agf

What are the other options for anonymity that don't provide the same cover for criminal activity?

I think one of the reasons bootcamps get away with this kind of thing is that, for at least many people, traditional schooling also fails to teach this material. So if you're going to just teach people enough to get a job, but not actually to do it, better to do it for "cheap" in 6 months than, say, expensively in a 2 year masters program.

I think the problem above is probably somewhat worse for data science than software engineering in general, but it applies broadly to quantitative jobs in the tech industry, in my experience.

I agree, that's why in this case (as I say in my post) I believe they'll follow through.

That's why you promise an update, not a resolution.

It is a good statement, and I believe they'll follow through, but it's missing something important that is often missing from otherwise professional communication.

The last line is "We will report our findings back to the community as soon as practical." It should be followed by "and we will provide an update in no more than 30 days".

Without any explicit time frame, holding them publicly accountable becomes trickier. At any point they can just say "we're still investigating" until enough time has passed people aren't paying attention any more.

Note that the companies that do ongoing incident updates on status sites best all do this -- "We will provide an update by 10:30pm PST".

Indirectly certainly, but directly it's on the same topic and rough geography as Kensington Blues, so it's extremely likely the author is familiar.

I believe the name of this article is a reference to this site and the accompanying book, about the part of North Philly he describes: https://kensingtonblues.com/

Except the better-than-average people move on, and the worse-than-average people stick around. So you have to hire above 50% just to keep quality static, and you don't every raise your bar to the point where it's hard to meet it just by hiring this way.

This is true, but if you're not in a good market I think the OP is right that having access to better companies and jobs outweighs that.

I work with a number of people who were hired, both remote and out of network, pre-COVID, onto a mostly co-located team. They have built trust and a strong network within the company, leading to promos and significantly increased comp, and through their excellent performance have built networks that will stay with them throughout their careers.

> Why is this hard to believe?

That's the core of what the article is about; it's hard to believe based on comparing testing and hospitalization numbers.

> "Social behaviors" are not what slows down Rt ... the number of targets gradually diminishes

Those aren't mutually exclusive, and it is possible to change social behaviors fast enough that it happens before you reach a threshold where you get significant slowing due to reduction in available "targets".

Any thoughts on the automated vertical farms that are starting to see good results?

Can this link be updated to the Wikipedia page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_square_puzzle

It has much clearer explanations, both written and visual. Really it's a stretch to say the Wolfram page explains anything at all, it just states it can't be how it appears.

No, but they're actively working on it. You can mount it as a CIFS share to get somewhat better performance; I believe there are some other hacks to fix specific things like "git status".

https://github.com/microsoft/WSL/issues/4197

I see two ways to get out of this. One is to learn to think of those things and doing them well, even though they're not original, as part of the form. Like meter and rhyming might be part of a poem's form; it's about how you do them, not that you do them, since they're always there.

The other is to consciously decide to ratchet down your consumption of this type of entertainment and put more effort into finding things that are more "for you" -- they don't rely on the tropes you're used to. Look for foreign content, other types / genres of shows, and reduce your consumption so by the time you've watched as much as you used to in a year, several years have passed and the style has morphed a bit.

Now imagine the consequences to people's travel decisions when you can do this for any two locations within, say, 500 miles of each other, because you can sleep in your self-driving car while it takes you there. Not just locations linked by train.

Wilderness areas, second homes, minor tourist destinations of all kinds. It has the potential to totally change the economies and usage patterns of those areas.

I live somewhere that's just far enough from the major east coast population centers to keep weekend traffic down. But when sleeping in a self driving car is a reality? We're talking 100 million people who can spend a weekend here easily. It's going to change everything.

In addition to the evidence cited in other replies, this solution has now been verified by the FBI, who has in the past dismissed other supposed "solutions" as the kind of thing you're talking about.

The original report of the FBI's confirmation appears to be this SF Chronicle article: https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/Zodiac-340-cypher-...

There are lots of good suggestions in other comments, but there is one thing I don't see that's really important.

A lot of these "large ideas" are really large. Like the amount of work they take is the amount of work it took to get through college, or master your profession, etc. More time than most people can afford to spend.

So the first thing to do is learn how to use the work other people have put in to answering the question. Learn how to judge the reliability of sources. Get to know the structure of the existing discussion of the issue. Look for ways to take advantage of existing knowledge in related areas to shortcut those tasks.

If you get good at those things, you'll at least get better at understanding the real complexity of the questions you're asking. You'll still do your own thinking, but realize that you're not in a position to just jump into that. You need to learn the context first. As other comments noted, you likely don't really even understand the question yet.

Try qBittorrent. I have been very happy with it as a uTorrent replacement for the past few years.

The author asks for someone to contact them with the answer to this question -- and I'd be interested as well:

A small mystery remains: if the statistics

  from /proc/*/statm which are used by htop

sync every 64 page faults, how can 1.5 MB of error accumulate? Syncing every 64 faults suggests that the maximum error would be 4 KB times 63 faults = 252 KB of error.

(sorry for weird formatting, wanted to include my comment around what statistics he's referring to, but asterisks can't be used unless preformatted AFAICT.)

I also had no luck with a number of classical pieces that are commonly recognizable. I had about 50% luck with random pop songs.

Absolutely. I'm not arguing for widespread use of raw milk, just mentioning that I actually think that's a bigger source of lost variety in cheese for the vast majority of us (at least in the UK and US) than a few low-volume types ceasing production.

While I'm sure my production facility (a.k.a kitchen) isn't as clean as most commercial facilities, I don't have to transport it, worry about lack of temperature control, or about the lag between when it's ready and when it gets consumed, so there is much less chance I grow a bunch of listeria. I also don't feed it to old people, children, or the immunocompromised.

I've been making cheese at home for a few years now, and was lucky enough to find a local source of raw milk a few months ago, at the beginning of the pandemic. Since then, I've made cheese exclusively with raw milk.

While I'd read about the differences previously, they're understated by most sources -- I can only assume many people are passing on accounts they've heard rather than speaking from experience. The texture of the finished cheese and how the milk acts while being processed into cheese is incredibly different from even fresh low-temperature pasteurized milk with added calcium.

Even a simple cheese like mozzarella is very noticeably different -- and in my opinion, better -- when made from raw milk. So while I'm willing to believe commercially produced cheeses are closer to their raw-milk counterparts than my homemade cheeses are, I still feel we've lost a lot when it comes to the experience of eating cheese just by using pasteurized milk.

Unfortunately both parts of your comment are incorrect.

Upper class Americans and Europeans generate more emissions per capita than lower / middle class people. They consume more, so they emit more.

I don't know your specific situation, but in general the carbon offsets you buy aren't actually priced to the real cost of reduction, and your estimate of your carbon footprint is likely low. So the real price would likely be significantly higher. If you're living in a large (and so heat / cooling efficient) building in the bay area where those costs are minimized anyway, and don't have a car, then you're an outlier, and you can't extrapolate accurately from your situation.

I have personally turned on the camera without the indicator light coming on on a 2012 Macbook Pro 15" with double-digit percent success rate, meaning someone with more time / expertise could probably do it consistently. I have been unable to do it on newer 15" pros or other models (Air / pro 13").

Certainly the previous comment was conflating things that happened in the past with what's happening how. I was sometimes disappointed with the reality of the Obama presidency, like may others. But this comment is just ridiculous. From the policies, to the personal conduct, to their respect or lack thereof for the rule of law, the two administrations and the actions of the two in and out of office are wildly different.

There is an important distinction you're missing between how you're using fractal and how this article is using it. It's saying something fundamentally different, though related, about turbulence, than you're saying about trees etc., even if you don't realize it.

I live in the mountains and I'm outside in a forest setting multiple times a week. I see exactly what you're talking about; it's just not the same as what the article is saying, even if you use the same word to describe it.

There are two statements in this that seem totally false to me, that make me skeptical of whatever point the author is working towards. I don't know anything about this author or the point they're trying to make, beyond what they say about it being related to identity in academia (presumably tenure).

> As divorce and infidelity are becoming more common than ever they are also more painful, shattering one’s life story along with the relationship.

I don't think this is true at all. First of all, in many places, divorce rates are declining (as are marriage rates). Second, while I understand the point about how marriage expectations are different now, at least for roughly half the population (women), divorce is much less painful than in the past -- women are less expected / forced / taught to define themselves as extensions of their husbands and families, have more options, etc., meaning they're less likely to be in the "I don't know who I am without this" trap.

> Not to be outdone by romance, companies also jumped on the identity-producing game. Jobs used to be described in terms of action ... Now they describe a persona ... You no longer merely work at BigCorpInc; you’re a Googler, Postie, Amazonian.

On what timescale is this true? Historically, your whole life was defined by your job. That's where many last names come from -- something way more permanent that being a "Googler". More recently, we had the era of lifetime employment, strong unions, etc. that meant you had a job for life. People were loyal to their companies in a real way. In some ways we still largely have this in the public sector. Instead, I think the "identity-producing game" modern corporations are involved in is about reproducing the parts of that system that were beneficial to the corporation without those that were costly for it -- bad, but different from what the author is saying.

Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding or missing context here.

Edit: I read the previous few posts in this series, and while there are some odd references and lots of things I can't tell if they're true or not, I don't immediately notice anything false. I have only a light background in what the author is talking about (a few college courses a long time ago).

That's not even remotely true. Most things in nature people talk about being fractal aren't, in the mathematical sense, at all. They show statistical variation between areas and only have a few levels of self-similarity. A few minutes of Googling with confirm that.

There are lots of things that appear to be true and aren't, and there is a long way between observing something that appears to be true and proving it mathematically.

Your comment is misleading because it implies we should all have been assuming this based on the evidence you state -- and we certainly should not have.

Not the poster nor am I endorsing this, just explaining it. Everyone who works full time would benefit from a shorter work week. Only people who live to retire benefit from a lower retirement age. So if you're considering the two policies as alternatives, then one is definitely a raw deal for people who die early. Given relatively few people die after starting to work full time but before retirement age, I don't think that's the issue with this proposal.