I find that supabase is pretty good at warning you about these things in their project specific security advisories, but obviously you need to actually pay attention to them and then take action.
Trump received 49.8% of the vote. Harris received 48.3%. Where is the bias?
Outcomes that don’t match with polls do not necessarily indicate bias. For instance, if Trump had won every single state by a single vote, that would look like a dominating win to someone who only looks at the number of electors for each candidate. But no rational person would consider a win margin of 50 votes be dominating.
When FiveThirtyEight claimed Harris has 50-in-100 chance, it didn't mean that she'd likely to get 50% of the general vote. It had already taken electoral college into account.
> if Trump had won every single state by a single vote...
Yeah sure but in the reality we live in, Trump didn't win the swing states by just one single vote.
"x/100 chance of y winning" for a single event just doesn't really have much meaning or value. if it predicted a 99/100 chance of a Harris victory, Trump winning is still compatible with that model. and despite the presumed urge to say it was inaccurate, it in fact could have been exactly right, but simply that the rare outcome happened. if it instead was predicting a vote share of 99% to 1%, then yeah you could consider that a poor model
> Avian flu is apparently not too dangerous to humans
There are multiple strains. So far the strain circulating in cows seems to be mild in humans, but the strain in birds seems to be very deadly to humans.
> From 1 January 2003 to 27 September 2024, a total of 261 cases of human infection with avian influenza
A(H5N1) virus have been reported from five countries within the Western Pacific Region (Table 1). Of these
cases, 142 were fatal, resulting in a case fatality rate (CFR) of 54%
> Globally, from 1 January 2003 to 27 September 2024, 904 cases of human infection with avian influenza
A(H5N1) virus were reported from 24 countries. Of these 904 cases, 464 were fatal (CFR of 51%)
Anecdotally, a teenager in Canada was recently infected with the strain being carried by birds. She lived, but after being in the hospital for a month, and an extended period of time on ECMO. Who knows where her quality of life is at the moment. That level of care would not be available to many people if the rate of infection were to rise.
Thank you. That said, CFR’s denominator is those who show up to a hospital in bad enough shape to be tested for H5N1. All we can conclude is this appears more deadly than the flu. That’s concerning, but not what I’d consider “very deadly.”
I think the available evidence supports calling it very deadly to humans. As you said though, it's possible and even likely the CFR is overestimating. However I doubt you would see a 50% CFR equate to something low enough that wouldn't effectively be a disaster if human to human transmission began, and at a rate similar to the flu or covid. Let's pray that never happens or that we have an effective vaccine by that time.
There was a post just a day or two ago about the surprising finding of people with antibodies who never got sick. Hopefully they'll chase that down and we'll get a more correct denominator soon.
People seem to forget that any able bodied person can end their life at any time they choose. Denying MAID is only denying this right to people who want to exercise it with dignity.
Despite the intent to show an equal distribution visually, if you actually pay attention to the individual outlets you see a few things. Nearly all the outlets in the summit block, over 40 reliability score, are considered left or far left by republicans. The most extreme fringe of low reliability score are all right wing. I’m honestly not sure how any critical thinker could believe both sides are equally bad at spreading misinformation. Both sides do it to an extent, but the right is clearly worse, and that’s what your chart shows. Believing that is not bias. It’s reality.
I would say that the chart somewhat limited based on the score that CNN is getting. Every single day for years if you were to turn on CNN at any time of the day you would see stories about Trump + Russia. Sure you can call that "analysis" but I think it under-represents how much of an effect the repeated beating people over the head with one-way "analysis" has.
You probably wouldn't call this misinformation, but I belive it is deception because CNN markets itself as fact-based "news" (https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/cnn_factsfirst/), but in fact it's just entertainment disguised as news. And like Fox News, CNN tries to bait it's viewers into emotional reactions and team-choosing, which ends up causing more division between us.
Anyway, that's why I get all my news from the Weather Channel.
The author specifically says he believes people will be using the 4th or 5th iteration of the Vision Pro for this purpose. Why are you comparing prices of devices that won't exist for another 5+ years?
Because you and I both know Apple will never be price-competitive with the commodity segment. They are a luxury brand that relies on luxury margins, so I want to know why their business model will succeed.
If plane seating is anything to go by, most people don't want a luxury experience but a practical and cheap one instead. Most seats aren't reserved for premium passengers because they are a minority, maybe a profitable audience but not at all the primary one.
> Because you and I both know Apple will never be price-competitive with the commodity segment.
OG iPhone: $799
iPhone 3G: $199
> They are a luxury brand that relies on luxury margins, so I want to know why their business model will succeed.
Apple has shown many times over they don't need to be price competitive with the commodity segment. If you want to know why their business model will succeed, why not just look at their current business model which has been massively successful? Arguably the most successful business model in the history of consumer hardware.
> There will always be people who disagree with the politics/opinions/alleigances of a successful person and who wish to downplay their success for selfish reasons.
And conversely, there will always be people who agree with the politics/opinions/alleigances of a successful person and who wish to overstate the reasons behind their success for selfish reasons.
