skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It should be a escrow release when a patient is cured.

This just winds up being cruel. We don't understand a number of diseases, and we don't know how to cure them.

But we can treat symptoms, and sometimes prevent them even if it isn't a cure. It's OK to make Insulin Plus that keeps diabetics alive longer. I have MS, and freaking trust me, I want my non-cure medicine. Without that medicine, my chances of having a very poor quality of life full of discomfort increases pretty dramatically. Lots of things are like this: No real cure, but we make folks lives better by treating symptoms or preventing some damage and things like that.

The only way to not be cruel is to give treatments that work even if they aren't a cure.
Isn't such a thing called a crypto key? And if you had such a thing, why in the hell would anyone sensible ever use browser cookie functionality to store that?

Learn to use a password manager.
A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work
Tequila wraps Psi4, Madness, and/or PySCF for Quantum Chemistry with Expectation Values:
https://github.com/tequilahub/tequila#quantumchemistry
It's not subtle in that it's not opaque to the programmer that it's just a "regular" sum type

It's not important in that it doesn't change what the programmer can do with it, it just changes the syntax used.

Return an error: return Err(...) vs. throw ...

Propagate error to caller: ? vs. nothing

Store/modify/nest/pass: Without try/catch/throw construct vs. WITH try/catch/throw construct.

The much more important difference is between bounded vs. unbounded error types. Rust falls in the former camp and inherits all the problems (and benefits) that come with it.
Hey, OP here! I fixed it, let me know if you can see it properly now.
> in the context of pensions, "tax on companies" generally means "increasing the employer part of social charges"

I cited specifically recent decrease of french corp income tax above, everything else is your speculations.

> lose margin (and have therefore lower capacity to invest).

investments are not included into margin, losing margin doesn't have impact on investments unless company become not profitable
Pretty much. If that type of income dominates your economic system it murders the incentive to actually create value.

Doing well in your career means nothing because the benefits are a rounding error on the rewards of having wealthy parents or getting into bitcoin early or whatever.

Quite apart from being grossly unfair it's grossly inefficient to structure the economy so that unearned income is privileged and dominates.
-- Related --

Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption : https://9to5mac.com/2023/07/20/apple-imessage-facetime-remov...

HN Discussion: (784-comments - 2023-07-20) : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36800297
Hoppscotch: Self-Hosted Postman Alternative
You are killing people under the guise of helping them.
I have suffered the same. The pain from the sciatica was unlike anything I had ever experienced. Excruciating doesn’t even begin to describe it.

The McKenzie exercises every morning since have undoubtedly helped my recovery. As has giving up running.
Let's say a treatment kills 9 out of 10 people. Maybe those 9 were terminally ill & that's why they died, but maybe the company was just lying and their treatment was doing nothing or killing people more quickly. How do you determine that? When would you shutdown a "death factory"? Would you require mandatory disclosures of the death rate & risks, or could a company hide those facts from prospective patients, only talking about the patients who survived? If they can't show efficacy, should they still be allowed to sell to patients?

I think the ideal of regulation is to try to remove the guesswork & expertise required for the end user to do due diligence. It's not perfect, but at least some minimum level of regulation, such as mandatory efficacy disclosures, would be needed.
Excellent explanation, parent is also correct. I think the author’s position is misinformed.

The FDA doesn’t hold back researchers on inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Inclusion for the Moderna trial he linked to:

> Must have primary refractory or acquired secondary resistance to prior immune checkpoint treatments. Primary refractory is defined as prior exposure to anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) antibody for at least 6 weeks but no more than 6 months with demonstration of progression on 2 separate scans at least 4 weeks apart but no more than 12 weeks apart and progression occurring within 6 months after first dose of anti-PD-1 antibody. Acquired secondary resistance must have confirmed objective response or prolonged stable disease (SD) (>6 months), followed by disease progression in the setting of ongoing treatment and confirmed progression on scans at least 4 weeks apart.

Exclusion criteria:

> Participant has received treatment with prohibited medications (that is, concurrent anticancer therapy including other chemotherapy, radiation [local radiation for palliative care is permitted with approval from the Sponsor]…

From the description of the patient’s treatment course it sounds like he had curative intent radiation (given he subsequently had surgery) and would probably not meet this study’s criteria making the limiting factor Moderna not the FDA.

He also doesn’t mention whether he’s starting immunotherapy/checkpoint inhibitors (or his tumor status) and may be lumping immunotherapy with chemotherapy which is a good new treatment option and would typically be offered if eligible. Definitely better than being enrolled in a dose study and in fact is required by Moderna.
It’s like in software, the user gets the most abusive treatment while other metrics are invented to take attention away from that.
Hey Aaryan, I just signed up and am taking the tour, and the body copy (#737373 on #070707) is effectively unreadable while sitting outside with my MacBook Air at max brightness. (Hacker News remains easy to read in the same scenario.)

For accessibility's sake, it'd be nice if the site met WCAG Level AAA contrast ratio requirements.
All significant changes in the past came from people loudly demanding change, be it through mass protests, civil rights movements, revolutionary actions, or the collective voice of individuals seeking justice and progress. These impassioned calls for change have driven societies to challenge existing norms, break down oppressive systems, and pave the way for a more equitable and inclusive future.

People have to change themselves first (to break the walls built by others) to want to change the society.

Hope is not hopium. Hope is necessary for any action to take place.
> I'm just taking author's following comment at face value

Plenty of mRNA human trials of cancer treatment are in progress. Indeed, as he stated, he wants into two that are underway, but that he is probably too far along for. He wishes that they had been greenlit even earlier and perhaps made their way to be approved drugs that he could just be given by his local doctor.

> For the situations where there's "no active trial" caused by the FDA not greenlighting the experiments,

There's compassionate use exceptions for circumstances like this.

The big thing is, there's two big bars to cross with getting a trial together:

- You probably want to be doing human research in a way that will produce evidence that will convince the FDA to grant you approval. (Hence, drug companies often are nervous that compassionate use will pollute their data).

- The FDA wants to protect human subjects, and if there's a drug that results in 15% survival for a year, vs. 5% for doing nothing and ???% for your new experimental treatment: they want that drug to be tested as part of a protocol that minimizes potential harms, not to randomly replace the 15% survival treatment. Most experimental treatments end up failing.
The paper seems to be paywalled so I have no clue about how they arrived here, but this: "That said, the results indicate that the probability we are alone (<1) in the galaxy is significant, while the maximum number of contemporary civilizations might be as few as a thousand."

Doesn't seem to really answer anything. Isn't this just a really fancy way of saying "we don't know the solution to the Drake equation"? It could be a 99.999999...% (<100%) chance of being alone, it could be a 0% chance, or anything in between.

Given the title of the paper, this is a very loose definition of "solution" for the Drake equation ("it could be anything!").
The article is discussing the merits of letting users generate their own passwords at all. So unless you can guarantee the website will generate nice pass phrases, you’ll have to account for weird characters too.
Hey, OP here, can you see it properly now?
According to the histories levied by the Athenians.

The Spartans left no written record and hardly any archeology.
In serious (esp. life-threatening) situations, the placebo is, or is supplemented with, the normal course of medicine, not sugar water.
That is the fundamental difference between free software and open source.

Free software centers around the user.
Everything else is a means to that end.
Open source centers around the authors.
This is fundamentally misguided.

I couldn’t give two [deleted] about authors and what they want.
I found the part "Humans in Complex Systems" quite interesting. My understanding of it is that technology could fall short of being an adequate solution to a more systemic problem wrt climate change. In addition to that work, I've been digging around the perspective of system dynamics [1] on the issues the global civilization is facing [2].

I feel the crowd here is more biased toward a solutionist view on those issues - I might be very wrong. Anyway, I was curious about different perspectives on this topics.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_dynamics

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPb_0JZ6-Rc
The Error rabbit hole goes far deeper than this. I was hoping to read about downcasting and anti-patterns. What were others looking for?
When tesla was first saying that LIDAR was nothing more than a laser and receiving optics mounted on a spinning hub that spun real fast. Like old those big radar dishes on big navy ships.

In the years since, ic and component manufacturers have created solid state lidar. They're basically little electronics modules that cost a few dozen dollars, no motors, etc.

The world changes. Better components come along
They've also been into e-bikes for a while now, too. 2021 article: https://amishamerica.com/amish-e-bikes/
https://weburbanist.com/2015/10/22/guerrilla-grafting-public... maybe?
> laptop

The author buried the lede. Using a bare laptop all day will damage your health. To achieve an ergonomic posture [0], you have to be looking straight forward (or close to that) while your elbows are low and bent at an obtuse angle. This is impossible with a laptop, unless you basically turn it into a desktop by connecting it to an external keyboard, mouse, and monitor(s). Theoretically, you could use a laptop stand instead of an external monitor, but I've found that the letters on a laptop screen are small enough that they make me reflexively crane my neck forward.

Time spent using a laptop without external peripherals should be limited just like vibration and noise exposure is. You're always straining either your shoulders, your neck, or both.

It's surprising to me that the author is looking into niche products like sit-stand desks before having addressed the obvious problem that would be pointed out by any ergonomics resource on the Internet. It reminds me of the phrase, "don't major in the minors".

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/7-things-you-need-fo...
I wasn’t aware of the castor oil plant’s beans.

My good old friend Calabar Bean came to visit last week though (Cain’s Jawbone reference).
I feel somewhat closer to this person because I was once in his position as a child fighting a neuroblastoma in 1981 and some how my mother found a way to get me on an experimental list which saved my life. Half of the kids that took the drug died by the time they were teens due to heart failure, obviously I wasn't one of them, but am thankful for the chance to live a full life.

When the odds are against survival, there shouldn't be any rules limiting treatment, if it means even a slightly higher chance of winning. That's something our government has forgotten about or doesn't care about. If I was in this persons shoes, I would make it as personal as possible against those in control of the FDA. Show up at their houses, work, kids soccer practice, get in their face and let them see what their inaction is doing in person.
I feel this has potential to bring new levels of painful ux.

> They might prioritize serving the VIPs and slow down the pace when there is an influx of newcomers.

Or they might prioritize people who are about to convert and deprioritize them once they pay.
When your entire business is built around public internet services and public internet enabled devices in the hands of end users, this approach feels like losing the plot. Compare with something like BeyondCorp, which actually advanced the state of practice in corporate security just a few short years ago, in a super internet-positive way.

What'll be their next old-school corporate move? Time cards? A ban on phones with cameras? A buggy middlebox that forges TLS certs?
As a user, I paid for a bandwidth and I want that bandwidth.

The rest is the service provider's problem.
Cool, what's the actual traffic to them?

How many of those aren't the owner?

How many of those aren't bots?

(Flip those last two questions as you'd like; I wasn't sure which would be more illuminating.)
Environmental Millenarianism
Twitter user begs Elon for help regarding spam situation
True, but the closure concept does appear alongside it. Are you chasing the etymological or conceptual origin of the phrase?
clarification: fruit juice is basically pure fructose which cancer loves and your organs can't handle.

actual fruit has fiber and you're unlikely to eat enough to cause harm.
If your set of beliefs implies that your set of beliefs are not true, that's a contradiction.

In this case, thinking all of reality is material implies that you cannot believe your thoughts, including the thought that all of reality is material. But that was your original belief, meaning through your own worldview you've reached a contradiction.
Ethereum weirdos' attempt to financialize the universe at everyone's detriment is a lot ruder, thanks.
>And from what ChatGPT tells me, it's likely that this would have been an investment with a positive ROI.

Wonderful.

It's interesting to me that, in just a few months, I've already developed muscle memory for checking whether or not things I read online are machine-generated. The first thing I do on any website is search for "GPT", "Bing", and "AI" and stop reading if I find them.

Reading someone's writing is an exercise in trust. If they claim something, I have to be able to trust that they have done enough of their homework to back it up. If they cite a source, I have to be able to trust it says what they claim. Otherwise what's the point? If I can't rely on the author, then reading their writing requires checking everything they've said. Their writing is useless to me since I'll need to do my own research anyway.

If you write something and ask me to read it, you are asking me to trust that you have done the legwork. If you really just typed it into ChatGPT, that's more than just stupid. It's a betrayal.
It's interesting that they dive into the climate change and health aspects of kerosene lamps but don't bother interviewing any Amish to see if that is actually the reason for switching. I would intuitively think that it is because they don't want to continue buying ever more costly kerosene.
It explicitly states the passengers will be killed
Ok grampa, let's use DNS. Should we all type code out by hand as well?
What I love the most about coding at night is that I am more creative, and everything flows better.
They do! Most all IAM errors will list the actor, the resource, and the missing permission
America’s largest tool company couldn’t make a wrench in America
You're right that there are alternatives, and there is an existing standard of care. I don't think I'm ignoring that. Let me clarify, I am not saying that patients with poor prognosis are being offered nothing. They are being offered standard of care.

I think sticking with standard of care until new drugs have gone through the full, current process may be net negative under the current process, and considering the counterfactual especially for patients with poor prognosis.

Chemoterapy will buy some time with certainty, but in expectations broadening access even slightly means we can gain confidence in the experimental treatments that do work slightly sooner, and that improves the standard of care for everyone. Experimental drugs sometimes do work, and it would be bias to only look at the risks while sweeping aside the potential upside.

Consider what happens a few years from now with the current system and with a system that selectively broadens access in some cases, when the early data seems to support the risk/reward. Even if most new medications fail, the cost of delaying those few therapy that will happen to work is much larger than the risk being paid by the trial population. That's because only a few people participate in trials, but everyone benefits from the results. This is why we have trials at all.

In someone with an aggressive disease such as OP, that person may very likely benefit from having that choice. Today they may choose to buy some time with _relative_ certainty, knowing that chemo has very heavy side effects and that they may not enjoy very much of that remaining time. But they may not choose to try some experimental treatments, even when the risk/reward seems reasonable according to early data, even though that may result in a small chance of success, and certainly data that will help bring therapies quicker to more people.

The benefit of experimental treatment is not just to the individual participating in the experiment. Part of the benefit, that helps justifies the risk, is the idea that a fraction of the treatments will be worthwhile. Slowing down trials is safer in the sense that no one will be responsible for anyone losing their chance at chemo or dying, but it creates the exact kind of invisible deaths in expectation that TFA talks about.
Whether correct or not, they're brilliant answers! :-)
There isn't a magical number which means the vaccine is effective, and below that number it is ineffective. A vaccine is effective if it helps people deal with a virus (i.e. lowering chance of hospitalisation/death). It doesn't magically become ineffective because it doesn't meet an arbitrary percentage of prevented cases.

The Polio vaccine is "only" 99-100% effective. That means that it's not 100% effective (as in, there are cases where it doesn't prevent transmission/infection). According to the criterium laid out by GP this means it is an ineffective vaccine, just like the Covid vaccine.
If it were for science alone, it might be fine. The problem is when Steve Jobs is sick and I walk up to him and sell him an experimental cure for $2,000,000,000. He can trivially pay it, but I have a huge incentive to lie. At a smaller scale, a more efficient conman can take all of someone's assets. And not just the dying person's. How many people wouldn't sacrifice everything to save a spouse's life or their child's?

The other concern is when you turn down medicine that might work for snakeoil that doesn't.
I don't understand how people use laptops for extended periods of time. The only comfortable way to use a laptop is with an external monitor, keyboard and mouse. The author talks about ergonomics but still uses a laptop. Laptops are for doing work on a plane or taking to a hotel room when traveling, not for being a daily driver in my book (at least not without peripherals). The keyboard on laptops is too close together, the screen is at the wrong height and angle. Trackpads are disastrous. Using a laptop for 8 hours feels like the day after running a marathon but without any of the good parts.
https://stretch15.com/ is nice low effort way to start stretching.

It was on HN few months ago and since then I do it almost every day. I've been going to the gym for a long time but proper stretching is something I never paid attention to.
It seems like a pretty "downhill" battle and repression wouldn't really have worked either way if no entity like this had intervened. It's a nice case to blow up for publicity and further making fun of such blatantly corrupt and incompetent cops, but I don't think it was in need of material resources to win.
It's very clear that the aim of the article is not talking about Sparta. It's talking about how modern society should fit the expectations of this historian more.

And his aspirations would be to have a society less like Sparta. Meaning less fit, respected people that get mobilized to protect their territory and more of the opposite perhaps?

The semantic opposite is flaccid, laughable people that get invaded all the time. Perhaps that would be more aligned with the author's preferences.
Know what my favorite part of the whole modern auth is? The most "reliable and secure" way to enter and transmit credentials is the browser. You know, that thing that has had absolutely tons of footguns with XSS problems, terrible cookie management/stealing, and generally leaving things up to websites to do auth.

They're even deprecating auth via non-browser means in newer OAuth/GNAP standards. It's like they're designing around what things are now, rather than thinking ahead as to what would be best. Like rather than website - managed auth, it be fully browser controlled (not HTML forms). Not cookies, but something prescribed by the browser (or whatever other application you might use, rather than needing to embed a browser yet again in everything).
Venus flytraps go dormant in the winter. Here's some info on their care:

https://www.flytrapcare.com/venus-fly-trap-dormancy/
Yes the book I made the diagram with had lots of these drawings. IDK I preferred a mind map to solidify my understanding :)
> yet nobody seems to be aware of it

I'm a rare earthier. But I've never found the Drake equation useful for estimation. The knowns are drowned by the unknowns, which we do not know to even vast orders of magnitude. The probability of abiogenesis or multicellular life forming are simply beyond our present understanding of biochemistry. We know they are rare. But the entire equation turns on whether they are merely rare, or vanishingly so.
No way i'm doing the networking certification haha... I barely have to touch this stuff anyway.
this is related to the so-called "25k bug" I disclosed 2 weeks ago, which was pooh-poohed https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36640767

an account which has over 25k followers is immune from all of twitter anti-spam safeguards unless it gets disabled. it can make near unlimited posts or tag unlimited users.

you can see how this hashtag spammer has 30k followers, above the limit:

https://twitter.com/FinnKnoxETH

or this spammer, who has 32k

https://twitter.com/chrislarlsensf