Is there not going to be an official venue for discussing the suspension of anonymous posting?

Management can't stomach it?

I think it's plain to see who the real cowards are.

Or is it just me?

What blows my mind is that YouTube provides absolutely no affordance for telling it that you don't want to see ANY videos from a particular channel. Unless I'm missing something, the best you can do (apart from user scripts) is to tell YouTube to remove any PARTICULAR videos from the channel that appear in the recommended list, then click "Tell us why" and say that you didn't like it.

Blocking on social media is a pretty important function, and YouTube is social media.

I don't recall any news source mentioning in any blurbs exactly what the adverse event was. As long as they don't identify the patient surely it's not confidential...

I remember when Slashdot editors were technical people. Those were the good old days.

The security researcher should have exploited the bug to send embarrassing company-wide messages posing as the CEO.

That might have spurred them into action without the need to make the details public.

If the precautionary principle doesn't apply to newly discovered diseases, when exactly does it apply? Or do you believe the precautionary principle is an idea with no merit?

If 2 years from now a new respiratory illness was detected in China, do you think governments would keep their borders open (including to travellers coming from the affected area) UNTIL IT HAD BEEN PROVEN that the disease was highly contagious, was transmitted by asymptomatic carriers, and had substantially greater lethality than the seasonal flu? Or do you think they might close their borders right away, UNTIL IT HAD BEEN PROVEN that the disease could be contained?

Haha, quite the zinger! Well done!

There is no evidence of a novel virus outbreak in Wuhan.
There is no evidence of human to human transmission.
There is no evidence of asymptomatic transmission.
There is no evidence that you should wear a mask.
There is no evidence of aerosol transmission.
There is no evidence of reinfection. <-- YOU ARE HERE

Let's review the recent proclamations of your precious WHO, which totally isn't playing this down to help the Chinese Communist Party save face:

"There's no evidence of a novel infectious disease in Wuhan, no need to worry."
"There's no evidence of human to human transmission, no need to worry."
"There's no evidence of asymptomatic transmission, no need to worry."
"There's no evidence that wearing a face covering helps prevent infection, no need to bother with one."
"There's no evidence of aerosol transmission, no need to worry." --- you are here (not for long)

Why not ask actual Hong Kongers whether THEY think the current developments are a good thing or a bad thing? (You might want to refer to their most recent election results.)

Are you just pretending to be autistic, or is this a real struggle for you every day?

As someone who's only used Window Maker, GNOME 2, and now xfce extensively, is it really the case that KDE doesn't have an affordance for minimize / maximize / close functionality via keyboard shortcuts?

Suppose that you have an opinion that the owners of media platforms don't want to distribute.

Suppose that every media platform bans you from using their privately owned service.

Suppose that even if you set out to build your own media platform, no hosting provider agrees to host it using their privately owned facilities.

Suppose that if you host your own media platform, no ISP agrees to connect your platform to the internet using their privately owned infrastructure.

Come to the realization that the internet is privately owned.

Your freedom of speech has now been reduced to how far your voice carries from the top of a soap box in the town square. Are you ok with this?

Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.

Anything resembling a "transhuman" won't be possible without post-singularity technologies. (In before "no true transhuman" fallacy.)

Quarantine disrupts internal clocks. The disease designated "COVID-19" by the WHO might disrupt internal clocks, but that's not what the piece is about.