ttesttom

Did you buy an AirGradient monitor or any brand you recommend that is not DIY?

Thanks! Yeah, I definitely think immersion listening can really help and I've used it a bit (subs2srs and audio books), but sometimes it can be used as a crutch to avoid speaking. Your app looks really cool and love that you incorporated SRS. Anecdotally, the hardest thing I've seen with my SO and I is that we end up switching back to english as we aren't disciplined when practicing together (even when in the other country itself lol)

I would kindly disagree and say that it's better to learn the pronunciation rules and practice producing them. There is a lot of research around learning that production and testing are better for learning (and also why is easier to understand than speak). Specifically, to train pronunciation, the anki decks from the author of the book Fluent Forever are incredible.

Source: Learned a romance language for my SO and everyone I've met in the native country tells me I have a very natural accent and clean pronunciation.

https://fluent-forever.com/product/fluent-forever-pronunciat...

Out of curiosity, do you mean words that are technical or specific to a field? Or more general words such as 'didactic'?

Awesome, this is very helpful! I know where i will be spending the next few hours : ) Very much appreciated!

Any recommendations for where to purchase these vintage watches? I've always thought they were beautiful but never sure where to find legitimate sellers (despite googling a bit)

Pre-print for that paper was published 7 months ago and the sample collection date was from April-May 2020. Obviously there have been huge spikes in cases across the world since May 2020 with majority of infections occurring after that timeframe.

> Sample collection date Apr–May 2020

I think commenter is referring to Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) that specifically impacts children.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/...

The phase 3 trial for JnJ/Janseen had only ~44k participants whereas here we are talking on the order of ~1 per million (that are reported as of today)

There have been a bunch of studies that have come out, with a range of quality in case selection methodology eg. biased sampling, so its still early days. I've seen estimates ranging from 2% - 33% for effects up to 7 months after infection for mild-moderate symptomatic cases. But generally, it seems quite a serious issue.

This is a good review on whats out there: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01283-z

In the EMA statement from today they said:

> there is no evidence of a problem related to specific batches of the vaccine or to particular manufacturing sites;

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-vaccine-astrazene...

I think this article is a bit more nuanced based on what they are seeing on the ground. Derek brings up good points about background rates, but papers over some things. It's a complex picture and the below article paints it well.

Also scientists in Norway claim they found the mechanism that causes it.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/03/it-s-very-special-pi...

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/KyGv2G/professor-says-...

Lots of different problems that are complex! For example:

+ Text internationalization system

+ Payment processing

+ User auth

+ User verification

+ A/B testing system

+ User metrics collection from UI

+ offline storage of said metrics

+ data pipelines to process stored offline storage

+ iOS app

+ android app

+ Image storage and caching infra

+ fraud detection

+ search ranking and indexing

https://medium.com/airbnb-engineering/airbnb-engineering-inf...

How is a company that is an entirely online marketplace with no physical property not a 'tech company'?

How is it a logical fallacy to check the opinions of both political parties? The parent asked:

> "Am I in a media bubble?"

Usually helps to check what both sides of the partisan isle are saying to avoid a bubble.

Well that is the cleverness of most trump statements, toe the line, give a nod to your side, but also retain deniability. If you don't start interpreting, you get into a trap in which you will be outfoxed by anyone who can toe lines enough to not blatantly incriminate themselves.

As for BLM, personally I was never very sympathetic to the portions of protests/riots that caused violence.

Maybe check what the Republicans are saying, for example Bill Barr said:

>“Orchestrating a mob to pressure Congress is inexcusable. The president’s conduct yesterday was a betrayal of his office and supporters.”

https://twitter.com/GingerGibson/status/1347213610406313986?...

Even Bill Barr, Trumps former AG, said Trump incited a mob.

>“Orchestrating a mob to pressure Congress is inexcusable. The president’s conduct yesterday was a betrayal of his office and supporters.”

https://twitter.com/GingerGibson/status/1347213610406313986?...

I think the point is that after his supporters broke the law and stormed the capitol, interrupting a constitutionally mandated process for the peaceful transfer of power, he told them:

> "Remember this day forever!"

Thus approving of the actions that already occurred and telling them that the crimes that they committed would be justified by history looking back at what they have done. It in no way deescalates the risk of future conflicts.

I think we do have those organizations with trust.

If you want facts only news, go to apnews or reuters. They are the mastheads of impartiality, or at least as much as possible with humans.

However, the NYT is what I consider as investigative journalism that includes informed speculation. A lot of stories that otherwise never would have seen the light of day were broken by the NYT, however at the time of publishing there was a degree of uncertainty given the nature of the story. The uncertainty means they could be wrong, even if the odds are high at 90% correct. However, I would argue both are valuable, just understand which you are reading.

Even if you are busted not all 'news' orgs would come clean, admitting the mistake and detailing out what went wrong.

https://www.npr.org/2017/09/15/551163406/fox-news-has-yet-to...

Ah, good to know context, thanks!

Didn't he state support for BLM publicly on Twitter though?

https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/12686223771826216...

I don't think Obama would have supported it as he called Clinton urging her to concede early on election night.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307536-obama-urged-cli...

First, I think you misunderstand poll margins of error. For example, the NYT poll is +-4 for each candidate. Meaning it could swing a total of 8 points.

That isn't anything new.

"In a new paper with Andrew Gelman and Houshmand Shirani-Mehr, we examined 4,221 late-campaign polls — every public poll we could find — for 608 state-level presidential, Senate and governor’s races between 1998 and 2014. Comparing those polls’ results with actual electoral results, we find the historical margin of error is plus or minus six to seven percentage points. (Yes, that’s an error range of 12 to 14 points, not the typically reported 6 or 7.)"

(written before 2016 election) https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/upshot/when-you-hear-the-...

There was an interesting chart from the economist today about that, which showed a strong correlation. The denser the area the more democratic.

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/132625098113116979...

It's not just for politics. For example, it's used frequently in public health. There have been a ton of polls about mask wearing, whether someone would take a vaccine etc. that help guide public health policy makers and give them a semblance of an idea of where the public is at versus just guessing.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/10/poll-incr...

https://www.statnews.com/pharmalot/2020/10/19/covid19-corona...

This is inaccurate based on latest elections. There isn't full data for 2020 but in 2016 college educated voted Dem +9.

"In the 2016 election, a wide gap in presidential preferences emerged between those with and without a college degree. College graduates backed Clinton by a 9-point margin (52%-43%), while those without a college degree backed Trump 52%-44%. This is by far the widest gap in support among college graduates and non-college graduates in exit polls dating back to 1980."

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trum...

This leaves out the states that originally tipped the election to trump last time due to polling error of 4-7pts. Really its big polling errors in these states. The rest of the map doesn't look as bad. Popular vote also most likely off by estimated 4pts when all ballots counted, which isn't terrible.

Diff on final 538 -> current results

Wisc: ~8pt diff

Michigan: 4-6pt diff

PA: still counting but most likely 2-5pts off