ranzispa

Recognizing our knowledge is limited does not mean we believe the earth is flat or that we have no reason not to believe it is not. Attempting to say that everything is pretty much explained just increases the confidence of someone believing in the flat earth, as that is very clearly false. There's a bunch of things we can not explain and there's a bunch of things that in theory we can explain and forecast, but in practice we can not. Go ahead and do some quantum mechanical calculations to describe a system with more than 3 electrons with the nuclei of the atoms moving...

Recognizing our knowledge is limited does not mean we believe the earth is flat or that we have no reason not to believe it is not. Attempting to say that everything is pretty much explained just increases the confidence of someone believing in the flat earth, as that is very clearly false. There's a bunch of things we can not explain and there's a bunch of things that in theory we can explain and forecast, but in practice we can not. Go ahead and do some quantum mechanical calculations to describe a system with more than 3 electrons with the nuclei of the atoms moving...

I am a chemist specialized in drug design. This article opened my eyes. I'm up to a great scientific discovery. Way too many people have been avoiding amanitas due to disillusions and ingesting large quantities of organic chemicals. Tomorrow I'll start my new sampling of mushroom properties using myself as evaluator, see you all at the Nobel candidature.

I remember going to Murska Sobota to see the romani population there. It was quite surprising as the integration was absolute. Romani people would live all together but go to town and to the bars with all other people. Most of them worked in Austria with contracts and all. But still, throughout the country there was much hate towards Romani and Croatians, as well as Italians among the older people.

Here, I got your bugs in the correct order.

Here, I got your bugs in the correct order.

Here, I got your bugs in the correct order.

Before today, ClickHouse users would only see the tables in the default database when querying table metadata from ClickHouse system tables such as system.tables or system.columns.

Since users already have implicit access to underlying tables in r0, we made a change at 11:05 to make this access explicit, so that users can see the metadata of these tables as well.

I'm no expert, but this feels like something you'd need to ponder very carefully before deploying. You're basically changing the result of all queries to your db. I'm not working in there, but I'm sure in plenty places if the codebase there's a bunch of query this and pick column 5 from the result.

I may be very stupid about it and not know the normative, but what is the safest option for me is the following. No informed consent -> no research on any samples from the patient.

Does not matter how important your research is. I myself would like to be informed about that stuff. I may decide to donate my organs to research after I'm dead, but I have decided that.

What I am saying is that it should not be up to a website company to decide whether something is legal or not. In all other businesses this has always been related to a judge deciding whether something was legal or not. A newspaper is something related, in which case the editor has some responsibility if he lets something clearly illegal slip, however the responsibility falls on the journalist and not on the newspaper itself.

Frankly, I do not want social media - which is currently the main source of information for many and likely most people - to be justified in deciding what should be allowed and what should not. If someone uses such platforms to do something illegal, there are indeed legal methodologies to deal with that.

Whether they are responsible for what gets posted is exactly the discussion point. There are different ideas on this. Different countries and different people have different opinions on this point.

Generally, website are not really in favor of this idea - and it's not only big tech I'm talking about.

My personal opinion is I don't really like this idea. Having the websites responsible of what gets posted means the websites necessarily have to do some censoring. I'm not necessarily against censoring, but I don't like the idea it is a large private company deciding what to censor. I'd much rather have the government decide and impose the ban on companies.

Moreover, forcing websites to censor things leads to a very centralised internet. The random guy setting up a forum can not afford to patrol that well how website, while big companies indeed can have teams of people doing just that.

I have been using Debian a lot in the past and now I'm on fedora. Reason I'm on fedora: got a new laptop and figured I could go Debian or try out another distribution. I installed it and didn't have any problems, a couple times I had to submit bug reports to the packaging team but not much else. It works and I never felt like I need some other system. All feels pretty similar to Debian after all, not much difference. One thing I favor over Debian is that packages are a bit more up to date: in Debian I'd often find myself backporting stuff from Sid. In fedora I don't really need workarounds to get new features in stable software. But still, that's just a minor annoyance. But still, I use a lot of very specific software in development; for normal use I really don't see much difference between the two.