antibuddy

Tell me what system without the capitalist IP system actually innovated faster/better. I only find a lot of failed attempts.

Maybe monetary incentives are important for innovation. And I don't think it's perfect at all, but abolishing it also seems a bit rich.

> Nowadays almost all new programming languages are open-source, and *nix OS softwares have won the cultural battle over Windows in the devops community.

What does that proof? You can't pretend that this would work universally.

> For something to be accepted now it needs to be like something written by a professional writer [...]

Actually it is mostly selected by person rather than content or style. Mostly evidenced by the fact that accepted edits are mostly done by the same people. This is at least true for the German Wikipedia, but I have no doubt that the English one isn't any different.

On the other hand the incentive for people to innovate and make it accessible to anyone is often money. The criticism of capitalism is warranted, however the supposedly bad capitalist IP system is also the reason for innovation and cooperation.

> Desktops and latops are work environments, not fashion accessories like iphones. Professionals don't like to change their gear if they don't need to.

I think even smartphones are no fashion accessory anymore including the iPhone.

The vaccines are not sterile, so they do not stop the spread either.

There are no long-term studies for mRNA vaccines.

> I fell that makes an incredibly convincing case for vaccination, but I have not been able to convince any anti-vaxer with it, so there's that.

People who don't want to be vaccinated with the new vaccines are not necessarily anti-vaxers tho. You didn't spell it out, but you speak about COVID in the previous sentence. Vaccination is also not meant to be some cult rite where you need to believe in it. It needs to be tested and that did not yet happen properly, so it is actually more sane to wait. This becomes even more important because even the basic mechanism is not studied for vaccinations long-term at all.

In Germany they push for vaccinating kids which is especially cynical given they have a COVID death rate which is lower than the death rate of some established vaccines. And COVID vaccines have way higher death rates even by official numbers (which are the lower bound).

Just to make it more obvious: In Germany in total 21 people died with/because COVID in the age of 0-19 (~15M pop in that age). Do you not see the insanity of this?

It's rather hard to resell these cards, so this is clearly better for nVidia. (not so good for everyone else)

I would shift the blame back to Reddit here, because they exposed data to mods that are completely unrelated to the subreddit. Another problem is the non-existing appeal process.

> Study: Drivers who experience shift work sleep disorder are 3x more likely to be involved in a vehicle crash

This would mean (potentially) 200% higher risk, not 300%.

PS.: Further down a 300% additional risk is stated, but it's confusing at best.

> The way to parse WSL is that it's a <Windows (NT) Subsystem> for Linux.

For me that still parses wrong on first try. I mean I can make sense of it, because I already know how it is meant, however for me the most obvious assumption is, that it is for the given host and that host is Windows, not Linux. So Linux (compatibility) subsystem for Windows would make more sense to me.

At least in Germany[0] and Sweden I found nothing like that.

[0]: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoel...

edit: I found no English version unfortunately, but at least the Excel file which is easier to work with.

I noticed (late summer last year) that especially age group 25-44 is/was affected in the US with a +25% (excess) mortality YoY. It is not entirely unusual that diseases affect different countries differently; However I found it peculiar.

My memory is a bit hazy, but I remember dd not working for Windows images. Did you test that recently?

In Kerala the all-cause mortality decreased from 2019-2020[0] - something you could observe in Germany as well. Kerala is said to be more advanced than other states in India, however it lends some credence to the official numbers.

[0]: https://health.kerala.gov.in/pdf/Technical-paper-All-Cause-M...

> Makeshift funeral pyres in the middle of a city street don't happen in a country where something hasn't gone terribly wrong

The same was said in Germany/Saxony (crematoria capacity reached), however they plain omitted the fact that usually these were outsourced to Czech Republic, but borders were closed. Cherry-picking parts of the story but omitting others is so common that I am hesitant to take it as is.

It would be certainly better to have overall mortality, so it would be easier to reason about the veracity of COVID mortality, however I am not convinced by obvious emotional manipulation.

> Delhi's official death rate of the last 7 days was 9 per 100k, and University of Michigan are estimating real rates at 2-5 times higher than that for India as a whole.

9/100k/w is not very high for cities given they are drastically more affected by pandemics in general. 2-5 times is quite a big margin, but I would be interested in how they came to these numbers.

In India currently die ~2 people per 100k per week on Corona. In Germany it was over triple that in December. The total Corona mortality in India is also way way lower as in Germany (16.842/100k vs 100.35/100k).

I am not sure that the moral panic is even justified.

Everything so far ago is at least hard to prove/falsify, however this is true either way. I think every possible scenario (prehistorics being of more, less or equal potential) is at least plausible. At least it's easy to come up with arguments for each of these cases (and a hidden one being of different brain specialization).

Autism is by (original) definition a disorder. If everyone has that disorder, then it is no longer a disorder.

I think many people confuse specializaiton, focus and/or intellect with autism.

I'd infer from the CVE naming (CVE-2021-21551) that it was discovered this year.

Yeah, you're right. Better examples are:

Zika: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04064905

Influenza: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31079849/

Rabies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28754494/

This is not new at all. They tried to use mRNA vaccines for other diseases as well, but were never approved. This still holds true to this date.

edit: An example would be Dengvaxia.

> In many Asian countries it's absolutely normal to wear a mask when sick, to prevent further spread possibly to the weaker among society.

"When sick" is an important distinction from the current regime.

> A hygiene regime isn't some binary thing where one failure of perfect compliance ruins the whole effort.

It's exactly like that. You get either infected or you don't. It's binary, however you maybe mean that there is a probability attached that is bound by the circumstances.

> Particularly with examples like "touching face more often", why would you even do that? You put on the mask and you leave it on, the constant touching, particularly with dirty hands, is really down to a lot of people being lazy/careless or trying to wear the mask as little as possible.

How is it better to wear masks for these "lazy/careless" people (which are apparently a lot)?

That might indeed be a factor; however the processes to get rid of the alcohol (it's toxic after all) might be to blame as well.

> This is only anecdotal, but as somebody working in healthcare, mostly with autoimmune compromised patients in ambulate care, there's most certainly been a very noticeable effect among those patients, and even myself.

And that is certainly due to masks? I ask because there are generally speaking more measures in place, especially in hospitals/nursing homes like fewer visitors (if any) for example.

> We've had to administer way less antibiotics therapies, the hospital stations we work together with are super happy about how well their patients are doing now, particularly the children.

And again, is that due to or despite using masks?

But since I am questioning the rationale, it would be nice if there would be a good explanation why it is better for symptomless people to touch their face more often, wear masks beyond their intended duration and reuse them (because it is impractical otherwise especially with mandatory medical/FFP2 masks)

Your hyperbole will not fly well here. Generally speaking the rationale behind masks is heavily flawed and there is yet to be a study to prove that masks help in a pandemic.

They sure work for limited amounts of time in specific use-cases, especially with training and when you can wash your hands before putting them on.

Day-to-day for longer durations at a time they seem detrimental actually, due to the fact that you have to touch your face more often (especially with glasses), wear them for too long and reuse them often.

I mean I kind of understand what he is saying (altho in an inappropriate way). It is likely for your own good to minimize screentime. However most people are still using their phone when bored. So you're either annoying people "glued to their screen" or you are the only one without doing it which yields you not much.

It's a bit boring, but I think both points are valid. If you are not looking up you probably miss the opportunity, but opportunities are still very slim.

I am not sure if this is still the case, but be aware that a specific CRF on x264 vs x265 might mean a different (perceived) quality. It was certainly the case a few years ago.

The connotation of black and white is not just a western one. It often derives from light vs absence of light (white vs black), where absence of light is often taken as something disadvantageous. It is also rather rarely used as good vs bad and more often denotes some vague characteristics (black/white plague for example).

I find it especially hard to think of good/bad or even race when using the term blacklist or whitelist tho.

There is some good reason to change black-/whitelists naming, but supposed racism is not one of them, because it is only due to some people feeling offended by a technical term. If you change words because some might feel offended, it will never stop. In the end you still have words to denote some characteristic and it will be taken as offensive if it is used at all (or by people of the "wrong" characteristic).

It would be equivalent if they would sell antibiotics-fed animals on the wet market. Otherwise it's really not equivalent at all.

I am not disagreeing that both practices are bad, but that is just not the point.