272 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2020
    1. He added that while it would not be possible to check every test to see whether there was active virus, the likelihood of false positive results could be reduced if scientists could work out where the cut-off point should be.

      Take Away: This is an incorrect usage of the term "false positive." A positive PCR test result from a recovered infection is a valid and true positive.

      Claim: PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 give false positive results when there is no active virus.

      Evidence: The diagnostic PCR tests currently in widespread use are designed to detect the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in a clinical sample. The RNA is only a part of the complete virus and is not infectious on its own. Research has shown that viral RNA can be detected in some samples up to 12 weeks after onset of symptoms (1). In other words, this is like testing if an oven is warmer than the room temperature - it could be hot even after it has been turned off.

      By definition, in the context of SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests, a "false positive" means that a test result is deemed positive when in reality there was no viral RNA in the sample. If a person is recovering from an infection, gets tested, and then is given a positive test result, that is a true positive regardless of whether they are infectious or not.

      Sources: 1) https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html

    1. I really have no idea how you came up with this solution but that reflects a major problem with many npm packages, i.e. 90 percent of the library documentation should be pulled from the Git issues or SO answers.
    1. If you were infected with the novel coronavirus, a new study suggests that your immunity to the virus could decline within months.

      Take away: Waning antibodies don’t necessarily mean that immunity will also decrease, because other components of the immune system retain “memory” for an infection and can combat invaders even after antibody counts have gone down.

      The claim: “If you were infected with the novel coronavirus, a new study suggests that your immunity to the virus could decline within months.”

      The evidence: This study [1], along with others [2], does indeed show evidence for declining neutralizing antibodies within a few months after infection; however, antibody counts alone are not enough to predict whether a patient will have durable immunity to a virus. Neutralizing antibodies are generated by B cells, a type of immune cell that patrols the body looking for their molecular targets. Some B cells carry “memory,” a quality that allows them to respond quickly when they see a virus or pathogen that they have encountered before, which allows them to pump out large quantities of antibody rapidly to fight the infection [3]. It’s actually normal in many viral infections for antibody levels within the blood to wane over time; the real concern is whether there are enough memory B cells to generate new antibodies at a moment’s notice.

      In addition to B cells, a second type of immune cell known as a “T cell” is critical for predicting durable immunity. Like B cells, some T cells carry “memory” and can patrol the body for years looking for their targets. Some T cells play a role in helping B cells produce antibodies quickly, and other T cells can actually target the infection directly [4]. Studies have now shown that T cell responses can persist after SARS-CoV-2 infection, and some patients even have T cells that can react to SARS-CoV-2 due to “cross-reactivity,” likely from preexisting immunity from common cold viruses that share some characteristics of SARS-CoV-2. While this cross-reactivity does not guarantee immunity, the presence of robust B and T cell responses is important, and could be more predictive than presence of antibodies alone.

      This article, written by a two well-known immunologists and COVID-19 experts at Yale University, provides a nice summary of the data that puts these claims in context [6].

    1. COVID-19 Can Wreck Your Heart, Even if You Haven’t Had Any Symptoms

      Take Away: SARS-CoV-2 infection has been clearly linked to heart muscle injury in those with severe COVID-19 illness. However, at present, there is insufficient data to determine the impact of mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 on the hearts of previously healthy individuals.

      The Claim: COVID-19 can wreck your heart, even if you haven’t had any symptoms.

      The Evidence: Several articles, including this August 31st piece (1), have raised the alarm about dangerous effects of mild or even asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 on the heart of infected individuals.

      In support of this argument, there have been numerous reports, some of which are cited in the article above, documenting severe heart inflammation (myocarditis) and injury (e.g. cardiomyopathy and/or heart failure) in patients with COVID-19. However, most of these documented cases were in individuals with severe cases of COVID-19. At present, the evidence for clinically significant heart injury (requiring treatment or special precautions) from mild or asymptomatic COVID-19, is much less clear, especially in those with no prior evidence of heart disease.

      One recent study reported that 78% of patients from an unselected cohort (including patients with asymptomatic, mild, and severe cases) had evidence of myocarditis (via MRI or blood testing) following COVID-19 infection (2). This study clearly demonstrated the link between COVID-19 and myocarditis by examining tissue from biopsies of the heart (the gold standard definitive diagnosis of myocarditis) of patients with the most severe cases. The study went on to show that, on average, patients who were treated for COVID-19 at the hospital (presumably more severe cases) and patients who were treated at home (presumably asymptomatic to moderate cases) both had blood test levels or MRI findings suggesting elevated myocarditis compared to non-COVID-19 infected patients with similar health profiles.

      A key limitation here is “average”. The study was not designed or powered to look for the rate of myocarditis in only previously healthy patients with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19. This study included asymptomatic patients in the analysis, but without knowing their prior health or comparing their findings to other healthy non-COVID patients, it is not possible to infer the risk of myocarditis to this population. To their credit, the authors of the study discuss this limitation in their conclusions.

      Despite this, the study was widely covered as evidence that ”COVID-19 can wreck your heart, even if you haven’t had any symptoms.“ In order to answer that question, we need research looking selectively healthy patients with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 as outlined above.

      Until that research is conducted, we might look at COVID within the same context as a number of other well studied viruses, many of which generally cause mild illness, that have also been shown to lead to heart injury and inflammation (3).

      Disclaimer: This content is not intended as a substitute for professional medical advice. Always seek the advice of a qualified health provider with any questions regarding a medical condition.

      Sources:

      1. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-19-can-wreck-your-heart-even-if-you-havent-had-any-symptoms/
      2. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916
      3. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.766022
    1. Take away: People are infectious for only part of the time they test positive. The tests for COVID-19 were granted emergency status by the FDA so some debate concerning the most ideal number of cycles is to be expected. It is worth noting that the FDA has the disclaimer "Negative results do not preclude 2019-nCoV infection and should not be used as the sole basis for treatment or other patient management decisions. Negative results must be combined with clinical observations, patient history, and epidemiological information (2)."

      The claim: Up to 90 percent of people diagnosed with coronavirus may not be carrying enough of it to infect anyone else

      The evidence: Per Walsh et al. (1), SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) is most likely infectious if the number of PCR cycles is <24 and the symptom onset to test is <8 days. RT-PCR detects the RNA, not the infectious virus. Therefore, setting the cycle threshold at 37-40 cycles will most likely result in detecting some samples with virus which is not infectious. As the PCR tests were granted emergency use by the FDA (samples include 2-9), it is not surprising that some debate exists currently about where the cycle threshold should be. Thresholds need to be set and validated for dozens of PCR tests currently in use. If identifying only infectious individuals is the goal, a lower cycle number may be justified. If detection of as many cases as possible to get closer to the most accurate death rate is the goal, setting the cycle threshold at 37-40 makes sense. A lower threshold will result in fewer COVID-19 positive samples being identified. It is worth noting that the emergency use approval granted by the FDA includes the disclaimer that a negative test does not guarantee that a person is not infected with COVID-19. RNA degrades easily. If samples are not kept cold or properly processed, the virus can degrade and result in a false negative result.

      Source: 1 https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa638/5842165

      2 https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

      3 https://www.fda.gov/media/138150/download

      4 https://www.fda.gov/media/137120/download

      5 https://www.fda.gov/media/136231/download

      6 https://www.fda.gov/media/136472/download

      7 https://www.fda.gov/media/139279/download

      8 https://www.fda.gov/media/136314/download

      9 https://www.fda.gov/media/140776/download

    1. Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

      Take Away: Diagnostic tests are most useful when they are both sensitive and rapid. The sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests is not the issue, but rather the time it takes to get a result. Additionally, the "90%" statistic is likely misleading due to the data source and not generalisable to all testing results.

      The Claim: The usual PCR diagnostic tests may be too sensitive and too slow, with up to 90% of positive cases due to trace amounts of virus.

      The Evidence: Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)-based tests, which are currently in the most widespread use for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, involves a molecular process that amplifies target DNA sequences in repeated temperature-dependent cycles. The amount of target DNA is measured after each cycle and the number of the cycle when the target can be reliably detected is often referred to as the cycle threshold (Ct). The Ct value is proportional to the amount of starting DNA in the sample and can be used to estimate the viral load of a patient. In some ways this is like a teacher making photocopies of a chapter from a textbook until they have enough for all their students.

      However, Ct values are relative measurements and need to be directly compared to controls for every sample - a Ct value taken alone can be meaningless. For instance, consider an infected patient who is tested twice: the first time they are gently swabbed and the sample is relatively dilute, the second time they are vigorously swabbed and the sample is relatively concentrated. The resulting Ct values could be drastically different. Therefore, Ct values need to be considered carefully in the proper context for making medical or policy decisions. The FDA also recommends that a PCR result alone should not be used to determine infection status.

      Positive results are indicative of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA; clinical correlation with patient history and other diagnostic information is necessary to determine patient infection status. (1)

      Current PCR test results are generally given as a binary positive/negative based on a cutoff value for Ct. The cutoff needs to be determined based on the performance of each individually developed SARS-CoV-2 test, of which there are currently over 160 that have been granted emergency use authorization by the FDA (2). Based on unpublished data from the CDC, setting a stringent Ct cutoff of 30 could return negative results in patients who are both infected and potentially infectious (3 Fig 5). Furthermore, a 30 cycle cutoff would return invalid results for samples which are too diluted. Based on the same CDC data, up to 30% of potentially infectious patients would get invalid results and need to be re-swabbed, thereby extending the time between getting infected and getting a positive result.

      The period of time when RNA from SARS-CoV-2 can be detected (and a positive PCR test result returned) may extend up to 12 weeks after recovery, with Ct values trending higher over time (3,4). According to The New York Times article, they looked at Ct values from people who tested positive in Massachusetts in July and found 85-90% of results had Ct values greater than 30. The epidemiology of COVID-19 is highly time and region dependent. Massachusetts had a peak in COVID-19 hospitalizations on April 21 (5), which is 9-12 weeks prior to the testing data analyzed by The NY Times. Therefore, the detection of a large proportion of people with lingering viral RNA is not surprising. These results are likely not universal and can not be applied to other regions, especially where community spread is still significant.

      Sources:

      (1) https://www.fda.gov/media/135900/download

      (2) https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/vitro-diagnostics-euas

      (3) https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html

      (4) Li N, Wang X, Lv T. Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RNA Shedding: Not a Rare Phenomenon. J Med Virol 2020 Apr 29. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25952.

      (5) https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/05/22/massachusetts-finally-seeing-downward-coronavirus-trends/

    1. Detection of viruses using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is helpful so long as its accuracy can be understood: it offers the capacity to detect RNA in minute quantities, but whether that RNA represents infectious virus is another matter. RT-PCR uses enzymes called reverse transcriptase to change a specific piece of genetic material called RNA into a matching piece of genetic DNA. The test then amplifies this DNA exponentially; millions of copies of DNA can be made from a single viral RNA strand.

      Take away: The claim that virus can be detected for a long time but is not infectious needs further clarification. This claim was based on a Lancet article (1). Within the Lancet article, some of the studies cited detected RNA in stool/blood/seminal fluid samples instead of nasal swabs. Other studies cited did not test infectious nature of virus detected by PCR. It is several logic steps to travel from detecting virus in stool/blood/seminal fluid in Lancet article to concluding that PCR of nasal swabs for COVID-19 results in large numbers of false positives.

      The claim: RNA from coronavirus is present and can be detected for a long time but may not be infectious.

      The evidence: The Spectator article links to the article "SARS-CoV-2 shedding and infectivity" in the Lancet (1). This article cites seven articles to support the statement that RNA persists long after virus is not infectious. Of these articles, only one reports that virus was detected at ~30 days but could not be cultured beyond three weeks (2). This article also states that detection was easier in stool samples than nasal samples after the first five days. Several articles cited by source 1 did not report infectivity of virus detected (3, 4, 5, and 7). Of the two remaining articles, virus was detected in serum/blood (6 and 8). In the serum study, 58% of tested specimens were infectious (6).

      Source:

      1 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30868-0/fulltext

      2 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(03)13412-5/fulltext

      3 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15030700/

      4 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27682053/

      5 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29648602/

      6 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(16)30243-1/fulltext

      7 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28195756/

      8 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22872860/

    1. Take away: Though many articles are referenced, additional context is needed because the conclusions of the publications do not always agree with the conclusion of the author of this article. Additionally, publications which conflict with the claims in this article are not presented.

      The claim: Masks are neither effective nor safe.

      The evidence: The data in the articles referenced here is inconclusive regarding whether masks are or are not effective. Though several studies referenced here did not see a statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and controls, several facts need to be considered. The sample size of people who became sick in the individual studies was small (often <10 people). Compliance in the mask group was not enforced. A number of the articles referenced are pre-prints lacking peer-review and validation. Some of the articles compare N95 masks to surgical masks but do not have a control no mask group. Additionally, the claim of the author of this article sometimes differs from the conclusions written by the authors of the publications cited. Publications which contradict the conclusions of the author are not presented (1, 2).

      Sources:

      1 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32497510/

      2 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27632416/

    1. This giant machine can be your best friend as long as you’re good for the business. But if you accidentally happen to get in its way, it’ll simply screw you over and won’t even notice. If tomorrow a corporate lawyer decides they need to cover their corporate ass more tightly — be it international sanctions, dodging any potential lawsuits from vocal minorities, or anything else — they won’t think twice: they’ll readily dispose of anyone and betray any “ideals” you might have thought they stand for.
  2. Aug 2020
    1. Although public health officials have warned that the presence of antibodies does not guarantee immunity from the disease, the common perception that this is the case makes the issue of bogus tests nothing short of a matter of life and death.

      Take away: COVID-19 infections result in antibodies in almost all cases. These antibodies probably give immunity to future infection for at least some time, although how long is still not known.

      The claim: The presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV2 does not guarantee future immunity from future COVID-19 infection.

      The evidence: COVID-19 has not been present in the human population long enough to know how long immunity will last. There is some evidence to suggest that having COVID-19 typically leads to antibodies will provide at least some immunity to future infections. The vast majority (>90%) of serious (1-3) and mild (4,5) COVID-19 infections do result in the production of antibodies and it has been found that neutralizing antibodies provide immunity to reinfection in monkeys (6). We do not know how long immunity lasts. The best evidence is from the related coronavirus infections SARS and MERS. SARS and MERS infections result in antibodies that last for at least 1-3 years (7-9).

      Source:

      1. https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa344/5812996
      2. https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/early/2020/05/13/13993003.00763-2020.abstract
      3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0897-1)
      4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352396420302905
      5. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.11.20151324v1
      6. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.13.990226v2.abstract
      7. https://www.jimmunol.org/content/jimmunol/181/8/5490.full.pdf
      8. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/13/10/07-0576_article,
      9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5512479/
    1. Asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is ‘very rare,’ WHO says

      Take away: Dr. Van Kerkhove appeared to refer to only “asymptomatic” individuals and not “presymptomatic” individuals in her statement. Clarification from the WHO, and public availability of the data leading to the claim, is needed for proper interpretation. At the current time, existing published data indicates that a significant amount of SARS-CoV-2 infections are due to individuals who did not have symptoms when they spread the virus.

      The claim: According to the WHO, asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is ‘very rare’.

      The evidence: This statement is attributed to WHO official Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove during a recent news conference. It deserves greater clarification from the WHO, but Dr. Van Kerkhove appears to make the distinction between “asymptomatic” and “pre-symptomatic” individuals during her comments. This distinction is essential for proper interpretation of her statement. “Asymptomatic” refers to persons who test positive, but who never display symptoms throughout the course of their SARS-CoV-2 infection. In contrast, “presymptomatic” individuals are those with confirmed infection, who do not currently display symptoms, but later go on to develop COVID-19 related symptoms (fever, cough, loss of taste/smell, etc).

      Importantly, the distinction between asymptomatic and presymptomatic can only be made retrospectively. From a clinical standpoint, if someone currently has no symptoms, but tests positive, there is no way of knowing at that time if they are “asymptomatic” or “presymptomatic”. Preliminary data estimates that around 20% of SARS-CoV-2 infections are truly “asymptomatic”.

      If “asymptomatic” individuals were rarely involved in transmission of the virus, this would be an important finding, but from a practical standpoint if “presymptomatic” individuals still spread the virus (as the data indicates), then the rationale for preventative measures still stands. Early studies [1] [2] have estimated that up to 40-60% of virus spread occurs when people don’t have symptoms. Preventative measures such as social distancing and universal mask wearing have been implemented to prevent the spread of virus from individuals not currently demonstrating symptoms.

  3. Jul 2020
    1. There's a few other questions on StackOverflow regarding how to structure YAML files for i18n, and I don't think there is a 'right' answer to your question. If it works for you, then great! I would say that any answer you get will be completely subjective, and more about i18n and translation management rather than anything specifically to do with the Rails way.
    1. The vaccine uses messenger RNA (mRNA), which are cells used to build proteins -- in this case, the proteins that are needed to build the coronavirus' spike protein, which the virus uses to attach itself to and infect human cells. Once the immune system learns to recognize this target -- thanks to the vaccine -- it can mount a response faster than if it encountered the virus for the first time due to an infection.

      This explanation is garbled and misstated. Genetic material is stored in DNA in the nucleus of the cell. Messenger RNA (mRNA) molecules carry the information stored within the DNA to the rest of the cell. Both DNA and RNA are a type of molecule called a "nucleic acid." Once outside the nucleus, the information in the messenger RNA can then be read, or "translated," to create proteins, such as the spike protein used by SARS-CoV-2. These proteins in turn carry out a wide variety of tasks that allow cells to function. This process is known as the "Central Dogma of Molecular Biology".

    1. JSON parsing is always pain in ass. If the input is not as expected it throws an error and crashes what you are doing. You can use the following tiny function to safely parse your input. It always turns an object even if the input is not valid or is already an object which is better for most cases.

      It would be nicer if the parse method provided an option to do it safely and always fall back to returning an object instead of raising exception if it couldn't parse the input.

    1. Even having useCallback() returning the same function instance, it doesn’t bring any benefits because the optimization costs more than not having the optimization.
    1. I agree in general splitting an array, according to some property using the order of the elements (no take_drop_while) or to some other array (this request) is more difficult than it could be.
  4. Jun 2020
    1. For example, if error messages in two narrowly defined classes behave in the same way, the classes can be easily combined. But if some messages in a broad class behave differently, every object in the class must be examined before the class can be split. This illustrates the principle that "splits can be lumped more easily than lumps can be split".
    1. “The alarming truth,” warned the researcher, “is that the average number of permissions requested by a flashlight app is 25.”
    2. “Asking for too many permissions is dangerous,” ESET malware researcher Lukas Stefanko explains. “These permissions can be misused as an exploit to access more device components, such as call logs, phone numbers, and browsing history.”
    3. At the heart of Google’s challenge has been so-called permission abuse—millions of apps requesting the rights to access device data and functions beyond those needed to deliver their own functionality.
    4. The security feature in Android 11 is a long overdue crackdown on this permission abuse.
    1. Google’s novel response has been to compare each app to its peers, identifying those that seem to be asking for more than they should, and alerting developers when that’s the case. In its update today, Google says “we aim to help developers boost the trust of their users—we surface a message to developers when we think their app is asking for a permission that is likely unnecessary.”
  5. May 2020
    1. The element dem in epidemic, endemic, and pandemic comes from the ancient Greek word demos, which meant people or district:

      Interesting how a word (pandemic) that literally means "all people" has ended up (only) meaning a disease that effects all people. Yet nowhere in the word does it say anything about a disease.

    1. Taxonomy, in a broad sense the science of classification, but more strictly the classification of living and extinct organisms—i.e., biological classification.

      I don't think the "but more strictly" part is strictly accurate.

      Wikipedia authors confirm what I already believed to be true: that the general sense of the word is just as valid/extant/used/common as the sense that is specific to biology:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(general) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(biology)

    1. "linked data" can and should be a very general term referring to any structured data that is interlinked/interconnected.

      It looks like most of this article describes it in that general sense, but sometimes it talks about URIs and such as if they are a necessary attribute of linked data, when that would only apply to Web-connected linked data. What about, for example, linked data that links to each other through some other convention such as just a "type" and "ID"? Maybe that shouldn't be considered linked data if it is too locally scoped? But that topic and distinction should be explored/discussed further...

      I love its application to web technologies, but I wish there were a distinct term for that application ("linked web data"?) so it could be clearer from reading the word whether you meant general case or not. May not be a problem in practice. We shall see.

      Granted/hopefully most use of linked data is in the context of the Web, so that the links are universal / globally scoped, etc.

    1. This topic is not a support question

      This is hard to answer because I don't know what they classify as a "support question". For example, are bugs classified as a support question? So if it's a bug, should I check this or no?

      What is the purpose of this checkbox? If you could describe that, it would make it much easier to answer the question.

    1. generic-sounding term may be interpreted as something more specific than intended: I want to be able to use "data interchange" in the most general sense. But if people interpret it to mean this specific standard/protocol/whatever, I may be misunderstood.

      The definition given here

      is the concept of businesses electronically communicating information that was traditionally communicated on paper, such as purchase orders and invoices.

      limits it to things that were previously communicated on paper. But what about things for which paper was never used, like the interchange of consent and consent receipts for GDPR/privacy law compliance, etc.?

      The term should be allowed to be used just as well for newer technologies/processes that had no previous roots in paper technologies.

  6. Apr 2020
  7. Mar 2020
    1. you have less direct control as you must rely on the vendor’s adherence to IAB’s guidelines for compliance.
    2. Directly blocking the vendor scripts (using another prior blocking method), then executing them only after consent has been collected. This method requires more implementation work and it’s a bit slower in terms of execution time, but it allows personalized ads to be served from the first page view (where consent hasn’t been collected yet) and gives you more direct and solid control in regards to ensuring compliance.

      pros:

      • allows personalized ads to be served from the first page view (where consent hasn’t been collected yet)
      • gives you more direct and solid control in regards to ensuring compliance.
    1. Did you know accurate data reporting is often capped? Meaning once your website traffic reaches a certain limit, the data then becomes a guess rather than factual.This is where tools like Google Analytics becomes extremely limited and cashes in with their GA360 Premium suite. At Matomo, we believe all data should be reported 100% accurately, or else what’s the point?
  8. Jan 2020
    1. a private library is not an ego-boosting appendages but a research tool. The library should contain as much of what you do not know as your financial means … allow you to put there. You will accumulate more knowledge and more books as you grow older, and the growing number of unread books on the shelves will look at you menacingly. Indeed, the more you know, the larger the rows of unread books. Let us call this collection of unread books an antilibrary.
  9. Dec 2019
  10. Nov 2019
    1. The chosen approach pushes a lot of complexity out of the core. As a result it might take more code to achieve certain functionalities. This is the price of flexibility. And that's the primary design goal of Reactabular.
  11. Oct 2019
    1. ) Blockchain MemoryWe let LL be the blockchain mem-ory space, represented as the hastable L:{0,1}256→{0,1}NL:\{0,1\}^{256}\rightarrow \{0, 1\}^{N}, where N≫N \gg 256 and can store sufficiently-large documents. We assume this memory to be tamperproof under the same adversarial model used in Bitcoin and other blockchains. To intuitively explain why such a trusted data-store can be implemented on any blockchain (including Bitcoin), consider the following simplified, albeit inefficient, implementation: A blockchain is a sequence of timestamped transactions, where each transaction includes a variable number of output addresses (each address is a 160-bit number). LL could then be implemented as follows - the first two outputs in a transaction encode the 256-bit memory address pointer, as well as some auxiliary meta-data. The rest of the outputs construct the serialized document. When looking up L[k]L[k], only the most recent transaction is returned, which allows update and delete operations in addition to inserts.

      This paragraph explains how blockchain hides one's individual identity and privacy, while giving them a secure way of using the funds. In my opinion lot hacker ransomware are done using block-chain technology coins, this and one more paragraph here is really interesting to read about how blockchain helps protect personal data. and i also related this this hacking and corruption or money laundering

  12. Jul 2019
  13. Jun 2019
  14. Apr 2019
    1. ​Technology is in constant motion. If we try to ignore the advances being made the world will move forward without us. Instead of trying to escape change, there needs to be an effort to incorporate technology into every aspect of our lives in the most beneficial way possible. If we look at the ways technology can improve our lives, we can see that technology specifically smartphones, have brought more benefits than harm to the academic and social aspects of teenagers lives, which is important because there is a constant pressure to move away from smart devices from older generations. The first aspect people tend to focus on is the effect that technology has on the academic life of a teen. Smartphones and other smart devices are a crucial part of interactive learning in a classroom and can be used as a tool in increasing student interest in a topic. For example, a popular interactive website, Kahoot, is used in many classrooms because it forces students to participate in the online quiz, while teachers can gauge how their students are doing in the class. Furthermore, these interactive tools are crucial for students that thrive under visual learning, since they can directly interact with the material. This can be extended to students with learning disabilities, such as Down Syndrome and Autism,​ research has shown that using specialized and interactive apps on a smart device aids learning more effectively than technology free learning. Picture Picture Another fear regarding technology is the impact it has on the social lives of young adults, but the benefits technology has brought to socializing outweighs any possible consequences. The obvious advantage smartphones have brought to social lives is the ability to easily communicate with people; with social media, texting, and calling all in one portable box there is no longer a struggle to be in contact with family and friends even if they are not in your area. Social media can also be used for much more In recent years, social media has been a key platform in spreading platforms and movements for social change. Because social media websites lower the barrier for communicating to large groups of people, it has been much easier to spread ideas of change across states, countries, or the world. For example, after Hurricane Sandy tore apart the northeastern United States, a movement called "Occupy Sandy" in which people gathered to provide relief for the areas affected was promoted and organized through social media. Other movements that have been possible because of social media include #MeToo, March for Our Lives, #BlackLivesMatter, and the 2017 Women's March. ​

  15. Mar 2019
  16. Dec 2018
    1. It’s the nature of the more more more culture: if you can run two miles, isn’t it better to run five? If you can write an article about something, isn’t it better to turn it into a book? If you can speak in four places this semester, isn’t it better to add on just… one… more…?

      It's like the old saying, I can't turn a profit with low numbers, so we'll make it up in volume.

  17. Sep 2018
    1. keenest attachments, and whose natural gifts may be, if we do not squander or destroy them, exactly what we need to flourish and perfect ourselves—as human beings.

      Kass' implications in the quote indicates the potential biotechnology has on the human psyche. Although biotechnology has the ability to forge new paths in curing feeble human (or in essence, any living thing) traits, such as sickness and suffering, it can be further exploited to enhance physical traits. However, Kass' tonality shines light that when this technology is fully developed, humans will lose sight of what they formerly relied on "keenest attachments" Therefore, it is of great significance that the limbs (keenest attachments) are used to "...perfect ourselves-as human beings." and not misused or ultimately destroyed.

  18. Oct 2017
  19. Sep 2017
    1. We the people

      Allusion

    2. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas.

      Allusion

  20. Feb 2017
  21. Jan 2017
    1. Paraphrasing Craig Muldrew’s findings, James B. argues that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries beer was more important as a source of energy (via calories both from grain and alcohol) than as an alternative to water (p 66
  22. Oct 2016
    1. Earn money with your music simply selling your tracks on MIXUPLOAD Upload WAV files to participate in wordlwide music catalogue & get more opportunities

      Earn money with your music simply selling your tracks on MIXUPLOAD Upload WAV files to participate in wordlwide music catalogue & get more opportunities

  23. Aug 2016
    1. VISITS

      I'm not sure exactly where this would fit in, but some way to reporting total service hours (per week or other time period) would be useful, esp as we start gauging traffic, volume, usage against number of service hours. In our reporting for the Univ of California, we have to report on services hours for all public service points.

      Likewise, it may be helpful to have a standard way to report staffing levels re: coverage of public service points? or in department? or who work on public services?

  24. Jul 2016
    1. You’ve loved sports as long as you can remember, and squeeze in as many as you can: football in the fall, basketball in the winter, baseball in the spring and summer. The problem, at least in the eyes of some of the adults in your life, is that your love is too promiscuous. You feel constant pressure to pick just one

      This quote right here matters to me because it relates to my situation, which is having to playing two sports at the same time. But I don't feel like I'm promiscuous because even though I play other sports than soccer I don't take it serious as much as soccer.

  25. Mar 2016
    1. What about extensions for other browsers? We’re working on that. The next supported browser is likely to be Firefox.

      I'm writing this note in... Safari!

      I thought hypothes.is could only work with the Chrome applet.

      Still looking for a way to use hypothes.is from a tablet.

  26. Feb 2016
    1. wildlife whic

      consider adding a comma, like so:

      "... wildlife, which is..."

    2. (link)

      Two considerations:

      1. This seems to me to break in style from your previously-established convention for links & citations (i.e., a consistency error); and
      2. Should it be before or after the period? (unsure of what conventions say).

      Consider changing from "(link") to some other options? Two that come to my mind (neither of them quite ideal) could be moving it to "support for climate change denial" and/or changing it to "(An excellent read/article/essay by Vice magazine delves into this [issue/topic] [, here].")

      NB: I include optional phrasing in square brackets [ _ ].

    3. ‘It’s impossible’‘It’s possible, but it’s not worth doing’‘I said it was a good idea all along.’

      source? not necessary, but (for my mind, at least) helps its appearance.

      also re: Style: I have no idea what the style recommendations / conventions are: I see you started with a big icon of an open-quote. Q: Is it customary (e.g. in magazines, the New Yorker, etc.) to include an identically large-icon-sized close-quote?

  27. Dec 2015
    1. The goal of “Making the world work for everyone” is vague and can be in-terpreted in many ways. I believe that is it’s power.
      • consider whether or not to lower-case the M in "Making." (I should probably ask an experienced copywriter or professional editor, actually... There is probably a "one right answer" in this instance, although I'm not certain.)

      • Change it's to its (that is, remove the apostrophe)

      The possessive form of "it" is an irregular form of possessive in lacking an apostrophe, probably to avoid confusion with the contraction of "it is."

      (This is yet another grammar rule I memorized in public schools. :p)

  28. Oct 2015
    1. our conference about fair ladies

      What do scholars sit around talking about? Cute girls. Image Description

    2. To glut the longing of my heart's desire

      Faustus, despite all he's been given, is still missing one thing: Image Description

    3. let us see that peerless dame of Greece

      Faustus has incredible powers, and his friends want him to use them to show him a cute girl. Image Description

  29. Feb 2014