• 261: What’s the point of doing a bug bounty if the bounty is ineligible for pay?, submitted on 2022-05-16 08:23:11+08:00.
• 262: Reddit are taking my account and I feel powerless., submitted on 2022-05-17 08:48:49+08:00.
• 263: Unofficial Daily Update for 2022-05-17. 5327 New Cases., submitted on 2022-05-18 02:00:17+08:00.
• 264: Arwady: “Chicago could soon reach ‘high’ COVID level” (or so she says), submitted on 2022-05-18 20:16:03+08:00.

261: What’s the point of doing a bug bounty if the bounty is ineligible for pay?, submitted on 2022-05-16 08:23:11+08:00.

—– 261.1 —–2022-05-16 12:19:53+08:00:

If you find an exploit, seems like it might have more value on the open market.

262: Reddit are taking my account and I feel powerless., submitted on 2022-05-17 08:48:49+08:00.

—– 262.1 —–2022-05-17 12:36:27+08:00:

The good news is that you are not powerless. At this stage, the mark holder has just said you infringed. Whether you actually have is far from established. Even if it was, you have several defenses.

Here, laches stands out because of how long it’s taken Instagram to figure out that you have this account. FFS it’s been eleven years at least, right? That is the definition of unreasonable delay.

What’s their strategy? Sit around like a potted plant for eleven years and all of a sudden issue a trademark claim, after all this time? Seriously? What nonsense. Such diligence. Vigorous enforcement. Wow.

Your response could read something along the lines of . . . .

COUNTER NOTICE OF IMPROPER CLAIM ALLEGING INFRINGEMENT OF ALLEGED TRADEMARK RIGHTS

Reddit Legal -

On information and belief, an alleged trademark holder has issued an improper claim that the username associated with this account, known solely on Reddit as “Instagram.”

By this counter-notice, you are issued a brief explanation as to why I am entitled to use the same. First, the alleged mark holder has provided no evidence whatsoever tending to establish either (a) the alleged claimant owns a valid and legally protectable mark; or (b) the infringement causes any likelihood of confusion about any source of any goods or services associated therewith.

Second, even if any such evidence was provided, which it has not been, this account’s use thereof is permissible under at least any one or more of the following: descriptive fair use, nominative fair use, laches, the First Amendment and the alleged mark holder’s unclean hands and/or trademark misuse.

Particularly with respect to laches, the alleged holder’s eleven-year delay in issuance is self-evidently fatal to any such claim. Accordingly, and in view of the alleged holder’s lack of diligence, the claim is improper and in no way constitutes any lawful challenge to my rights to this username.

All rights to assert, or further substantiate, these or any other grounds for defense to the alleged holder’s claim are explicitly reserved.

Sincerely,

u/instagram

NOTE: Obviously talk to a lawyer.

263: Unofficial Daily Update for 2022-05-17. 5327 New Cases., submitted on 2022-05-18 02:00:17+08:00.

—– 263.1 —–2022-05-18 20:47:46+08:00:

but there’s that little voice that whispers “we still don’t know the hidden effects of even asymptomatic infection”

Long term complications aren’t necessarily limited to infection that is asymptomatic. But that isn’t the issue. The issue is whether it is reasonable to presume that COVID infection can be avoided in the long term. Clearly, it can’t. Now with that information, the question thus becomes how to move forward.

COVID is with us, lamentably. There were certain folks many years ago in the Obama administration that correctly realized the risks associated with certain types of highly dangerous public health research, and deliberately undertook the effort to ban it. Yet, that category of activities continues because of reckless irresponsibility of certain stakeholders.

I fully anticipate we’ll see another such outbreak of another highly infectious respiratory virus in my lifetime, potentially of pandemic scale. Hopefully not in the near term, but it will happen. When researchers pull and tweak the genetic structure of pathogens to facilitate their gaining functions they have not otherwise acquired in the wild, the stage is set for another outbreak of COVID-19.

In a non-stupid world, we would have turned back to the Obama administration’s foresight when they banned this set of activities. But the political impetus is not prevention, or acting in good faith in the public good. Rather, it’s exploiting the business opportunities the pandemic has created.

Not that we could do anything about it - the anti-maskers have had their self fulfilling prophecy: we’re all getting this thing someday.

I fully realize you will likely hold fast your belief that masks of any kind actually reduce COVID-19 transmission risk and potentially offer some level of protection to users. I also don’t expect that anything I can show you will change your mind. But the data speak for themselves. As a matter of public policy, to take on faith that purported countermeasures achieve the purposes for which they are intended is totally irrational. There are scores of public data-sets on this issue and exactly none of them support the contention that masks reduce the spread of COVID-19, provide any benefit whatsoever to the wearer with respect to COVID-19 and the like. That has been studied time and again. Tens of thousands of researchers have undertaken hundreds of thousands of man-hours trying to figure out if even the slightest effect can be seen, and none of them have found any causal link between masks and either reduced COVID-19 transmission or any individual reduction in susceptibility.

Yet, there actually are factors that do matter, namely ventilation, which is critical. Time spent in an unventilated room is the single biggest predictor of contracting COVID. From very early on, the research clearly pointed in one direction — COVID was obviously transmitted by aerosolized viral material, and that is how most people get infected. So, spend time in an unventilated room with someone who is shedding virus? You’re likely to contract, because of how the viral material accumulates in stagnant air. No mask is going to protect you from that.

As I have repeatedly emphasized, there is a reason the masks people hold out as being so awesome, whether N95 or K-N95 (or non-woven surgical masks and formerly cloth masks), are not marketed as anything other than dust filters. That is because to market a product for a medical purpose, you have to go through many regulatory hoops through the FDA. That is because you cannot market medical devices in this country without proving they are both safe and effective. Here, safety isn’t the issue. Efficacy is. And there is no mask currently marketed in the United States for that purpose.

Realize the significance of what I have said. As a point of comparison, if you were diabetic would you appreciate it if some crackpot who knew nothing whatsoever about how a blood sugar testing device worked, held out some random “home remedy” for diabetes? I should hope not, but that is the level of proof that exists for masks. It’s on par with alternative medicine, homeopathy and other quackery. The fact that certain highly irresponsible so called “experts” have appeared to claim something like consensus (note: there is no such “consensus”) as to the alleged efficacy of masks does not change this result. What people say does not change what the evidence says, and the data here are the relevant evidence.

Even if all of the above is too complicated, don’t you think that if any mask actually did work, that SOMEONE in this country would have sought to obtain the appropriate regulatory indications? So that they, unlike the universe of their competition, could carry the “FDA approved” designation? What would have happened if Pfizer or Moderna tried to market their vaccines without regulatory clearance? Is it enough that a whole bunch of people appear to have certain beliefs about efficacy or safety? Absolutely not. The underlying data to support safety and efficacy are the prerequisites for those products’ being eligible for commercialization. The entire reason the FDCA was passed is to protect consumers from being misled by “snake oil” type drugs and devices. This is key difference between the so called field of “public health” and the people and companies that actually do the work of innovation in this space.

264: Arwady: “Chicago could soon reach ‘high’ COVID level” (or so she says), submitted on 2022-05-18 20:16:03+08:00.

—– 264.1 —–2022-05-18 20:18:13+08:00:

Arwady is a source of unyielding exhaustion, but has at least recognized that prior “mitigations” have no connection to any purported “metrics” whatsoever:

Arwady said Chicago would not necessarily see an immediate return of mask mandates until hospitalizations begin to rise significantly.