thatsamonad

A somewhat related approach that I’ve found incredibly useful in my career is repeating what -others- have told you back to them, a lot.

It’s honestly amazing to me how much mileage I’ve gotten out of simply saying, “I heard you say X about Y. Does that sound right to you?” a couple of times during discussions just to make sure that everyone is clear that we’re all discussing the same thing.

It seems like “common sense” to clarify your understanding of someone else’s communication but I haven’t run into very many people who actually take the time to do it.

“The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.” - Albert Camus

It’s “easy” to descend into nihilism and the view that human existence is ultimately devoid of meaning. It’s more challenging (and rewarding, in my opinion) to accept the struggle of life as the point of life itself, to keep moving even when it seems like it’s fruitless.

Basically, I stay alive out of spite against nihilism and the impulse that says to give up.

Living also leaves open the opportunity that things will get better and that some meaning will eventually reveal itself. Nihilism and suicide (physical or philosophical) lead to nothingness and annihilation.

Chicken pox/varicella is another disease to which a lot of children gained natural immunity prior to vaccination being an option (“chicken pox parties” were still a thing when I was a kid in the 90s). We now know that the virus can lay dormant for years after the initial infection and come back later in life as shingles which, while not deadly, can be extremely painful and debilitating.

Southwest also operates a flight network that relies on flights making multiple stops along the way, whereas many other airlines may have more direct flights that aren’t impacted as much by distant flights being delayed.

Here’s an article from the AP that mentions the “point-to-point route network” as a contributing factor in terms of a cascading failure: https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-business-travel-8abd4e0...

It’s definitely interesting to contrast my experience with that of my child. My parents were completely illiterate when it came to computers and electronics in general, so I basically taught myself how to take things apart and fix them when they broke, figured out how to get a modem set up to connect to the internet, etc. In some ways my experience with technology was driven by necessity as much as it was by curiosity.

Now the devices that my child uses can’t be easily taken apart and the solution when they break is to get a new one. They don’t have any reason to learn about the software internals, either, because everything “just works” as soon as they power a device on and the internet is always available.

> Can you point to the place on the doll where it hurt you?

Using a reference to how survivors of abuse are often required to re-enact their abuse to make a snarky comment is neither funny nor clever and it doesn’t add anything substantive to this conversation.

I think generally it’s easier to have these kinds of conversations with strangers because there aren’t any existing “roles” or identities in the mix based on past experience. You have a lot more freedom to explore ideas when you aren’t tied down by certain interpersonal epistemological assumptions.

A couple of things I found interesting from the study:

- The eligible participants in the study tended to be over the age of 65 (Moderna median = 66, Pfizer median = 68)

- The Pfizer cohort (738 eligible participants) was almost twice the size of the Moderna cohort (476 eligible participants)

Would these factors have skewed the results at all? To me it seems like the study strongly indicates a difference for those age 65 and over but not necessarily for younger groups.

There is also still evidence of strong protection from hospitalization and death with both vaccines so I don’t think anyone necessarily needs to be regretting the fact that they got a pair of Pfizer shots at this point.

Source study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e1.htm#T1_down

Running docker and docker-compose commands isn’t difficult. What IS difficult and (time-consuming) is sifting through a bunch of articles about how to set up Docker properly on macOS and/or Windows without relying on Docker Desktop.

Maybe it’s not represented on HN, but a lot of developers just want to get their work done and not get sucked into the complexity of the myriad ways they can set up their development machines, so a “one-click” installer works well for them even with some downsides (that may not even become issues for them).

This is only partially true. The mRNA vaccines don’t generate the full protein:

> mRNA vaccines tell our cells to make a piece of the “spike protein” that is found on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Since only part of the protein is made, it does not harm the vaccine recipient, but it is antigenic and thus stimulates the immune system to make antibodies.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/hcp/mrna.html

Additionally, one of the studies referenced in the linked paper also states that negative thromboembolic events are observed in vector-based vaccines but are absent in mRNA vaccines:

> Here, we present first molecular evidence that vector-based vaccines encoding the Spike protein exhibit a problem that is completely absent in mRNA-based vaccines. This is due to the fact that during the vaccination step, the adenoviral DNA enters the nucleus and use the host machinery to transcribe its (trans)genes inside the nucleus.

Source: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-558954/v1

If it helps you at all, we aren’t the only ones who were blindsided by the severity-level update and lack of further communication. There are several comments on the source ticket calling out the poor communication, and the earlier comments are all asking for clarification about the user registration requirement: https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/CONFSERVER-67940

Both I and another colleague looked at the issue when it first came out and decided we were “safe” for a bit based on the initial communication. Many IT/IS teams were probably scrambling over the long weekend to patch this issue.

Another issue is that they sent out the initial communication on August 25th (which I did receive), but the original wording indicated that it only affected servers that allowed user self-registration. We didn’t have that enabled, so I held off for a bit because the risk seemed lower and our upgrade process is a bit arduous (we have quite a few customizations on the server and need to perform all upgrades on a test instance and validate first) and our instance requires authentication through a load balancer before it’s even accessible.

Then, Atlassian updated the ticket a day later to state the issue affected all servers on the affected versions regardless of user authentication or registration but didn’t send out a follow up communication when they did so. Instead they waited until Friday afternoon before a US holiday weekend to send out another update. So if you weren’t watching the source ticket directly and thought you could wait due to the setting distinction you wouldn’t have known for over a week and you were left vulnerable.

Atlassian should have sent out another communication to all customers as soon as they knew the scope was broader than they had initially thought.

It’s mind-blowing to me that he was alive during both the American Civil War as well as both World Wars. Those events seem so far apart because of the technology differences in how they were fought, but when you place them in the context of a single man’s life it’s astonishing how close in time they actually were.

They updated the details of the CVE to state that it affects servers where that setting is disabled, as well. From the source ticket:

> Our Securities Team has since reviewed the wording on the Confluence Security Advisory CVE-2021-26084 - OGNL injection - 2021-08-25 and have removed the ambiguity generated by: The vulnerable endpoints can be accessed by a non-administrator user or unauthenticated user if ‘Allow people to sign up to create their account’ is enabled. To check whether this is enabled go to. There are additional endpoints identified that still expose Confluence to the CVE-2021-26084 Confluence Server Webwork OGNL injection and applying the workaround script will assist in temporarily mitigating against all known vulnerable endpoints until the application is upgraded to the fixed version. The temporary workaround script must be run even if Confluence Administration > User management > User Signup Options > Allow people to sign up to create their account is not enabled.

https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/CONFSERVER-67940

The irritating thing about this is that Atlassian initially sent out an email on August 25th stating it only affected servers where a certain setting was enabled that allowed users to self-register. They then updated the CVE wording to state it affected all instances on the affected versions even with that setting disabled, but didn’t send out a follow up email to customers until yesterday (September 3rd - right before a US holiday weekend!) at around 4pm PDT. Customers who thought they could delay upgrading for a bit and weren’t monitoring the ticket for the CVE directly likely went on with their business for over a week being vulnerable to the exploit.

Right. My sense is it’s a dismissive and/or low effort response, especially to any sort of substantive message. But I’m also an anxious person so I’m likely reading into it too much.

My typical reply if I want to quickly acknowledge something is, “Got it. Thank you!”

Maybe it’s just me, but one email or IM response that really comes off that way is someone just replying with “Ok” and nothing else.

Are these numbers higher or lower than what we’d expect to see in terms of myocarditis and myopericarditis cases resulting from infection with COVID-19?

I’m genuinely curious as I haven’t been able to find a good comparison on my own but I have read that damage to heart tissue is a potential long-term complication resulting from natural infection.

The headline is incredibly misleading as it makes it sound as though it’s a broad UBI measure for all Californians, when in fact the article itself states it is limited to “cash payments to some pregnant women and young adults who recently left foster care”.

At least in the United States, most children are currently unable to receive a vaccine so they cannot protect themselves.

Would you feel the same way if you were to come across a child drowning in a shallow pond and had an opportunity to save them with the only “cost” to you being the inconvenience of being cold and wet?

> inject with experimental genetic drug

By “genetic drug” I’m assuming you mean either the mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer/Moderna or the viral vector vaccines developed by AstraZeneca/Johnson & Johnson.

The claim that either technology is “experimental” is false. Both have undergone the same rigorous trials and testing as other vaccines before being rolled out to the public: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines-idU...

Your “natural immunity” also doesn’t protect other people around you from contracting the disease and suffering from a very severe illness, whereas there is growing evidence that the vaccines available also cut transmission risk: https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vac...

These statements seem contradictory to me:

> I'd rather have a happy safe driver than a miserable one at the end of his or her rope

> Amazon’s entire value to me is fast delivery

My understanding is that the pace/quantity of deliveries is what makes the drivers miserable so if you want the drivers to be happier and not stressed then relaxing the delivery standards would have the most impact.

Do we really need most of the stuff sold on Amazon delivered in 2 days or less (or even at all)?

One of the huge benefits I’ve seen since switching to remote work is fewer distractions due to “shoulder taps” throughout the day. It seems like this app is meant to recreate an environment where more of those interruptions can occur again. Why is this desirable? What happens if management mandates this “open hangout” type of system and requires that people who need to focus are still available for “drop ins” at all times?

I feel like I’m missing something, here, but this app may not be for me.

> Because of a virus that doesn't kill kids

It does kill/severely impact a lot of adults with whom kids interact, however. My decision to keep my child at home even if schools reopen is based as much on the risk to other members of our family as it is on the risk to her.

And even if it doesn’t kill them, we don’t yet know what long term effects the virus may have on children who contract it.

> has never failed to start, even when left standing for 6 months due to CV19

Aren’t there other reasons beyond just the battery draining to start the car and drive it a bit at least once every few weeks?

I’ve been working from home but still take my car for a short drive every two weeks to avoid things like flat spots on my tires, fuel spoilage, seals and gaskets drying out and becoming brittle, etc.

For most cars if I left them sitting for a month or more I’d expect to jumpstart the battery and don’t think that’s totally unreasonable.

I hear what you're saying and I don't disagree that both "sides" are susceptible to group think and a mob mentality. I consider myself fairly moderate which is why I include examples of extreme views from the left (anti-vaccination theories, GMO conspiracies, 9/11 “truthers”) in my analysis, as well. I’m not a fan of misinformation no matter what the source is and do my best to try to “lead” people away from it.

That being said, what do we do in this situation (which is a common one I see in these kinds of debates)?:

- Group A claims X.

- Person N asks Group A to provide evidence for their claim X.

- Group A cannot provide said evidence, or the evidence provided is unreliable/cannot be validated.

- Person N asks for additional evidence that the claim X made by Group A is true.

- Group A insists they are right and refuses to provide any additional evidence for claim X.

- Person N chooses to not believe Group A’s claim X due to a lack of evidence.

What’s the next step? Assuming good faith on the sides of both parties, how do you reach some sort of agreement or conclusion?

And what do we do when claim X made by Group A is one that leads to violence or other societal harms (such as an increase in death and suffering due to the spread of disease in the case of anti-vaccination theories)?

I don’t have a good answer, here. I desperately want to have rational and productive conversations with people with whom I disagree. But how do you avoid a deadlock situation like the above?

My first job was washing dishes at a cafe for about 30 hours a week for minimum wage (which in my state at the time was around $5 an hour). I also got a portion of the tips made by the front room staff (usually a few bucks a day). So as a teen who wasn’t expected to pay rent or anything it was a pretty decent amount of money!

I also installed the phone line tap in my room myself, so initially I just had to pay for them to come out and turn on the line via the hookup box outside. I think it was like $50 for the initial setup and I saved $100 by running the tap myself.

I think this is something that largely gets ignored in all of these discussions about deplatforming, free speech, etc. There is a baked in assumption that all people are rational and will respond to well-reasoned arguments and evidence and will eventually arrive at a reasonable and evidence-based conclusion if you just bear with them and try harder. But my experience so far has not shown this to be the case.

I’ve tried to have a calm and reasonable discourse with people who believe in things like QAnon, anti-vaccination theories, the “deep state”, GMO conspiracies, among others, and I’m a single voice among however many hundreds or thousands of others they are listening to. No amount of evidence or rational argument will sway these people because they are swimming in a sea of voices reinforcing their views.

I’m not sure if deplatforming is the right solution here but I also don’t know what the alternatives are. Should we let them keep espousing and spreading patently false information that is actually causing harm to society to a large audience and hope that people just ignore it? That doesn’t seem like a good solution, either.

I used my very first paycheck from my very first job as a teen to get my own phone line set up in my room. Mostly so I could use the internet (dial-up at the time) without tying up the phone line, but also so I could avoid my siblings snooping on my calls.

It also worked out because my parents could just call me when it was time for dinner.

I’ll second this. Here’s an anecdote from just this morning:

I sat down at my desktop with my coffee. The first thing I did was fire up Unity and Visual Studio to continue some work on learning about networked multiplayer games. I spent about 2 hours reading API documentation and prototyping different things. I came away feeling like I had learned something and was making progress on a thing I care about.

After that I picked up my phone. I spent an hour scrolling through different news sites and jumping between apps. I came away feeling depressed, anxious, and like I just wasted an hour of my life on meaningless information consumption.

I’m sure some people have the same experience on a desktop/laptop and others can use their phone for creative endeavors, but for me, personally, the differences in experience between the two environments is quite stark.