https://software.es.net/iperf/faq.html

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-...

This legal defense effectively frames the show as opinion/entertainment, not journalism, to shield it from defamation claims.

I think all three of us would agree about your propaganda stance, too.

2nd, the only injection is intravenous. It uses a kind of virus that has been specifically engineered to cross the blood-brain barrier. That virus has a payload which infects/alters astrocytes already inside the brain, and the astrocytes become aggressive at clearing amyloid plaques.

3rd, I agree that the road to a marketable therapeutic could be a long way off.

Is Motorola contributing engineering resources directly to GrapheneOS, or is the partnership purely about hardware enablement on their side?

"We are going to use your email to train our LLMs. I'm not okay with that... my confidential commercial information is NOT okay to use to train your models [...] So... goodbye Gmail."

The title is Bye Bye Gmail.

A service to clean up the UI does nothing to solve the issue at hand.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46550366

For one, the paper specifically studied brain structures that are directly homologous in both mice and humans (retrosplenial cortex). The researchers specifically targeted evolutionarily-conserved circuitry.

Second, there is already human research on the topic, too, and this paper is reporting on a likely mechanism to understand "why" rather than "if." Here's one from a Yale researcher:

https://news.yale.edu/2025/09/23/psilocybin-breakthrough-men...

https://www.aorus.com/en-us/monitors/s55u

The vague potential harm of sex doesn't justify the concrete harm of abolishing digital privacy. Further, it's just sex. Equating imagery of legal, natural activity with physical danger is an error.

It is blatantly dangerous to justify stripping citizens of their anonymity. The lawmakers who proposed this are oppressors. They are the danger to our children.

I am challenging the result of that release in your poorly framed experiment.

You explicitly sought to test 'a different side of the spectrum.' You cannot equate a holistic character judgment with a narrowed, specific medical safety protocol judgement.

A clean account without memories will solve the tie-breaker issue. It will not solve the poor experimental design.

Furthermore, admitting you have 'memories' enabled invalidates the test in both cases.

As an aside, I would not expect that one party's candidate is always more correct over the other for every possible issue. Particular issues carry more weight, and the overall correctness should be considered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession

> In the United States, a recession is defined as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the market, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales."[4] The European Union has adopted a similar definition.[5][6]

It does seem to be used to signal prestige more than in-group membership in general. I perceive it as mildly haughty.

Also, I don't think acrolect is the right term here, because the all-lowercase style is both not a creole and is not a closer approximation to standard English than some lower form of all-lowercase.

If you need a linguistics term call it a register.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Register_(sociolinguistics)

Externalities are costs/benefits to someone uninvolved with the chicken/egg transaction (noise or free insect control affecting your neighbor are negative and positive cases).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44416761

Signal processing is probably a general problem. This month we had news about transcribing speech from sound waves jiggling a regular computer mouse.

https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/07/mouse_microphone_secu...

The data here shows that coal consumption is simply increasing in China. Therefore, I believe it is inaccurate to say "they are building more plants but starting to burn less coal." It is more accurate to say "they are building more plants and burning more coal, but they are not increasing their coal use at the same rate they increase their use of other energy sources."

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-coal?tab=line&...

Our World In Data gets that information from https://globalcarbonbudget.org/. I believe that the next update will include 2024 data, and should be available next month.

My reason for challenging the phrasing is just to be precise. This is a complex topic, and the distinction between a falling percentage of energy mix versus a rising absolute amount of consumption is a key detail that's often missed.

OP's linked paper has "the iron-reduction patients had 300ml of blood removed at the start of the trial and between 250 and 500ml removed four weeks later."

A blood donation removes 500 ml, so about a year of menstruation all at once. You can donate every two months, besides.

So, yes, if there is an effect then we might expect the magnitude of the effect to differ. Or else we'd expect a paper cut to also have the same effect.

Sex biological difference could matter as well.

If so, the answer is that the body replenishes plasma in a day and red cells in six weeks (redcrossblood.org FAQ). The relative amount does change quickly.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/23/us/swatting-investigation-ser...

EDIT:

While the headline on NYT highlights an attack on the towers for disruption, the CNN piece gives more weight to two other uses: (1) criminal communication network and (2) swatting.

I think those two make sense. The SIMs would probably hold US numbers and would appear authentic for accessing the US operators' networks.