That's likely also the case, but aside from the melanin-vitamin-d angle, there's been some work suggesting a genetic susceptibility to covid for people with significant recent SSA ancestry.
On the other hand it seems a major genetic risk factor for COVID-19 is inherited from Neanderthals, and that should be less common among Sub-Saharan Africans.
The Lancet or Nature don't exactly have stellar reputations anymore. Source reputability should not be weighted heavily when assessing new information in our information environment — this is a very outmoded, maladaptive norm.
Techies are usually too naive about how the media works. This is a hit piece. Cui bono? Who are Coinbase's competitors? Who would stand to gain from Coinbase taking a hit?
This is the thing that used to be called Safari, right? This is great, but a tad expensive at $50/month. I wish O'Reilly would just charge a bit less for that.
There are sales every now and then which get you pay less for whatever period you continue being subscribed. I pay 20 dollars a month since 2 years without any “student discount” shenanigans
I subscribed for a few months, cancelled and later in the year got an offer to resubscribe for around $200 per annum and they've locked that in for me ever since. Worth a try.
Yes, it is, actually. That's literally what the employees voicing their displeasure want --
(1) for his speech as a private citizen to not contradict the public values of the company he leads (i.e. for him to not donate to, say, exclusionary institutions), and,
(2) most likely, going beyond (1): for his speech as a private citizen to be "in alignment" with the public values of the company he leads (i.e., to compel speech).
You can agree or disagree that any of this is a reasonable or desirable or legal, but it's Orwellian doublespeak to claim it's "not silencing".
He’s an extremely wealthy individual. His “voice” aka his “speech” aka his ability to influence the actions of the government via political donations is orders of magnitude greater than pretty much all of his employees. He ain’t being silenced.
The only people being silenced here are the LGBTQ+ kids going to that abhorrent school he donated $250,000 to
In a generation, vim and emacs will still be around with their minuscule but loyal user bases of tinkerers and VS code will have long been replaced by something newer and flashier.
Ah, but you miss its hackability aspect by virtue of being a lisp runtime. I wouldn't say eclipse is anywhere close to "hackable" as emacs is.
Just run C-x b <scratch> RET and you have an elisp buffer to manipulate the state of the entire editor. It allows for superfast iteration, compared to the plugin development cycle of other editors. Though, vscode/javascript has definitely made it much closer to what is possible in emacs.
"Superior" for sure isn't the word I'd use, almost every one of the editors and IDEs make a bunch of trade-offs that appeal to different audiences
IMHO, the barrier to entry for modification for both emacs and vim is much lower than their competition: evaluate text in a buffer, observe change to your editor
I don't know of any other tooling has that immediate feedback loop remeniscient of the old JS in HTML (or the dev tools console, as apples to apples) approachability
I am more accustomed to vim than emacs.
Some things I painfully miss when using something else than vim : quick and easy shortcuts to jump around the file, delete words/blocks/parenthesis, place marks to jump between parts of one or multiple files, macros, filtering parts of the file through external command...
This all rings true but from my vantage point this kind of management ends up introducing excess overhead that makes my work life more fraught with emotional uncertainty rather than less. I avoid it altogether.
I don't want anyone, let alone an EM — someone overwhelmingly likely to have below average emotional intelligence relative to the general population — to be probing into my inner life in 1:1s and playing 4D chess orchestrating the team. I've experienced this. It's exhausting.
The whole organizational arrangement is misbegotten. Most companies follow it largely out of faddishness and cargo-culting.
What was happening between 1920 and 1940? The universities were taking power. In 1900, the idea of a professor telling the government what to do was borderline absurd. By 1940, it was normal. By 1960, it was universal—all “public policy” in future would be determined by “science."
And, because the Ring works like that, power was taking them—with its favorite toy, money.
