stri8ed

As does global warming, and pandemics. Why assume their is a causal relationship?

Do you have a source for this?

This line of thinking could be extended to banning junk food, motorcycles, cars, etc.. Where do you draw the line?

The question is if/to what extent does the booster prevent transmission of Omicron. We already know its transmissibility is significant greater than prior variants. If the effect on transmissibility is small, this argument would not hold much weight.

There seems to be little relationship between percentage vaccinated and case-counts. Open to being proven wrong on this.

E.g. given total new cases today, California (30k new cases) has a higher number of cases per capita, vs Texas (15.5k), despite CA having 10% higher vaccination rate. Granted there are other variables at play, but its hard to make the case that vaccination has a large impact on transmission, currently.

Would be interesting to know if/to what extent it prevents transmission. Assuming the booster reduced severity, but not transmission, it would make little sense to require it, since there is little/no negative externalities by someone not getting it.

There are some oral vaccines in development - https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...

Given the relative weakness of the (current) vaccines vs Omnicron, do these mandates make any sense, or is it largely security theatre at this point?

How does interactions with local resources e.g. uploading a file work with Mighty, or VNC?

This is effectively the same as enforcing a minimum wage. An argument for it would be, its collective bargaining at a national level, while avoiding the coordination problems associated with unionizing.

Ironic, isitdownrightnow.com is down.

All my DigitalOcean instances are down.

Wishful thinking is a powerful drug. The same technique is used on dating apps, where a beautiful "girl", explicitly seeking sex, sends you a link to some paid service, to "verify" your account or some nonsense.

I think they could have done a lot better by having Elon tweet out a new product preorder page (limited edition Tesla merch?), which accepts payments in crypto. Really anything other than give me X so I can give you 2X, which has been done to death already. 100k is chump change, historically for this class of scam.

Another idea is, hijack customer service request DM's from crypto exchanges, and lead customer to phishing login page. Perhaps could athorize API access to the account, and then change email back to original, without the owner realizing account breach.

The most info I have seen thusfar https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/jgxd3d/twitter-insider-ac...

Given the ability to completely access arbitrary Twitter accounts using an internal tool, begs the question, how else has this been exploited?

I would like to see more discussion around, if the initial viral load is related to the severity of the infection[1].

If yes, then in theory, a mask could provide large benefits, even in absence of a perfect seal around the face.

[1] https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/3ArEA7tHDXQxE6PED/taking-ini...

I prefer to have my cake and eat it too. Is that too much to ask?

The most charitable explanation would be, that this phrase is considered derogatory and offensive towards some, akin to say the N-word, and they have banned it on those grounds. Seems unlikely though.

This is the first time I am seriously considering leaving Gmail. Seems like a royal pain in the ass to switch though, since you don't "own" your email handle like you would a domain.

As with all such matters, its about the slippery slope, and setting precedents. The belief is, we can have our cake and eat it too. e.g. we will allow free speech, except for the egregious cases like X, Y, Z. The problem of course is, who defines egregious, and can it be objectively defined?

This attack does not depend on the GIF. It could just as well have been a JPEG.

Doesn't augmenting imply replacing at least a big percentage of workers?

What incentive does bank have to actually do due diligence, when the loans are all guaranteed by government?

> But given a choice between being alive and being jobless

To be fair that is not the actual choice on offer. Its more like being jobless, vs accepting a certain (in some cases low) probability of dying.

Unfortunate, since the actual document seems quite reasonable.

Just to confirm, ipfs.io is a centralized gateway, and none of these browsers actually embeds an IPFS client. Correct?

Please explain.

> Zoom which defaulted to a machine-guessable URL

Was there any rational for them doing this?

> Kentucky is giving it to patients, too.

Source?

> Italy saw its numbers of deaths stabilize once they started giving it.

It appears the total number of cases also decreased. Which would suggest effect is likely due to social distancing.

> Marseille (where Raoult's hospital is) has the lowest fatality rate in all of France

Source?

Not to diminish the possible successes, but without a randomized control trial, there is no way the success can reliably be attributed to the medications.

That's not to say they should stop prescribing it, simply due to lack of formal trials. But the perceived benefits should not be taken at face value, yet.

In theory, so long as one does not make contact with their nose or eyes, except in a shower (after washing hands), all infections can be prevented, besides airborne-based intake? Has it been established that infection cannot be caught by consumption of contaminated food?