whatisthiseven

Isn't it plausible your medical friends mentioned it a lot because...others around them also mentioned it a lot? Doctors and nurses are just as capable as spreading rumors as anyone else.

What about economies of scale? Wouldn't we expect as demand rose, more suppliers and production would also come about?

Why bring up something like this? I don't think that jives with HN's guidelines of "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

Your post is good overall but I am not so sure about this part:

"as they require two doses per person and are more demanding in the refrigeration requirements."

Moderna doesn't require overly deep refrigeration, that is Pfizer. The difference is a technical one and one that Pfizer believes they can solve. So while it is true of the current Pfizer vaccines, it isn't true of mRNA vaccines generally.

Secondly, the two dose regimen is unnecessary, IMO. Pfizer and Moderna have higher efficacy with one dose than J&J or Astrazeneca have after their one shot. The FDA and others insisting on two doses is because of Pfizer and Moderna's original process called for two doses as they wanted to be sure of the efficacy and that is what they got approval for. Given many doctors are looking at the pandemic from the perspective of a patient rather than that of a population and a disease, they aren't willing to admit that two doses for Pfizer and Moderna is unnecessary and putting far more lives at risk.

The rest of the world can benefit, as those countries that can afford the higher priced vaccine may do so as they are more effective and available now, which helps to get them out of the market of the lower cost vaccines. That decrease in demand for J&J and others can then be filled by countries that don't have the funding or the infrastructure for the current mRNA vaccines, thereby keeping their price low.

This is overly dismissive.

A security camera must be agreed on, it's quality chosen, it's recording backed up, maybe someone watches it live and needs to be paid, they need somewhere to sit and monitors.

All of these things are decision points that can be used to delay any vote. No one here is necessarily trustworthy, but the nlrb is a supposedly neutral organization and presumably has it's own security. Why add more? If you assume malicious actors will compromise one security layer why not all of them?

You have to choose some cut off for security over cost and time. I don't think Amazon is arguing in good faith.

Why would private companies do this? Who is paying them and how would the cost structure work?

Debris in orbit is not like trash on a field. It is moving at several km/s and is thousands of miles away. Good luck finding, intercepting, and then spending enough energy to de-orbit anything large, let alone tiny objects you can't see. I can't even imagine doing this millions of times.

It is interesting to read the rules you came up with to limit memory usage, and then to think of the criticisms one gets in Java for limiting memory usage. In Java we try to limit new as much as possible to prevent the GC from pausing too much, or inconveniently, or for too long. And basically all the rules you say are what we also use in Java.

Except when you have these rules in Java, the ironic counter-point is "if you are doing this much memory control yourself, you should just use C or C++ or something".

I'll keep your comment in mind next time I see that rebuttal. Thank you.

As an analogy, I think everyone here would be quite upset if someone made the claim, "why shouldn't we trust Musk, Gates, Jobs, etc at their word when they say what caused them success? Obviously it is true because they are successful"!

If you reject the premise I proposed, but not the anthropic principle, then you have just moved the goal posts on when to accept blind tautologies without further examination.

Sure, but we also do the things you suggested.

However, if you are relying on defense in depth for security, then having them be network separate helps prevent internal DDoS attacks, whether malicious or not.

Enforcing security across the entire network layer has many positives. But I don't want to be messing with the lower levels, and those lower levels all have the same security models and solutions as one another, at least if you view them at a high level.

VPCs have value as a security and availability solution, I just don't want to have to configure it to get what could be an automatic benefit.

Agreed, I always thought VPC and all that complexity was a big step backwards. My org is moving from a largely managed network into AWS, and now we have to configure the whole network and external gateways ourselves? What engineer wants to do this?

VPCs are virtual, but I don't need VPCs, I need the entire network layer virtualized and abstracted. As you suggested,just grouping devices in a single network and saying "let them all talk to each other, let this one talk to that one over this port/IP" should be all I describe. Let AWS figure out CIDR, routing, gateways, etc.

That power has always existed, and could have always been used "by those who think completely different" from us. If they think that differently, then they wouldn't even think twice about using said power to censor.

In this case, Twitter et al. thought a LOT about what to do, as they did very little for 4 year's of Trump's presidency, and only decided to act after Trump incited a literal self-coup and insurrection with the goal of illegitimately keeping himself in power.

If in the future "those who think completely differently from me" are going to think liberal ideas are so dangerous to be removed, it won't matter what "standard" we set today. It seems even with the highest standard of "don't support open coups", you still think I will be judged the exact same.

Censorship is bad. But insurrections against legitimate governments are worse.

for reference: I regularly took 200mg or more a day through diet coke. Quit a little over a year ago with 20mg caffeine pills for about a week or two. Had headaches the entire two weeks. I had a total tolerance to caffeine at this point. I could drink an entire can right before bed and sleep absolutely fine.

I think my productivity increased, but really it was just removing the "brain fog" of feeling like I had to ingest more caffeine that boosted my productivity.

Things that changed for me:

* no more "I forgot to drink caffeine/didn't have access, now I have withdrawl".

* my hangovers after drinking alcohol are more tolerable or gone.

* no more compulsive soda drinking when bored

Things that didn't change for me:

* sleep

* energy

* overall mood

* weight

* caffeine still has no (or imperceptible) impact on me when I drink small amounts from tea. Most months I go with 0mg.

I think many people ascribe quitting coffee, soda, or caffeine to many of the things that didn't impact me, but those same people also note other life changes they did at the same time and I suspect that had a greater impact for them.

That said, I replaced my caffine habit with seltzer/sparkling water (which helps trick me into thinking it is a soda). I now drink large amounts of seltzer instead.

Every time I see a diet coke? Anxiety spikes, I have to strongly resist the urge to drink it. Caffeine addiction was pretty terrible for me.

"is an upcharge fee subscription service offered by telephone company providers which, when dialed immediately after a malicious call, records meta-data for police follow-up. A police report must be filed after each use, as law enforcement will only act on the trace once a formal police report is filed in regard to the call. "

So, I will get charged for reporting a scammer? And nothing will happen unless I file a police report? That is certainly a solution, but not the one I would hope for.

This also used to be my strategy, but now I am concerned that competing brands are sabotaging each other by just leaving poor 1-star reviews. I say this as I have read some low reviews that just made no sense, or didn't reference aspects of the product that existed.

I still trust 1-star reviews more than 5-star, but I don't take them as gospel. As you said, if there is a consistent message across all the negative reviews from a mix of reviewer types, then it strengthens the signal quality.

Buying online sucks :(

Given that the author wrote this, "I downloaded a random subsample of US-based customer reviews of the 3 most popular scented candles"

Are you claiming that counterfeits are affecting all three? Or that there are enough counterfeits in at least one of them to cause the average to drop so substantially? And that is a more likely outcome than covid affecting a substantial portion of the population causing a drop in reviews?

The reply this tweet thread is based on is from the seller's own website themselves seeing a large increase in negative reviews from customers that state their candles have no smell.

I feel jumping to conclusions about a rise in counterfeits is unnecessary.

Your comment intrigued me as I hadn't found anything at the time to support this, however this unofficial library exists to try to solve my problem: https://github.com/bmellstrom/esp8266-arduino-threads

Many of the solutions I had found talked about cooperative multi-threading, which doesn't work if I can't make the wifi stack cooperate with me.

Maybe I can make my device run that much smoother during wifi drops now!

When I was working with an ESP8266 board I was really frustrated that the wifi stack was blocking. It meant I couldn't make a good user experience in the event that wifi was lost or at boot.

If that blob was open sourced, it would have been great to make changes to the wifi stack and make it truly async.

Right, I am not sure the limiting factor here is our ability to send or interpret the received signals. I think the limiting factor that is most impactful is the probe itself.

Eventually, its power source will die out, its components will fail, or enough cosmic rays or debris will corrupt enough of its systems it can no longer transmit.

Given those factors, I do wonder what the expected lifetime of the probe is, with the power source being the most clear "game over" line.

No, it is a complete myth, something that virtually all sword makers across the world were doing. Japanese iron ore was actually higher quality than most, and they had plenty of iron ore for sword making (though iron was later imported during the industrial revolution).

See this answer on a subreddit dedicated to high quality answers by historians: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/77tq5r/japan...

This is backwards. First, plastic is something like 1% of all oil production. Secondly, oil is the the best way to do sequestration by keeping it in the ground.

Unless you mean turning co2 into oil to make plastic or something? Which is itself weird for the energy requirement.

"I've mentioned it before, but Reddit is so incredibly, unbelievably user-hostile nowadays that I don't understand why people use it."

I really don't see this "hostility". HN loves to complain about the new design, but I don't mind it, and sometimes I like it. RES works with it just fine. The only annoyance I get is RPAN, which I have been able to disable.

After 10 years of using Reddit, I don't feel like the site itself is worse. I just move to subreddits with good mods that don't want memes and I really enjoy my usage of the site.

I see, and I am not using hyperbole, literally none of the problems you state. Reddit is massive with more communities than either of us can appreciate and I think the direction the admins are going is actually fine? Sure, I don't agree with everything they do, but I don't see it as hostile or such a negative experience to my usage that I would think of leaving Reddit.

Try asking people what subreddits they go to, what their use-cases are like, when/why they use it. I really don't think it is so hard to "understand" why Reddit is a massively popular as it is.

No, power generation is about a quarter: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...

Transportation could push that total to 50% if all ICE cars were converted or destroyed and only electric vehicles were used (ignoring ships and trains). "Industry" includes CO2 waste byproducts which are much harder to reduce as many processes may struggle to eliminate that byproduct. Instead capture and sequestration would be needed. This is another 25%

The rest are small, but since we need virtually all CO2 emissions to be zero, we are left with nearly another 25% that isn't tied to electric production and is difficult to replace.

So, 50% of all CO2 isn't power generation related.

My bad, thanks! I did mean the opposite

My reddit account is over 10 years old, and I think we have different views of why Reddit is on a slow decline.

Every single sub-reddit will, at some point after its first few users, need to decide if it will be a meme/image macro sub, or not. Every sub that implicitly allows memes, will eventually become a meme sub if the mods choose to do nothing. It seems there are large numbers of users on Reddit that feel entitled to let "upvotes and downvotes" be the ultimate and only modding that should happen on a sub-reddit. These users will balk at any notion of getting rid of memes because "what else is there to discuss"? For them, the worst thing to happen to their feed is for there not to be a huge dearth of mindless content to consume which is heavily remixed and re-used all over the site every single time they login.

They will also deny that any sub that allows memes will somehow then "become a meme sub". They seem willfully ignorant of what happens to meme subs, and seem to think "if people upvote it, then that means they want it", ignoring how the people who upvote most frequently and the lowest quality content are those that rapidly consume meme content.

Reddit is ruined by these super passive consumers of memes. Not anti-intellectualism, but just those that want to go to reddit, see funny shit, upvote it all, and then get on with their day. And they demand to see that EVERYWHERE.

Here, from the article:

"That same day, she shared a separate post suggesting that Michelle Obama is secretly a man. Someone responded with skepticism: “I am still not convinced. She shows and acts evil, but a man?” Shock’s reply: “Research it.” There was a post claiming that Representative Adam Schiff had raped the body of a dead boy at the Chateau Marmont, in Los Angeles"

What research should I do here? So many "claims" from QAnon look exactly like this, and it looks like random garbage. There is nothing to "research" here because it is impossible to research all this BS. But apparently I am a "sheep" unless I prove Michelle Obama is a woman? Or any other insane claim they make up regularly every day?

Sorry, no, QAnon is garbage. No need to "research it" to know that.

I read the article and it examines multiple QAnon claims made over time. I have also seen lots of QAnon claims not on this article and it seems the "thousands" of posts from supporters of QAnon is just mass-generated garbage with no truth. Made out of thin air.

I am thinking for myself, and when I see QAnon, I don't see a group that is doing any thinking at all. The "drops" you talk about are meaningless garbage.

That article on efficiency comes to mind: currently businesses have some slack built in on their deliveries because they can only arrive so quickly.

If AI trucks are the norm, and all that slack is eliminated for efficiency sake because the "AI truck can always get here in 13 hours, no stopping", then that increased efficiency only raises the urgency that it arrives on time, thereby eliminating the time savings on delivery.

How do you get results, and what kind of results have you got from bugging manufacturers? Genuinely curious.

Robin misses the point that blackmail harms people as it is an ongoing threat. How would you write a contract that says what you are being blackmailed for without the lawyers involved that wrote the contract also blackmailing you? How do you prevent someone from leaking something anonymously and reneging on the contract to blackmail you repeatedly for the same thing? I feel the con side was really weak and didn't dive into the actual implementation problems at all.

Your point is maybe a little obtuse to me, because it sounds like you are arguing for "computers are tools that should be learned, but really no one does and who can blame them, they just want to science" and simultaneously arguing, "tools aren't science, and science can be done without them".

I feel like the later is obvious: of course the tools aren't science, but if you want to do real work and real science, your tools are going to be crucial for establishing measurements, repeatability, and sharing how one models their hypothesis onto real world mechanics.

Likewise, the former is just the same commonly repeated thing I just argued against and my reply is the same: so what? You building a kayak is not science and is irrelevant.

Scientists can't reach a meaningful conclusion without proper use of tools. All they can do is hypthesize, which is certainly a portion of science (and many fields are in fact stuck in this exact stage, unable to get further and come to grounded conclusions), but it is not the end-all of science, and getting to the end in the modern day science means knowing to program.

Of course there are exceptions and limitations and "good enough". No one is arguing that. The argument I am refuting is those who think "tools are just tools, who cares, I just want my science". That is the poor attitude that makes no sense to me.