Readit NewsAlso, keep in mind that this is a partial leak. The data was scraped from some leaky endpoint which was patched out before every user could be scraped. Only users who were in the partial leak received emails (I have two accounts, only one received an email). If you're a Substack user but didn't receive an email, I'd assume you're not in the leak. Troy Hunt should load it into HIBP eventually, and those concerned can check there if they don't want to seek the leak out on their own.
I'm not sure this would be the case? I've seen plenty of links to content of questionable legality shared on HN.
This can be said about any drug, but even then, heavy use of weed vs other drugs is absolutely cheaper, especially these days if you live in an area where it's legal and/or are willing to grow it.
Sure, I think a lot of those donations would amount to a few pennies or so at once, but I feel like a lot more people would be willing to support creators if they didn't have to constantly choose which to support.
Why should anyone want to use this, OP?
I need a waveform, a playhead, a good browser that can do both metadata based libraries and dumb folders fast and without lagging, a way to build/save/view/load playlists and a way to queue songs.
Most players are just too basic or make the wrong or to many assumptions about my collection. Or the interface is just too cute and dysfunctional for my actual daily use.
This means on Linux I currently use either mixxx or just VLC player, but I surely haven't tested every possible mediaplayer.
I have encountered this for myself.
A few months ago New York banned phones at lunch and was discussed on HN [1]
We live in times where parents and schools no longer have the authority to enforce behaviour and social media is peer pressure from the entire world.
These bans are obviously heavy handed but hopefully they are a reversion back to an equilibrium that gives our young a chance to properly develop...
...What? They certainly can, if they're banning certain behavior?
This topic came up in another online community (which I'm intentionally not mentioning) a lot a few years ago. I left a comment about why giving experimental drugs to terminally ill patients is not a simple or obvious idea like many would assume. I got some very long, very intense replies from someone who was dying of a type of cancer who believed he had a good shot at recovery if he could get his hands on an experimental drug. He had all of the links and papers to prove it.
I remember trying to take it all in and reconsider my position.
A few years later, there was a post from his wife that he had died. It was a very sad situation. I clicked some of her links and found that he had a blog where he had written a lot. He actually did go through with the process of requesting the experimental drug and his request was granted. However, the drug not only didn't work, it had caused some irreversible damage to his body that made his final months a lot more painful and difficult than they had to be.
Apparently the "compassionate use" exemptions are not as hard to get as the anti-FDA writers have led us to believe. The harder part is often getting the companies to provide the drugs, because they know the risk profiles and uncertainties better than anyone and aren't always interested in letting terminally ill patients experiment on themselves outside of the process.
Jake's blog where he posted throughout his entire illness: https://jakeseliger.com/
Bess' blog: https://bessstillman.substack.com/
It was a heartbreaking story to follow, and one that hit me a lot harder than I thought it would when Jake died.