chithanh

Maybe I am missing something because I am not from the US, but why wasn't it an option to make evictions permanently impossible for precisely the rent that was due during the moratorium? Then people would have had to start paying again once the moratorium ended, and landlords would have to use other forms of debt collection on what was still owed, but without being able to evict anyone.

Also this part struck me as odd:

> The Supreme Court’s ruling creates a particular risk of eviction for families still recovering from the pandemic’s economic fallout.

In my understanding the court didn't say that a moratorium was unconstitutional, they only said that the CDC lacked that authority. So if Congress wanted to have that moratorium, they could have acted, but they didn't.

XMG (a gaming laptop brand) even publicly announced that AMD would not meet their request for validation samples of Ryzen 5800 and 5900 CPUs. CPUs that have been launched and are shipping to other customers already.

https://www.reddit.com/r/XMG_gg/comments/n4i3x2/update_threa...

ICEs use friction brakes.

Electric (and hybrid) vehicles normally use regenerative brakes, and friction brakes only as a backup system.

> AFAIK Intel 10nm approximately equals TSMC 7nm.

I don't think so, TSMC 7nm is ahead in many ways. For example, Intel 10nm power efficiency is much worse.

https://blog.cloudflare.com/the-epyc-journey-continues-to-mi...

Intel 10nm is maybe more comparable with Samsung 8nm.

> glycemic index of 0

That doesn't necessarily help. Saccharin, aspartame and acesulfame-K have all glycemic index of 0, but have been found to alter food preferences in humans.

cf. Roberts et al., Uncoupling sweet taste and calories: Comparison of the effects of glucose and three intense sweeteners on hunger and food intake, Physiology & Behavior 1988 https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9384(88)90207-7

> I'd rather reduce the harm

The fact that artificial sweeteners are used as animal feed additive in order to increase body mass should give you enough to think what happens if we add it randomly to human food.

Yes, artifical sweeteners can be a good replacement for sugar, but things that shouldn't contain sugar in the first place should probably not contain artificial sweeteners either.

No, only "morbid obesity" includes a morbidity in the definition.

Other than that, body fat is an indicator not of personal health, but of personal risk.

Plenty of countries have this problem. WHO recommends a "sugar tax", to decrease market viability of products that are high in added sugar.

https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/260253

Whether artificial sweeteners are the answer is less clear, given lack of evidence that increased use of artificial sweeteners leads to reduced sugar consumption.

People typically mask the sour/bitter taste of not well prepared coffee with milk and sugar to make it more palatable.

Good coffee you can drink black.

What is true is that since we have computer-based theorem provers / proof checkers, "working it out" becomes a matter of getting your challenge past one of those, and the orthodoxy will have a hard time arguing against that.

But OTOH you see many people in other disciplines challenging the orthodoxy (in Physics: string theorists, MOND proponents, etc.) and while their views aren't always taken fully serious, their houses aren't being torched either.

In addition to weakening the logic (or avoiding the parts that introduce incompleteness, especially the existential quantifier) you also need to weaken your arithmetic. We know that Primitive Recursion (PR) is too weak to prove its own consistency, and Peano Arithmetic (PA) is too strong. So you may have to look at a strengthening of PR and/or weakening of PA in order to achieve a theory that proves its own consistency. Whether that theory exists is still an open question.

> Why is bread not considered ulta-processed?

Even traditional bread is certainly highly processed, undergoing mechanical (milling), biochemical (fermentation), and thermal (baking) processing. It doesn't quite meet the definition of ultra-processed though as all these technologies are readily available to unsophisticated producers.

I think ultra-processed is some sort of proxy for hyperpalatable here.

> People let their (understandable) hatred of Intel-the-company colour their technical judgement. Itanium was one of the more interesting architectures of its time, it fairly flew on expert-tuned assembly;

I know only few people who maintained software for Itanium, but from their reports it was a nightmare to debug code on. To have a chance to see what was going on, you would have to use special debug builds that disabled all explicit parallelism. Debugging optimized code was almost impossible, and user-provided crash dumps were similarly useless. Your only hope would be that the issue was reproducible in debug builds or on other architectures.

Needless to say, they hated it and were happy when ia64 was finally phased out.

> once the computing world finally moves on from C.

Yeah, it moves on from C... to JavaScript. Making compilers slow and complex doesn't mix well with JIT compilation.

One thing I have to give Itanium credit for is that due to EPIC it was totally safe from the speculative execution vulnerabilities like Spectre/Meltdown/etc. That was certainly a forward-looking aspect of it.

> We're going to have to agree to disagree there.

Everyone can of course have their own opinions. But they cannot have their own facts, a discussion does not work that way.

Whether one considers some statement as entitled, that is an opinion and we can disagree about this.

But whether a program is open source or not is a fact. It doesn't matter if the source code is going to be released a day or a year after the Signal server has been pushed into production, at that very moment the program is not open source. Your comment about my time-frame is irrelevant. In the github issue 11101 link I posted above is Moxie admitting to running versions of the server that are ahead of the public git repository. These are factually closed source, and you continuing to argue against that fact doesn't reflect well on you, nor the ability to have serious discussions with you.

> It's not reasonable or constructive to expect their software to never have bugs

I think nobody demanded anything of that sort, that is just a strawman. What was actually demanded is that priority of such bugs be raised, and perhaps users be adequately warned about known defects that may compromise the confidentiality of their messages.

That Signal developers didn't have an idea what was going on for 6 months? And then it turned out to be similar to that other stale/invalid database bug where messages were sent to unintended recipients? Back then fixing only the bug at hand but not taking steps to ensure that the type of bug (wrongly matching expired message IDs to existing messages) won't happen again? Doesn't paint them in the best light.

> to throw around labels like "proprietary" just because they don't release something on your schedule

I throw around the label "proprietary" because software which doesn't come with source code is in fact, proprietary. If Signal pushes new server code to production and keep its source to themselves, calling that still "open source" requires serious mental gymnastics.

> Signal, for whatever reason, seems to attract a lot of entitled complaints like the ones I enumerated.

No, besides your strawman the other commenters were all reasonable and constructive.

If you call it a "whim" if I point out that the latest version of the Signal server is proprietary software most of the time then so be it.

Or maybe you are referring to the other commenters who were entitled to expect that the one critical task of a crypto messenger is ensuring the confidentiality of communication, which has been broken by this bug (and at least one similar bug before it, https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/7909 ).

You can both be grateful that Signal is free and at the same time call out shenanigans of its owners. Just saying.

> How can users be assured that this type of issue won't occur again?

Actually, this very type of issue (sending messages to wrong recipients due to stale/invalid database entries) has occured previously.

https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/7909

Signal typically delay releasing the server source code, so the latest version of the server is not open source. In one case it took them almost a year (no public commits between 20 April 2020 and 6 April 2021).

https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/11101#iss...

Among the official reasons given was staying ahead of spammers. In this instance it was also speculated that the payment function which they were building into the server was to remain secret.

https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/11101#iss...

To be more precise, running different cloud customers on different SMT threads of the same core allows them to attack each other.

This is also the case with Spectre-related vulnerabilities such as L1TF.

Work done by Schmieden&Laugwitz in the 1950s helped to formalize and retroactively apply rigor to the earlier uses of infinitesimals. Their Omega Calculus approach was also constructive.

cf. Detlef Laugwitz, Curt Schmieden's Approach to Infinitesimals. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9757-9_12

However this turned out less useful going forward.

Even in a VM you have to carefully ensure that memory deduplication is disabled, and/or some form of mitigation against Rowhammer is in place. Else you will be vulnerable to Flip Feng Shui cross-VM attacks.

https://fahrplan.events.ccc.de/congress/2016/Fahrplan/events...

Most companies who publish AGPL software also offer a paid commercial license, so it is accept AGPL (and contribute in kind) or pay (and contribute in money).

I don't think this is bad forcing companies to choose between these two (or abandon the software), and they are fully responsible to making lives of people who work there easier.

Also standard works on this are:

Robert D. Austin, Measuring and Managing Performance in Organizations (1996). This book coined the term "measurement dysfunction" to describe how reward structures work against company goals.

And Alfie Kohn's 1993 article in Harvard Business Review where he summarizes decades of motivational research (also citing Herzberg), concluding that giving bonuses to staff is usually a bad idea, and it is an especially bad idea for jobs that require cognitive sophistication.

https://hbr.org/1993/09/why-incentive-plans-cannot-work

That changes a lot of things. For one, this side effect was neither known nor documented, so people could not make an informed decision before getting the vaccine.

Then individuals have a quantifiable risk of dying from COVID vs. dying from the vaccine. Depending on age/sex/comorbidities/medication/etc. one of the other may be higher.

Also from a public health perspective, if these CVST cases are known to be mostly limited to a particular group (women under 50) and the vector vaccine, then this group could be vaccinated with other types like mRNA vaccines.

That article is quite uninformed. There was no legal requirement either, it was a purely political decision, based on the advice of the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute (PEI).

The statistical anomality about the thrombosis cases was known before and not considered a reason to halt vaccination. Only when it became clear that these were CSVT combined with lowered platelet count (which is known to be caused by immune reaction), strongly suggesting a causal link, then the decision to halt vaccination was made, until the actual risk could be assessed.

I don't know about Norway, but for Germany there have been preliminary results published, which indicate that the cerebral venous sinus thrombosis cases were indeed caused by immune reaction.

Article (in German): https://www.spektrum.de/news/astrazeneca-impfstoff-immunreak...

> Companies don't have ethics.

In a way, they do. There exists a "company culture", which is the collection of social norms that have formed inside the company. Most members of a group will behave in a way that does not stray too far from these norms.

There is a very good TED Talk by Dan Ariely "Our Buggy Moral Code" which describes how such a culture is facilitating unethical behavior by individuals.

This is not how I read the EMA statement. They don't see any evidence but they didn't exclude the possibility either. Which is why they want the observations documented in the package insert.

>> there are other options

> Not with sufficient supply there isn’t.

Depends. If AZ is not removed entirely from use but instead only from the most affected group (women under 50), then this can be achieved by shuffling around which group gets which vaccine. So the same number of people will be vaccinated, and vaccination deaths are avoided.

> Only if people (and the media especially) hype up a very small danger to be more than it is.

At least here in Germany, it was mainly the healthcare workers who specifically rejected AZ. Police, fire brigade, kindergarten teachers, etc. were eager to get any vaccine. So simply blaming it on the media is maybe short-sighted, there are other dynamics at play here.

But did these women have any comorbidities?