While I'd like to think that the administration's threats to enforce section 230 spooked the tech oligopoly sufficiently, I'm not holding my breath. I imagine that any verification process will still have the standard escape hatches, so if any heretical opinions are ever expressed in the past or future then the verification is removed and the user banned.

Are you having a stroke?

Are you intentionally confusing prophylactic use and acute treatment? Or don't you realize that there's a difference between taking something to prevent an illness, and taking something to cure one after it's underway?

Very few of the studies on treatment of acute Wuhan Flu with HCQ have published their dosage. Two studies were doing 600mg on the first day and a lower 400mg maintenance dose after that, presumably as an acute treatment, not as prophylaxis. That's actually lower than the acute treatment for malaria, which starts at 800mg and goes to 400mg the next several days.

Right now, all the prophylactic studies for the Chinese virus are still in the preclinical stage, but given there's a very low risk to taking it at prophylactic doses, and the anecdotal evidence from actual doctors using it to save lives is very positive, it's entirely prudent to take it if you have the means.

Why wouldn't he take it?

31.7 million Americans traveled to Africa in the last 15 years.

91% of these travelers ingested Hydroxychloroquine prior to their flight, as advised by FDA.

Less than 1% had any adverse reaction to this.

It's not a meaningful risk. It's become politicized because Trump's enemies literally cannot let him be right about anything.

Even Fox News agrees that this drug is harmful, adds hcs_$reboot. "I cannot stress this enough, this will kill you," Fox News host Neil Cavuto said.

Oh please, people take this as long-term treatment for lupus and as prophylaxis for malaria for months on end with no ill effects. Chloroquine is a 70-year old drug that's one of the most prescribed drugs in human history. It's safety profile is very well understood, and it's not dangerous taken at correct dosages.

This is fear mongering of the dumbest kind.

You mean when there's no social pressure, acts which are only done because of social pressure happen relatively infrequently?

Yeah, that was the one that worked. Wasn't not lazy enough to google it.

According to systeminfo my box hasn't restarted since 2019-02-08, 8:59:56 PM, which was a power outage iirc.

There's some dark magic you can do to disable the automatic reboot. I did it months ago when I built my new workstation -- there's a folder buried deep under System32 that contains the 'Reboot' script. If you remove that and replace it with a folder named 'Reboot', then it will always fail to run the reboot-after-update phase of the update cycle.

Well, yes, that's the point of Open Source. (Google did the same thing with Linux and Android).

However, it's worth noting that in both the cases of iOS and Android, the kernel talking to the hardware is all that it really is. Darwin uses a bit more of the BSD userspace, but it's still only half an OS without the actual OS/X layer ontop of it. The value that the systems bring to the table are from the layers in the middle. No one would use just Darwin, and no one would use an Android device without the touchscreen UI.

Is anyone really going to read it who cares? I imagine the biggest use of this will be trying to spoil this for others online.

You keep an old NTSC TV around to watch them on...

Or, you know, it will keep going down year after year.

Thanks for not understanding how evolution, or the mind for that matter, works.

We have facilities for communication and self-identity largely as a result of being hunters -- being able to "run a model" of our prey in our minds was massively useful. This structure then got applied to the self, and so the ego was born. (This is one of the currently en vogue evolutionary explanations for the rise of consciousness -- obviously not a subject you can create causal experiments to test easily).

What evolutionary pressures are there for creating self-awareness in algorithmic trading applications (given that it would necessarily be less efficient, and likely introduce errors)?

Then the algorithm corrects for that after seeing it once.

You, coming up with a "plan" 10 seconds after reading an article -- you can't outthink people who are employed to come up with ideas for improving how the computer thinks.