pdx
20 Patients in Study with COV19
* 65% of them went to ICU (13 patients)
* 35% of them did not (7 patients)
Of the 13 Patients in the ICU 84.6% (11 patients) had VDI
Of the 7 Patients not in ICU 57.4% (4 Patients) had VDI
Thin gruel indeed. But all they are saying is that it's perhaps worth doing a real study. That's fair. > The Oath Keepers are more extreme than nearly all other
> white people. Just a fact. Read up on them and I think
? you will agree.
Are they more extreme than nearly all other non-white people as well? Or just more extreme than white people? ;-)For non-americans, the idea of a group of people who do not instantly submit to individual figures in authority, but instead, resist those in authority if they believe that those in authority are infringing on rights that are protected by the constitution, may seem really bizarre.
To condemn an organization because their raison d'etre is such resistance, would be normal in other countries, but it's a little frightening how a quick google search shows that condemnation here in America (assuming the people who wrote those pages were American).
I know a lot of HN readers are not American, so just wanted to clarify that we do have a slightly less submissive culture over here.
Since all nodes change sections randomly, like air molecules, they should remain randomly distributed, provided the network size is large enough. For a small network though, one can imagine you could get lucky eventually. Like other decentralized networks, security and size are related.
In the case of SAFE, you can generate as many nodes as you want, but they must be valid nodes (doing the work that the network asks of them) for a long time before being promoted to a status that allows them to participate in consensus of a section. Any misbehavior on their part results in demotion or failure to be promoted. So each node would need to be a legitimate contributor to the network, with all that that entails, before being promoted to a status where their later misbehavior would matter. You would be creating real nodes, that used real bandwidth and real CPU resources and did real work that benefits the network, in order to infiltrate your evil nodes into the network. So, not an insubstantial cost to you.
Your nodes will be assigned into sections randomly, so it will be very difficult for you to manage to get multiple nodes with voting status, into a single section, and staggeringly difficult to get enough such that your nodes constitute 1/3rd of that section. Of course, exactly how difficult depends on network size (number of sections).
Finally, even once a node is assigned into a particular section, it will be reassigned to another random section at some interval, further decreasing your ability to take over a particular section.
It is meant as an introduction to other occurrences in peoples lives, where they invest something that they will lose if they abandon the activity. Being on hold is one such example, where you lose the time you've invested in being on hold, if you give up and hang up the call before it's connected. Thus you end up in a situation where you are somewhat trapped.
I remember the one after the election in NYC that was supposedly set up by BLM against Trump, but turned out to be organized by Russians on Facebook
Why shouldn't a corporation, effectively a person, use the vast wealth at it's disposal to influence elections and steer government policy in the direction it wants?
Hmmm, perhaps we should rethink this whole corporations as persons thing.
- Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, or Epsilon - negotiable
That pales compared to the atrocities that have been done in the name of communism. It's frightening that young people have forgotten those lessons, even the oldest of which is less than 100 years ago.
The ideal of sacrificing the individual to benefit the group is where communism always ends up, and from there, it's never a long slide to the disappearings, the executions and the starvation. The American ideal of protecting the individual, even at the expense of the group is much more inline with the world I want to live in. Happily, you still end up with a strong group, since it's composed of motivated individuals that feel safe.
> I never said I was a big-government proponent, I just
> pointed out that your attack against them was fallacious.
You didn't? Hmmm, well, somebody did. Either you edited or I confused you with them. Fine, you're not big gov, that's good. You and I are on the same team.Your strawman refutations are not convincing. I would rather you managed to pull up examples that a government might actually in good faith propose, to attempt to fix a perceived economic shortcoming, but that would still be opposed by our hypothetical (not you apparently) big-gov proponent.
Edit: These already exist. [1] ;-( Oh well. Just need to have facilities start using them throughout the site.
[1] https://www.lifewire.com/best-vpn-enabling-devices-4140254
> There's zero support for the notion that it was "Chinese" flooding
You'll have to take that up with Obama then, since it was his administration that specifically targeted China. It's amusing that I'm being attacked by both people who say the flooding was done not only by China and also people who say it was only by China. I think my main sin was implying on this board that Trump did something that wasn't evil.[1] https://energy.gov/science-innovation/energy-sources/renewab...
If you want to beef up the network security to the PLC, be my guest, but don't disparage ladder logic. It's the right tool for what it's used for.
They're not doing it because they like the big follower counts themselves. They're in on the con.