> So, yes, in June 2015, I slowed down the whole company [Facebook] by a second.
> Of course, here it is ten years later, and the guy in charge just sent it back fifty years [by ending fact checking?]. Way to upstage me, dude.
Would have been nice to have some more network, code and command line examples. You need to set up a local ntpd and need to point your local master at that temporarily. A better utility to write would be "timediff -s1 -s2" that takes two time servers and shows the offset. I bet there's a way to do that in one line. Anyone?
I feel like there's a link to a story missing there
I worked at FB for a decade, and I now am rooting for its complete destruction.
The cosine adjustment that Google originally used is not the best: NTP aims to measure the difference in rate between the client’s hardware clock and real time, and it works best if the rates are fairly constant. With the cosine smear, the rate changes continuously! If you use a simple linear smear, NTP just has to cope with two small rate changes at the start and end of the smear.
The smear needs to be slow enough that NTP’s algorithms have time to react without overshooting; 24 hours is a reasonable choice tho you can go a bit faster. There’s some disagreement about when the smear occurs relative to the leap second; if the leap is in the middle of the smear the max offset is 0.5 seconds, but if the leap is at the end of the smear the offset is always slow. They were able to test the up-to-one-second-slow scenario in a system-wide live trial, whereas they could not do the same for the sign flip. I think if you can cope with a 0.5 second offset from real time then a 1.0 second offset should not be much more troublesome.
Um, that's a pretty inaccurate way to notice an offset in the millisecond range, isn't it?
Doing sth because of somebody's spouse is a bad reason, imagine the relationship goes sour and they face a divorce, boom they change their tune.
Seeing that this was written by Rachel by the Bay, I thought it was going to be a post about Facebook's recent policy change, and indeed it was.
Lets not pretend that the current climate in SF isn't both way outside the Overton window for most of rest of the US and most of California until ten years ago.
I don't understand how we can insist that these conditions are both the worst mental illnesses, and not mental illnesses at all, at the same time. And maybe you do understand, but it's not so clearly explained that people shouldn't be allowed to discuss it in public.
> though not any other group (e.g. religious people).
Is this made up?
> This is why it's important not just that people do the right thing but also why they do it.
I care about what Zuckerberg, Loraine Powell Jobs or Musk feel the right thing is about as much as I care about what my bus driver thinks the right thing is. What we need is a functioning government.
Umm...We actually do pay for breast implants/breast reductions in the case of medical need which can vary from reconstruction to hormone imbalances, the latter of which makes sense to consider being transgender under since hormones do quite a bit to help with the illness.
What are your credentials, anyway? Why do you think you know more than decades of in depth research and millennia of anthropological evidence?
It's just the same for transgender people. Growing up feeling that you're in the wrong body can cause a lot of mental distress, and the best and most universally effective option for fixing that distress is to simply transition to living as another gender.
Not all people who are transgender experience severe enough dysphoria to cause serious mental health issues, and yet they still decide to transition and report being happier afterwards. [1] However, many transgender people do experience distress over it, and a proportion of that population are even suicidal over it.
This is why I consider it to be a cause of mental illness, not a mental illness in and of itself. And it's important to note that, even for the group that experience suicidality, transitioning is still an effective treatment. [2] [3]
Plastic surgery, on the other hand, is not even close to universally effective for people who are depressed about being "flat-chested" or "ugly." Cosmetic surgery such as breast enhancement has been shown to have a much, much higher rate of regret than transgender surgeries. [4]
In short, the reason that gender-affirming care is considered a treatment for gender dysphoria, whereas breast enhancement and rhinoplasty are not considered treatments for body dysmorphia, is simply that the former is effective and the latter is not.
1. https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender-people-gender-i...
2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10925986/
What on earth are you talking about? 18-29 year olds were the most Democratic age group, as usual. 18-29 year old men might have slightly favored Trump, but to a significantly lower degree than older men.
* Okay, you have a little control in that you can press enter, or otherwise set it running, at a particular moment.
https://apnews.com/article/election-harris-trump-women-latin...
They even said that Trump could threaten Facebook with specifically removing protections for the platform, and then turn around and not do it: resulting in damage to the platform without having to do anything.
I think everyone knows why Zuck is doing it. If there were any other republican government, the capitulation wouldn’t be this abject.
Yes, which is not remotely the same claim as
> Gen Z were heavily supporting Trump in the recent election [and therefore Zuckerberg needed to change political course for his social media to stay relevant]
which is the false claim I was responding to.
> If those numbers hold democrats have no path to winning national elections
Yes, it's certainly the case that if Democrats keep getting the same percentage of votes as in elections they lost badly, they'll keep losing elections.
They have a whole media ecosystem, the actual main stream media, giving them training and talking points to subvert these conversations and successfully move away from facts.
They only follow the style of debate, not its substance.
Limiting your self to the substance only weighs you down against an attacker of this nature.
Engage, but just waste their cycles.
Eventually there is always a missing definition, something extremely basic that’s being alluded to. Or a contradiction that shows up.
Point that out and you will get the “go google it yourself”, retreat flag show up.
I come from a post-communist country which had a lot of censorship. It was happening 50 years ago as well (it was happening since the end of 40s to the end of 80s). Call me sensitive. ;)
The guy is removing the company from 50 years back.
Do you think pro-natalist policies (anything that can be seen as incentivizing the act of having more children) need to come from a desire to see more equality, or human dignity?
In fact some of the most evil people of the 1900s thought it was good to support the medical costs of pregnancy, and even thought you should /pay families if they had more children to incentivize having more/ (see pro natalist politics in Western Europe in 30s, 40s, 50s. The ones in my country, France, actually had their strongest push in 1939, and are a large part of the reason why France's baby boom was one of the strongest in Europe later on).
You will find out that people who usually hate social programs will have different opinions about anything related to demographics, and it's not complicated to understand why (whether their motives come from racism, or selfishness ie a desire to preserve the GDP and make sure the country won't be an empty hell hole of old people dying in the hospice when they retire).
I have a program I use in shell scripting called sleepuntil that does something like this, but it doesn't try to be millisecond-accurate.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/985183/size-urban-rural-...
>>In 2023, there were approximately 55.94 million people living in rural areas in the United States, while about 278.98 million people were living in urban areas
If Trump won, it couldn't have been solely because of people in the boonies, who represent a much smaller proportion of total demographics. The same goes for Brexit, and all the happenings that have been shifting Western societies as a whole towards the far right.
This sort of obliviousness is not helpful in fixing the situation. Same energy as the media acting like Trump could never possibly become POTUS. These incompetents are getting in positions of power because the left and moderate right are, it seems, still not perceiving what is going on outside of their very specific bubbles.
So I figured you need a time "diff", a single command that updates from both timeservers and then presents the offset in a single operation. So (I just researched this again and) there's three answers here [0], using ntpdate and something I've never seen before called clockdiff.
[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2296981/how-can-i-work-o...
To see the NTP offsets of a machine you can run something like:
ntpq -pn
To see the clocks ticking visually you can do something like the following and run it on each machine (assuming they have the same ping).
#include <time.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <stdio.h>
void main() {
struct timeval tv;
struct timespec ts;
ts.tv_sec = 0;
while(1) {
gettimeofday(&tv, NULL);
ts.tv_nsec = 1000000000 - 1000*tv.tv_usec; //number of nanoseconds left in the current second
nanosleep(&ts, &ts);
gettimeofday(&tv, NULL);
printf("%lu.%06lu\n", (unsigned long) tv.tv_sec, (unsigned long) tv.tv_usec);
}
}
63% of Urban voters went Harris, 35% Trump. 63% of Rural voters went Trump, 35% Harris. Suburban went 52% Harris and 47% Trump
The 15% more Rural than Urban voters, combined with gerrymandering and state vote power differences offset the 5% Democrat lean of Sub-Urban voters.
If we look at who ACTUALLY voted from the voting age population, then the boonies certainly did win it for Trump despite the other 65% being pro Harris to varying degrees. If we consider people who didn't vote at all that could have, and assume the majority of those would have voted for Harris, then we can likely blame those that didn't vote for leaving the power in the hands of those in the boonies.
https://timemachinescorp.com/ntp_poe_wifi_dotmatrix_clock_ti...
https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-genz-kamala-harris-trump-...
He doesnt need credentials. No one needs credentials to be correct, their statements should be evaluated on their merits alone. Credentialism is a choking ideology, leading to higher prices and possibly higher quality in many things.
Source: https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/h...
Having studied or lived through something makes you far more likely to be correct than simply thinking about it with your giant brain. You don't need them to be correct, but they really help.
Uh insurance actually does cover them, particularly for reconstructive surgeries. It should be noted that the conditions under which insurance would cover a trans person's gender affirming surgery is going to be essentially under the same conditions they would for a cis person. Now it's worth noting that Medicaid does generally cover gender affirming surgeries in certain states however Medicaid is required to be primarily paid for by the state rather than the federal government. Medicare only covers them under specific circumstances with a large pile of supporting documentation attached. And then with private insurance providers it is highly dependent on the company and policy whether they cover them or not.
> We're also not labeling it as "life-saving."
Gender affirming surgeries are almost always the very last step for trans people and it's far quicker, easier, and more common to get them as a cis person than it is as a trans person.
Gender affirming care however is generally what is referred to as life-saving more than anything else. This is primarily access to medication in the form of Hormone Replacement Therapy and additionally in the form of access to counseling and therapy to support the transition and to mitigate gender dysphoria among other issues.
And the thing I think most people don't really understand is how disgustingly cheap the primary form of care, Hormone Replacement Therapy, is.
For trans women the main medication is estradiol. This medication is extremely cheap and most pharmacies won't take insurance for it due to how cheap it is. A month's dose in the cheapest form at one of the higher doses is going to be at most 15-20 USD per month. More expensive forms of estradiol that don't have to be taken as rigorously and/or have less risk of side effects cost around 1.5-3x that depending on the form. For the first few months to a year they'll also generally take a testosterone suppressor until the estradiol suppresses testosterone by itself and those medications only cost around 10 USD per month or less.
For trans men the main medication is testosterone. It's controlled so it's more annoying to get due to it's abuse as a "performance enhancing drug" but even at the higher doses it costs more or less the same amount or less than the equivalent doses of HRT for trans women (coming in at well under 20 USD/month, more often less than 5 USD/month).
This puts the cost of the bulk of treatment for transgender people at well under the cost of most other medications.
If anything, I'd say that's become less prominent in recent years as the consequences of that mindset have been playing out around us.