estro

A flu with 20x reported mortality rate caused by a virus with a significantly higher infectivity than influenza virus is something you should be worried about.

Note: data is from current cases, may vary as more data is accumulated.

The premise of your brain evolution argument is flawed because you’re assuming nature absolutely wins over nurture in psychological development, which is what I assume you mean by “brain” here. I doubt there’s a particular physical brain configuration that gives rise to pro-life thoughts, although neither of us have proof.

I didn't say it was, I was asking GP to define what he meant by "easily".

Depends on which strain. Ebola Zaire is reported to kill with up to a 90% efficiency, while others more around 50%.

What do you mean by “easily”? Do you mean it’s not airborne?

No(t yet): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Holmes#Criminal_char...

Quite a few bars, and restaurants in the Mission, are cash-only.

Could this assessment be extended to "companies can be guessed to be large by calling customer support"? I can think of few examples of large companies, monopolies or not, having good phone customer support; many large companies outsource their call centers, which could contribute. This method of assessing "monopolies" will give many false positives if the answer to my question is yes.

Do you have a link for this discussion? This is interesting.

I second the recommendation to get an Asus Zenbook, with the same cons. The case is solid and durable; specs range from reasonable to outstanding (especially at its price point). I would also look at the IBM Thinkpad, as I've had friends and coworkers praise its Linux interoperability.

Can you provide something to support your claim? Why would a private corporation not be subject to Constitutional law?

Sure, this argument may be valid here. At what point do we explicitly allow a website's ToS to supersede the Constitution though? Denial of rights is a single-edged sword easily flipped.

The author is describing a general trend of domicile in American life, which is statistically[0] accurate. Most people who are in a stage of life where they can afford a detached home or mindset to buy one also have or are starting a family. I'm sure there's data to back up my claim somewhere.

[0]: http://www.nmhc.org/Content.aspx?id=4708, see the table "State Distribution of Apartment Residents, 2015", which shows that most US residents live in non-apartment homes.

You must not be very good at your job if you can't explain it to people you've known your entire life analogically/in layman's terms. Furthermore, you definitely should not need a cookie-cutter metaphor from some article.

This. It's easy to assume the tech employment environment will improve by holding all other variables constant, ex. the total number of jobs, but in reality the up-front cost offset by hiring cheap labor will continue to be offset via other means, ex. SaaS instead of employees.

There is no practical way of finding a collision for a specific key. Finding collisions to one of the created keys non-specifically is a much smaller search space.

This is awesome! I had no idea services like this existed. Thank you for sharing.

Yeah that's a fair point

How so? I'm genuinely curious.

I'm not sure why people continue to ask this question when the threat of massive global food web and ecosystem disruption caused by human-driven environmental damage is arguably far more imminent than job displacement. I say arguably because there are arguments that state the contrary, but they aren't realistic. Drastic job displacement due to automation will take at least 10 more years, while we're already seeing unprecedented droughts, groundwater depletion, pollinator extinction, and massive biodiversity eradication in the oceans. Scientists are literally saying that we are past the point of no return [0]. So why would people think that a massive unemployment wave will strike before an ecological catastrophe does? I'll tell you why: because rich people don't even know what they're doing. If they did, they'd know it would be in their best interests (granted, long-term best interests) to use their massive capital advantage to improve the longevity of the human race, i.e. their customers. And, as time has shown, the only way to wrangle in stupid rich people is by a revolution, and probably a violent one unfortunately. So ironically, as I say that there are more pressing issues at hand, my solution is to have a revolution. Disclaimer: I don't want this to happen any more than the next person, but it will regardless.

[0] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/donald-trump-clima...

What's to stop someone from sending sensitive data as an attachment via email using an encrypted email service? I don't think a proxy can detect much besides data size correct? I suppose a virtual desktop could log which files are uploaded.

I believe your branding hypothesis is correct, and all of this hype around neural nets and machine learning is creating a startup ecosystem ripe for market correction. I've heard a million times that most machine learning problems are solvable by regression, and I expect to hear that a million times more.

It seems like these VC cycles are akin to a natural selection process for startups. Those with legitimate market fit and pricing schemes will have the highest fitness and thus survive; new startups will (hopefully although historically not so much) attempt to copy a similarly sustainable architecture. So in essence these cycles are beneficial to startup market health