Usha's Pickle Digest is a great resource for pickling recipes: https://a.co/d/cOPoPni

There was a NYT writeup back in 2020: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/06/dining/indian-pickle-quee...

I filed a complaint with the FCC, citing Title 47 of the CFR and including their email to me as an attached PDF.

The complaints link: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us

I have a similar situation with the archive.* sites recently as well, on multiple devices on the same network (and various browsers).

On a hunch I tried using a VPN (I'm in the US, and tried just another regional VPN endpoint) and everything works fine. I believe my ISP (AT&T) or its gateway configuration is blocking the site for "security" reasons, which is showing up as an SSL problem. Going to poke at it further, but thought I'd mention it.

Possibly related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28495204

Rivers burn and run backwards.

[Citation needed]

I see a few typos in the wording of the paper (e.g., "spezify", "touchs", etc.). While this doesn't mean much, I would expect if the paper had gotten a fine-toothed comb review that these sorts of typos would have been caught. Moving back to the "not holding my breath" stance unless there start to be indications from experts in the field that the claims are holding up.

I can forgive imperfect English. He's not a native English speaker and his reviewers probably are not be either.

The paper is on arXiv, so we don't know if it's gotten a fine-toothed comb review yet. Furthermore, some reviewers seem to ignore those kinds of typos, which means a paper might have been reviewed carefully for the technical contents, but not at all for language.

It's on ArXiv, people are free to publish there without getting a language review. The author's first language is not English.

This appears to be just reinvention of known algorithms on suffix trees. I recommend (and recommended as a comment on the original article) Dan Gusfield's book "Algorithms on Strings, Trees, and Sequences" which does a pretty thorough job of covering the relevant algorithms and data structures.

The GADDAG is a standard datastructure - the original paper, linked from the article, is from 1994.

The article doesn't pretend to invent the GADDAG, nor claim to compress it better than others, only to try and explain how to simplify and pack a GADDAG.

The steps would work on all DAGs generally. This is nothing new, but hopefully its new to some of us and a nice article.