worker767424

Ah. chocolates != chocolate

Usually nougat uses egg whites so it doesn't need gelatin as a protein. Marshmallows are arguably nougat, though, since they're also sugar bound with protein. Marshmallow cream usually uses egg.

All of the major nougat US candy bars I can find use egg and not gelatin.

I've seen chocolates with marshmallow in them.

The theme in the US is things that are chewy and things that are stored cold and need to retain a texture.

The common places you might not expect it are sour cream, yogurt, fondant, and some Planters dry-roasted nuts.

> chocolate

Definitely not in anything like a bar of chocolate.

> ice cream

Oddly, this seems to vary a lot by country. It's rare in the US, though. Guar gum is common, though.

Not like Fraktur.

https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/fraktur/

> solved class participation in grade school

Wish I'd learned that lesson. Instead I got this idea that people will like me because I'm smart, so show everyone how smart you are, which is so not true.

> we do not know for sure how long haulers will fare.

Annoyingly, most of what we know about long haulers is anecdotal, and long-term effects of covid are in many ways more significant than deaths.

> the US has reported 27,101,847 cases of COVID19 and 460,398 deaths, giving a CFR of about 1.70%, so that's about right.

That's if we catch every case with testing. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but I've heard estimates of 25%-50%. The death toll also lags total cases 2-4 weeks.

> @Downvoters: just state why please.

This doesn't really relate to myths of vaccine manufacturing.

I suspect Biden talking up the defense production act was mostly for show. Reading this post, there aren't any easy bottlenecks, and everyone knew this was coming, so they did what they could to ramp up production.

There's a joke about Emacs being a great OS that has everything except for a decent text editor.

Still seems cheap.

I'm not even sure what the point was when the amount is so low.

How does the Department of Labor even make this claim when the numbers are likely within the error bars?

Not that Google would care to fight this. For Google, $1.3M is like getting back a Canadian quarter in change.

> FWIW

It's worth basically nothing. We already know it's 95% effective; someone has to be the 5%, and there's a publication bias towards reporting on those.

As much as people like to talk up the AT&T breakup, it wasn't all that effective because it just created regional monopolies with the silly local/long distance split.

Splitting up network companies and retailers might have been more interesting, but there's still the issue of having a monopoly on the last mile of copper.

Long-term, I agree, vaccines are generally (depends on the vaccine) more effective, but when we're dealing with a vaccine shortage, deprioritizing people who already have antibodies isn't necessarily crazy. I had doubts about prioritizing hospital staff who work with covid patients because they might have already been exposed (I haven't seen any data either way on this), but they also arguably "earned" it by being on the front line, so I'm not complaining too much, either.

> if a business that connects people to people—such as a social network, an instant messenger, etc.—grows larger than X users, it could be required to allow fully-featured third-party clients to exist

I might get some of the details wrong, but AT&T was forced to let smaller ISPs or telcos into their exchanges so they could set up equipment and act as an independent ISP on AT&T's copper. This wasn't huge win for small ISPs; AT&T still got most of the DSL orders, and it had a rough time competing with cable.

> If we (as a society) guaranteed everybody enough resources to live

That would do really weird economic things because either money would have to be something you really want since your basic needs are already covered, or the job would have to be very rewarding because you can basically choose not to go into work arbitrarily.

Your feed is pretty much posts from friends, groups, things you follow, and ads. If your friends aren't sharing old rotten.com posts and posting dick pics, it's probably pretty good.

I assume hedge funds know when a short squeeze looks viable, so they know how to do it and turn a profit. If they didn't do this, that means they didn't think it could turn a net profit, so there's a decently chance people late to the party will lose a lot.

So I can like buy an options contract on arbitrary Hungarian deaths?

Depends if they can have profit margins a lot higher than other auto companies. They probably can't, but higher profit margins are one way to justify a valuation.

Really, it's priced higher because people like the brand, even if it's run by someone easily distracted who used shareholder money to bail out his cousin's solar business who goes around making 420 tweets, and that's when he's not calling people pedophiles. Oh, and their hubris kills people.

> didn’t have the capital to clear trades of super volatile stocks

As long as people executing buy orders have enough cash or margin in their account to cover the purchase, how is this a problem?

It's not about reasonableness as much as it's about officials enacting the policy unilaterally. Twitter disabling Trump's account might be reasonable, but it was a pretty unilateral decision.

Throwing this out there, too: assorted government restrictions and lockdowns imposed by regional public health officials. The early ones were more justified because we knew less, but as the pandemic drug on, the burden of proof justifying closures needed to increase, and legislators needed to step up and legitimize the policies. It's like how the president can wage war for 90 days, but then has to get approval from congress.

> Fauci was never dishonest

TheStreet asked him "why weren't we told to wear masks in the beginning?"

> Well, the reason for that is that we were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply. And we wanted to make sure that the people namely, the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected.

https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-dire...

He didn't say "because we didn't know any better," he said (paraphrased) so the general public doesn't go out and buy them, causing a shortage. I find that dishonest.

I dunno, politicians seem pretty good at lying to people.

In seriousness, I believe him when he said he's not a politician. What he doesn't get is that that's half his job.

> on what he thinks the country is ready to hear

He does have a track record of being dishonest about things. Part of the reason he drug his feet on masks was he was worried about shortages. It makes sense, but I really don't like the "I know what's best for you" paternalism.

Or maybe it was the content of his posts flagging the right ML features. At the scale of any large entity, you're going to get things that fall through the cracks because of human error or machine error. Unless the mistakes are happening all the time, how they're handled is more interesting than that they happened.

Makes you wonder if half of what tech is doing that's turning incumbent industries upside down isn't software, but connecting people building things with business decisions.