss-of-taste symptom, which does not correlate with belief in prior infection and only correlates with serology test results. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34747982/

The layman interpretation of this is that long COVID is possibly a mental health issue associated with the belief in having had a prior infection, except for the loss-of-taste symptom which is very specific to COVID (vs, say, persistent fatigue). Not to say "it's not real", but maybe "it's not always viral in origin".

This is a good take, but

> A machine learning organization thinks of risk entirely differently than an automated risk underwriting organization.

It's possible and maybe even advisable to use machine learning in the automated risk underwriting business, but it is a different setup / set of objectives.

As the author notes, IMO the adversarial and antifraud aspect of risk underwriting turns it less into a straight-up estimation problem and much more into a game theory type of problem. ML models can assist in evaluating risk, but you do indeed have to be preocuppied by your risk as a party to the transaction in the first place, and not just trying to predict prices as a third party observer (which by itself is pretty riskless).

I can only guess, but I suppose the context in which they would trigger something like this would be that some of their accounts get hijacked to send things to a bunch of email addresses, which later turn out to be links to zero-day exploits attribuable to state-sponsored attackers, so they warn the recipients of those emails. But it's got to be a relatively scattershot warning - Google doesn't really know how vigilant you are. A friend of mine working for an NGO got the Gmail warning back in 2012 and upgraded a few overdue things.

Respond by using 2fa if you weren't already, not signing into the account from untrusted devices, checking OAuth grants for apps you don't recognize, not using same pw elsewhere

Google's been doing this since at least 2012 http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/google...

Thanks for the very informative answer!

Practical question: if you're in the US, how do you deal with health insurance?

Can you overwhelm this detector by hiding the camera in another reflective material (eg wrinkled metal or shards of glass wall decor)

Yes the problem with ebikes isn't other people being aware of the bike's sound, it's the rider being aware of the risk to themselves and others. Maybe this is ingrained in the motorcycle culture, but it seems like most buyers of ebikes I know have never ridden a motorcycle before and were not riding bicycles regularly either. They just go "oh this makes my commute like that time I biked when I was on vacation" and approach safety with a lackadaisical attitude. That makes them relatively irresponsible riders in my opinion. This problem hopefully fixes itself over time as they learn from accidents and an ebike safety culture emerges, but for now it's pretty sad.

Maybe you mean `2021-11-11_client_project-name_v2_final.ext`

Áčçëñts hęlp tóø

> There's only been a handful of videos out of hundreds that received more downvotes than expected because the video was posted on a place out of my control and folks didn't like that.

Yes. People downvote based on their expectation. So you can have content that you would probably find bad that has a lot of upvotes because it has a niche that likes it, and my sense is that the excursions in dislike ratio are more often driven by distribution channel or brigading than the intrinsic value of the content.

> Almost always if a video naturally gets downvoted it's because you either released something bad or unrelated to what your channel normally expects.

Doesn't this directly contradict your experience as a creator? But if it was true, wouldn't it be a good thing that creators no longer feel as much pressure to conform to fan expectations, eg in pursuit of bigger opportunities/audiences?

Public dislike counts were opportunities for brands to own up to their ambition for authentic engagement. This is maybe the main thing lost here - without putting this at stake, and with full moderation powers on their video comments, brands basically only have a veneer of authenticity at this point. There's not as much at stake for them anymore, very limited downside / reason to care.

You also cannot have comments on videos that feature or target children

Hopefully this kind of story encourages more people to actively shun certified organic products. I do because I think certification is a piece of paper that doesn't mean much about food quality and I resent the pressures it's creating on small, responsible farmers.

He was farming using traditional and non-intensive techniques, but too small/exotic of an operation for the certification to be worth it in his opinion. Anything he would've sprayed, his family would've breathed since they lived right next to the field and it wasn't very big.

It really depends on what you replace it with. In the past year I think I've decreased my consumption of social media significantly but I have also increased my consumption of TV and passive YouTube content, and I'm not sure it's great either. It's like diets, if you cut all fats but replace the calories with refined sugar, you're not really making a great change.

Organic certification does not have much to do the quality of the food produced in the first place. It is only a qualification of the means by which it is produced, what kinds of fertilizers and pesticides are used, etc. There is a sort of implicit assumption that more natural-ish means of productions are somehow better than others but it's not really something you can test from the product itself.

As a farmer once explained to me:

"What does Certified Organic mean?

— It means they haven't caught you sprayin'"

I think the challenge is you'd expect a company like Google to have more of the setup be automated. If replication and monitoring are such universally good ideas, then why don't they come out of the box?

> Perhaps a bit more info though like pics would be good haha. Some indication of the quality.

Maybe some value-added services like transportation, credit, and insurance too? Oh and a seller and buyer reputation system so you know you're not getting stiffed. A convenient IoT button to reorder hay without opening the computer. Ads, to pay for the servers. An app to know where your hay's at?

Nah you and I know all that bullshit ends up getting gamed with meager user benefit. Surely at some point even this gets up on freaking Amazon or Etsy or "eHay" but until then here's the sound of a creaky dude pouring one out for the old Craigslist-style BBS out there. Make it last and fuck the VCs.

This is such a lame-ass take geared towards bashing the proposed tax on unrealized gains...

It's clear enough that the pursuit of ROE incentivizes stripping excess capacity in the short term. But NIFO vs LIFO accounting is a small insignificant detail of this, and the claim that founder-led businesses are fundamentally different doesn't pass the sniff test.

First there are many businesses in logistics that are founder-led or privately controlled by founder families, from Walmart to Maersk. If founder control was really critical to setting up a business to weather a 100-year storm, you'd have expected the logistics industry to fare pretty well.

There are also plenty of industries that had to deal with massive demand spikes and did not end up being long term bottlenecks, in spite of being pretty brutally managed by markets, like grocery supplies or telecom and internet access providers.

The main difference IMO is the growth orientation. In tech there was already a large expectation of strong long-term demand growth, so there was already a structure in place to deal with capacity growth. Industries that did not have this expectation, like maritime transportation and port infrastructure, do not have the ability to start increasing the capacity on a dime.

When the profit growth expectation isn't there, evidence is the private founder businesses don't invest either. I would believe the argument more of I heard a lot more of the likes of Bezos, Gates, Page, Musk etc. investing their private money into the kind of massive infrastructure upgrades needed to solve the world's logistics bottlenecks. Until then I call BS on the argument that we should just wait for them to invest their money to solve it.

Governments might as well take it and upgrade infrastructure if the money's just parked. With the modern "golden share" structures, that shouldn't actually take a lot of control away from founders...

I feel that's the case in many professions like plumber or car repair that people are reluctant or unable to DYI, whose services aren't going to be needed often, but that are accompanied by acute pain when they're needed. That tends to make people cost insensitive because they need pain relief, they have few points of comparison, and don't anticipate needing the same service again soon.

Sorry to say, but I'm not sure the IP law profession is different... I probably have worked with about a dozen attorneys hired by my employer to file patents on my behalf, and there were two lawyers that stood out a lot. They understood the inventions, what we claimed to set them apart from prior art, and produced filings that were relatively brief and to the point. The rest of them didn't really get the stuff, sent us draft filings that made me cringe because they were shallow copy-paste jobs, etc. If you're one of the better lawyers out there, I hope your clients are rewarding you appropriately for it!

The very story of each of WhatsApp, Signal, etc. is a testament to why interoperability across apps matters much less than user reach and feature velocity within an app ecosystem. Most people don't actually mind using different apps for different things once their friends are there, because functionality tends to break at the edges (even creating a simple group chat becomes a pain across non-cooperative networks)

Maybe this works for the language that the author is talking about, but in the cases that I'm familiar with, the standard library code does not give a good idea of what "normal" application code looks like. For example it's often got a bunch of platform-specific logic or low level optimizations that, as an application author, you probably want the standard lib to abstract away from you

Doesn't Windows have a decent terminal nowadays?

Likely much lower than the value and developer time savings, but (a) that's usually the case even with licensed software (nobody buys Microsoft Office nearly the amount of "developer time savings" coming from not having to reimplement an office business suite) and (b) by setting up your project as open source, you're essentially saying that you're not interested in capturing any of that value anyways, so I don't really see how it's relevant.

I get that Sonos, Roku, etc are in a tough spot but this business is structurally to be a good, cheap, dumb terminal. It's no use for Roku to try and get in the way at this point, it just reinforces incentives for players to undercut them with branded sticks (Chromecast, fire tv, apple TV...)

The asymmetrical warfare of bullshit "science" is demoralizing. It seems to take so much effort to get the bad stuff taken down, compared with the apparent ease of made-up stuff to be published. This one is pretty crazy: a paper alleging paranormal time-reversed causality still not retracted 10 years later https://replicationindex.com/2018/01/05/bem-retraction/

If there wasn't a shortage then sure they might lose money by paying drivers more, but the supposed shortage of labor hurts more (it leads to business that they don't do at all)