I think the takeaway may be that both sides of the political spectrum are equally inclined to name calling.
(One tiny piece of evidence these results are not mere coincidence: there are 4x as many such results for Trump/Obama Hitler than for "Jesus Hitler" - 9.5 million)
The part I hate is that the media and everyone is eating up all these new sound bytes for things like "alternative facts" instead of just calling them what they are, lies, and moving on to more important things like focusing on the actual issues. To give it a fun name like that plays into the spectacle and is exactly what he wants.
Yeah, I wish I could recommend WordPress to people because it's really nice at what it does, but the security flaws are too serious.The fact that it takes months for them to fix serious vulns reported to them only makes it worse.
Seriously, there are youtube tutorials about 'How to Hack Wordpress.' It can't get much worse than that:
It doesn't support your assertion but it's still interesting 2008-2010 data from an antivirus vendor. It's talking about about how long some vulnerabilities were exploited by malware before getting disclosed, use in targeted attacks, and so on.
I don't think it says that about the set of all vulnerabilities (IOW - citation needed!).
It does say "In this paper, we consider only exploits that have been used in real-world attacks before the corresponding vulnerabilities were disclosed" so it's unsurprising that in their dataset this is the case :)
Yeap, you're right, I misread. Here is a quote from the paper: "15% of these exploits were created before the disclosure of the corresponding vulnerability." So there's a lower bound.
"The End of Physics" is a good one. You may also re-think your desire to learn physics. If you get through the book and still want to learn, then you will do it completely without illusions.
I'm curious whether any physicists here have read this book and found its claims justified. I'm just a layman who enjoys reading about physics from time to time, but it seems to me that there are actually a large number of unsolved problems in physics that are experimentally accessible to us right now, and there's plenty of space for new theories to yield testable predictions. People were making claims similar to the ones in this book 100 years ago; they were unjustified then, and I expect them to turn out to be unjustified now.
Are you doubting the results of personality research or that personality is genetic? A simple google search would tell you that there is plenty of evidence that personality is partly genetic:
It hasn't stopped working, for an example close-to-home, look at the corruption in SF, that has been there for over a century. As long as voters don't pay attention, we'll have lousy government. Voters are the watchdogs.
