anon1m0us

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21164014

You can get them on Ebay

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=sunbeam+radiant+control...

Yep. Oklahoma now has more earthquakes than California.

https://www.npr.org/2015/04/26/402413137/oklahoma-now-has-mo...

Why do we still allow fracking?

This was a hard time: https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archiv...

> Why Is He Still Smiling? Bill Gross blew through $800 million in 8 months (and he's got nothing to show for it).

This reminds me of an article I found recently while trying to explain to a business analyst that the problems we are solving aren't simple. https://noop.nl/2008/08/simple-vs-complicated-vs-complex-vs-...

I think what is bad is confusing complex and complicated things for simple things. If you think a problem is simple, when it is complex or complicated, then you'll expect the solution sooner and you won't think deeply about all the ramifications of the solution. You'll avoid breaking the complexity down into simple parts.

By their nature, complex things are unpredictable. Things that behave unpredictably are complex. It doesn't make them bad, just means they need more attention and thought to understand -- and sometimes accept.

Another good resource I just discovered is the Cynefin framework that breaks it down further: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework

> obvious, complicated, complex, chaotic, and disorder

https://blog.codinghorror.com/introducing-stackoverflow-com/

> Stackoverflow is sort of like the anti-experts-exchange (minus the nausea-inducing sleaze and quasi-legal search engine gaming) meets wikipedia meets programming reddit. It is by programmers, for programmers, with the ultimate intent of collectively increasing the sum total of good programming knowledge in the world.

The key part is "minus the nausea-inducing sleaze" except that their behavior of late is exactly nausea-inducing sleaze.

https://www.wired.com/2012/07/stackoverflow-jeff-atwood/

>Atwood was bothered that the community doing all the work wasn't getting paid...

Yet, the contributors to the stacks don't get paid either. Now the creators and VC are trying to sell the stacks and make money -- exactly what he said his competitor was doing and shouldn't be.

> He and Spolsky decided to create an ad-supported free alternative, and released all answers under a Creative Commons license, so that the users could use the content elsewhere if Stack Overflow ever shut down or started charging for subscriptions.

Now they've decided to retroactively change content users created for them to their benefit.

https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/stack-exchan...

> we will continue forward under version 4.0 of the CC BY-SA license. This change encompasses all Subscriber Content as described in our ToS including data dumps as well as any content previously made available by Stack Exchange under the terms of version 3.0 of the CC BY-SA license.

I said, "I want to create synergistic relationships with other people."

I despise advertising too, but I realized I have to advertise so people know about my products. There are people who want them. Advertising helps them find my products that solve their problems.

And then I realized the advertising platforms like adwords and such were also deceptive. So I stopped advertising.

It doesn't help me though or the people who I could help if they knew.

Eventually, only those that can bite will survive.

I don't see how it can go the other way. Where eventually since only half of them bite, that ratio declines to zero. Can that happen with evolution?

I suppose there is a tipping point where if enough of the population can't find each other then they all die alone. Like rats in Alberta.

What is ... "it"? My despair?

I understand your point about lies vs myths. If I substitute the two words in my mind according to your explanation of myths and their purpose, then everything actually does seem to make more sense and is more acceptable in my mind.

If someone tells a lie the connotation is that it's meant to harm others to their own benefit. If it's a myth, then they need that ... not accurate portrayal of the world in order to keep going... to survive, perhaps as an individual or group.

It's certainly subsidized by China, so yes.

Continuing your thought. In the past, wars were fought physically by damaging the opponent. We are at a place in history where we can fight not with fists and bullets, but with entertainment.

Like national rap battles.

Wars were fought over resources: water, oil, food. Now they are fought over games, movies, ... products.

Instead of war winners being those who can inflict the most harm on the opponent, maybe now we can shift that into the winner being the most entertaining.

This could be a good thing.

Not only are we increasing the number of lies in the world, using lies to get what we want has become more and more acceptable through social media, politics, capitalism, etc...

But we are increasing the number of things you can't prove are lies. You can't falsify me, therefore I am right.

OMG, this is very religious. This is all because of postmodernism! Prior to today, you couldn't prove that my religion was wrong. The more people I could get to believe my lie about the origins of the universe, the more powerful I was.

Tribalism requires agreed upon unfalsifiable lies. I am with you because I believe the same thing you do.

Postmodernism has done this to us. With religion and an omniscient being watching us, heaven for the good, hell for the bad, we had a -- conscience.

Now, it's the internet. The internet is omniscient. Facebook is watching us. Google is watching us. The CIA and FBI are watching us through the internet.

We've replaced god with ... the internet. The internet is the new god. And thus, we are evolving toward the biblical God that created us in his image. We are walking down the path to omniscience via the internet.

Why are we so up in arms about this? Why not before this?

Well, because we were insulated from China's behavior. Their heavy handed approach only affected their own citizens. They jailed their own citizens, but not Americans, not other people.

We got our supply chain from them and they gave us what we wanted, so we're good.

However! Now China's tyranny is leaking out of China. It's getting into arenas where we are. You could have been playing that game. You could have said something that offended China -- maybe without even knowing it.

Plus, they are in our IoT devices, our iphones, our cameras. China is watching and controlling us now. They are restricting our access to games -- not just their own people.

The culture and rules of countries don't exist solely within the borders of that country.

This is new for Americans. It's not new for the rest of the world. What USA wanted, USA got.

Now, what China wants, China gets -- even if it's not what we want.

This is a short term fix at best.

Technology like Hydroponics also reduces consumption while increasing output.

Computer aided design helps with construction.

It's all there.

This is part of why R. Buckminster Fuller thought there was more than enough to go around.

People know this about me. They know it almost instantly. I sense it in them.

I sense the same about other people. They have that power over me.

However, I make an effort not to. Or, when I do, I work especially hard to steer them in the direction of their goals or somewhere that will benefit them. Even if it's at my own expense sometimes and that can be sad or disappointing.

And so, through that, I have come to resent people who don't think that way. Who think, "People won't look at the number of ounces in the can, they'll just see it's the same size and think they're getting the same amount."

It's a lie. Deception. It's wrong.

But yet, we allow it in society.

It's destroying us. It's all around us. Fake news. The US President. Marketing. Stack Overflow.

So, why put up with it? It's not that you even know you're putting up with it. Some of us do. Most don't. Scammers proliferate.

It's more like, How do we protect the innocent people? Why as a species, do we allow some of us to prey on others?

It doesn't seem good to me.

It's on us though. They're lying to us to get our money, our labor, our consent. We let them.

Why?

You said I was "dangerously wrong" because someone else you talked to said I was wrong, but you have provided no evidence supporting your case, other than hearsay.

I have provided evidence. You concluded with:

> This is what I was told by people who spend their lives studying the treatment of cancer.

Which, again, is appeal to authority. It's a logical fallacy.

How much evidence do I need to provide? https://www.cancertherapyadvisor.com/home/tools/fact-sheets/...

> Current data in humans suggests that IF may be beneficial for chemotherapy outcomes, particularly for reducing toxicities. IF appears to be safe in appropriately selected patients, and the adverse effects associated with fasting appear to all be of low grade.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6530042/

> Growing preclinical evidence shows that short-term fasting (STF) protects from toxicity while enhancing the efficacy of a variety of chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of various tumour types. STF reinforces stress resistance of healthy cells, while tumor cells become even more sensitive to toxins, perhaps through shortage of nutrients to satisfy their needs in the context of high proliferation rates and/or loss of flexibility to respond to extreme circumstances.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5031958/

> Both chronic calorie restriction (CCR) and intermittent calorie restriction (ICR) have shown anticancer effects.

https://www.cell.com/trends/endocrinology-metabolism/fulltex...

> Fasting and FMDs have the potential for applications in both cancer prevention and treatment.

Do you have any evidence that fasting is deleterious to the health of cancer patients? Except what you said someone said?

Did you ask those oncologists for any evidence supporting their case or did you just take their words at face value?

The research clearly indicates that there is a benefit to fasting, yet you say the research is wrong because of the opinions of several oncologists.

I'm biased because several oncologists told me something that wasn't true.

> Conclusion

> [Short Term Fasting] during chemotherapy is well tolerated and appears to improve QOL and fatigue during chemotherapy.

https://jeccr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13046-019-...

> Abundant and convincing preclinical evidence shows that STF can decrease toxicity and simultaneously increase efficacy of a wide variety of chemotherapeutic agents.

https://osher.ucsf.edu/patient-care/integrative-medicine-res...

> For general cancer prevention, it may be beneficial to add intermittent or short-term fasts in combination with a plant-based cancer prevention diet

and

>Fasting may also protect patients against the harmful side effects of chemotherapy or radiation therapy.

and

> They concluded that a 3-day fast could help regenerate a strong immune system

> Additional research in both rodents and monkeys have shown that when CR was started by 12 months of age, lifespan was increased and incidence of spontaneous cancers was reduced by 50%.

> Furthermore, it is theorized that cancer cells do not respond to the protective signals generated by fasting, thus leaving them vulnerable to both the immune system and cancer treatment.

I feel like this is sufficient to refute your several oncologists' anecdotal opinions which are not supported by the research.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/324169.php

> There is a growing body of evidence supporting the role of fasting in both cancer treatment and prevention.

Lots of links to sources in that article too.

You have to be very careful relying on the advice of oncologists. Think about what their motivations are. What are their biases? I dealt with this very personally for a long time and found oncologists to be ... human and suffer from all the same problems as other humans.

Their patients are ... dying and they don't want to die. It's a very emotional time for all involved.

There's no moat. It's easy to create hyperlocal competitors. There are many. This market is saturated.

I can't see how postmates can continue to grow wealth for investors. Neither can the public markets. They are barely better than index funds with way more risk.

The mechanism seems to be that during periods of fasting, normal cells "hunker down" and restrict the consumption of nutrients and other materials. Cancer cells don't do this though and continue to consume the nutrients, which are actually chemotherapy drugs in the patients.

Fasting therfore increases the absorption of chemo by the cancer cells and reduces the consumption by normal cells keeping the patient healthier.

Fasting also enables the body to more completely rid itself of cancerous cells by consuming them in the absence of alternative sources of nutrition.

Lots of reasons why fasting is a good thing.

This 3 punch combo creates an incredible user experience. The only downside is that dc.js doesn't have all the charts. The interactivity with the basic charts they do have is worth the absence of other types of charts.

Drywall, insulation, plumbing, electrical all these products work their way into the laws encoded in building codes. Many of the companies have members on the committees of these "non-profit" organizations.

It's terrible. It's part of the reason houses cost so much.

Everyone wants their piece of the pie. If you want to house yourself, first you must feed everyone else.

The price of homes is pushed up by everyone except those who want to buy their first one: Banks, Insurance companies, incumbent owners, construction companies, land owners, real estate agents, governments.

Everyone wants higher home prices except people who don't own a home.

I will work against that tide. I am going to build a company that will build me an affordable house and then I will sell affordable houses to people.

If people get hungry, they revolt. The banks said to government, "If you don't bail us out, there will be a revolt. You don't want war in the streets do you?"

You too can be a success on the internet! Just follow these 10 tried and true techniques. For just a simple investment of $999, my system will show you what to do.

Do you want to be a millionaire too!?