Would those markers be usable as a natural UUID?

Not the major HLA markers, no, because there's a ~25% chance it'll match for two siblings [0] and can sometimes match other relatives.

Once you start looking at even more factors, you start reinventing a regular DNA-matching test.

[0] The "Birthday Paradox" makes the odds of confusion even higher with more siblings.

Yeah, I love my pipes.

To be clear, it's 100%, definitely not good for you - but the level of harm doesn't seem to be even close to cigarettes or chewing tobacco.

The amount consumed is much less, the smoke shouldn't be entering your lungs, and if there are tons of good, "all-natural" tobacco out there without all the additives put in by cigarette companies.

Why is it less harm compared to cigarette? I would assume the cigarette at least has a filter which makes things a little better?

It's just because cigars (and presumably pipes?) are puffed, not inhaled. You absorb nicotine through the mucus membrane in your mouth (not as much), and otherwise enjoy the flavor. The practice with cigarettes is to inhale into your lungs. You could technically puff a cigarette I guess.

People make a big deal out additives and accelerants, but the carcinogens are 99% from smoke, burning plant matter. In that respect, pure tobacco isn't meaningfully safer. That said if you "puff", that's probably safer, though still risky (mouth cancer, and you're still going to inhale some amount of smoke).

For the additives, I’m more concerned about the addiction potential than direct risks.

I would think nicotine does most of the heavy lifting qua addictive potential

A common assumption. A filter filters out harmful stuff right?

Except they don't:

https://exposetobacco.org/wp-content/uploads/Cigarette-Filte...

There have been calls in the Netherlands (perhaps even at the EU level) to ban filtered cigarettes, for the simple reason that they are misleading and offer no protection, but are harmful to the environment because of the non-degradable micro-plastics.

Meh - I'll believe it when I see the actual data.

Qilin allegedly hacked BATFE about a month ago, and the files were never posted to their site.

I don’t think those are contradictory at all.

My personal agent is prompted in a way to “believe” that it has full personhood. It makes it more open to novel solutions in my experience - but I don’t believe that it’s a person. It’s still just a token prediction routine, not a conscious entity.

I live in a town of <15k people, and it’s the county seat. Our hospital can handle tungsten carbide rings without issue. I checked before getting one for this very reason (though I now wear an Oura as my wedding ring).

I understand where you’re coming from, but would argue that the reality is that our industry is predominantly almost exclusively AI-related at this point.

A tagging feature would be nice, but HN is historically very reluctant to introduce new features. I argue that’s a good thing, given its age and the fact that it remains the gold standard for tech community news.

Adding tagging strikes me as a tall order, almost like asking Craigslist to make a major UI change - feature additions threaten the spirit of a beloved platform.

The toxic effects also impacted the area where I grew up here in the Southern US - there’s a road that’s known locally as “Chemical Ranch Rd” where there’s a ~100 acre property that was used for testing Agent Orange.

I’m not a manned pilot, but have my part 107 and have spent a few thousand hours flying combat flight sims - ~150kts in a cargo aircraft, four seconds from departing the runway, seems like the worst possible time to abort a touch-and-go. Then consider the numerous automated audio warnings and the copilot suggesting a go-around, and it seems pretty ridiculous to me.

Don’t get me wrong - if I had to land that plane, I’d likely have overrun the runway too. I’m not saying it’s easy, only that it appears to me that they were operating well outside the documented parameters that are the pilot’s responsibility to know.

I just looked it up, and a 767’s Vref is 122-165kts, with Vref at max weight at 144kts. They touched down at 158kts, nose down. The approach was ~35kts over speed, they were above the glide slope, and not bleeding speed fast enough to sink - so they dropped the nose.

From what I can see, they were screwed the moment they touched down - the last moment they had a reasonable opportunity to abort was when they decided to drop the nose and commit instead.

They could have “aborted” at almost any time prior to when they did. And even that may have been fine if they had stuck with it.

A decent rule of thumb in aviation (and life…) is that you’re allowed to change your mind once. Waffling kills more people than switching to a bad decision does.

They’re all over the rural South. Public opinion seems to be increasingly changing that, but a lot of them are installed by entities with little accountability.

I don’t think the point of GP’s post was to claim one way or the other; rather it’s saying that it’s important to understand the motivations of others if you’re going to publicly characterize their actions or effectively oppose them.