aphantastic

Ok, I think we’re on the same page.

Classic bayesian error. The population in question here isn’t the globe, but rather people who have already died from caffeine related causes. Naturally the rate of increased caffeine sensitivity amongst those folks will be different from the population at large.

The cooldown period built into HN is there for a reason: taking time to reflect on messages and do any necessary background research makes for better discussions than impulsively saying whatever is top of mind. I suggest you use this time to understand what an LD50 actually is and how the concept generalizes.

(cc @dang, seeing this growing trend of people misunderstanding the missing reply button and evading the timer via edits, perhaps UI affordances could be developed to better introduce folks to the feature?)

That’s not what I was implying at all I have no clue how you arrived at that. I’m saying an LD1 does exist – it’s the dose that would be fatal to 1% of a population (and further a LD0.1 and 0.0001 exist). These doses are lower than the LD50, fatal to millions, and approach what some would consider normal. For instance: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna759716

1 cup filter coffee can be 170mg or more. And LD50 isn’t really relevant here, even LD1 levels are deadly to hundreds of millions of people. It’s entirely possible for what some might consider a “normal” amount of coffee to be deadly to many. See other comment for espresso calculations.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=etnMr8oUSDo

LD50 for espresso is roughly 1 gallon per 50kg body mass. I wouldn’t want to, but I could drink 2 gallons of water without significant issue. If we accept that some people will naturally have a lower tolerance (and that espresso isn’t the strongest drink in the world), it’s not hard to see a caffeine overdose itself being fatal.

(based on 36ml espresso having 110mg caffeine, LD50 caffeine is 150-200mg/kg)

Teflon is known to not interact when it is in its stable long polymer state. But if we accept that it is breaking away from that state, we know it is not stable, and is potentially reactive.

Personally, a touch of avocado oil in a coast iron is much (much) lower risk (and price) than taking bets on whether this particular PFAS matrix will see the same fate as all the prior (now banned) ones or if we have somehow finally solved PFAS once and for all.

Not to mention all the known-bad environmental PFAS’s the manufacture and disposal of these 2 year pans creates.

Why do you feel a need to buy a new pan? If something about the coating has degraded, where do you think the offed material has ended up?

Backgammon, most likely.

What is the legal means to get it back?

How do you actually get it back? Friend of mine has a portfolio website in their name they’ve been maintaining for well over a decade, they missed one payment and some scoundrel bought it up and is demanding thousands of bucks for it.

Basically ASLR for DNA?

Ah. Well that tells me all I need to know about your intellectual honesty.

He’ll head the Department of Health and Human Services soon, little use debating what his position is here when we will see it play out soon.

I do recommend you read his book, https://lfpl.overdrive.com/media/6093658, it seems you are of the misconception that a paper being retracted is a statement that it is false. In reality, it’s a statement that state officials (sponsored by big pharma) have threatened the livelihood of the author and/or publisher. It’s extortion, not science.

In that case, you should read the book RFK Jr. published with Dr. Brian Hooker that provides a treatise on the topic, referencing 100+ published, peer reviewed studies on the topic. A free sample of the first few chapters is a available here: https://lfpl.overdrive.com/media/6093658

Of course, you should additionally read the various counter arguments that have been published, for instance: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5789217/, and likely more beyond.

So not “anti-vax” but rather “pro-choice”.

He is vaccinated and all of his children are as well. What specifically of his statements do you consider “anti-vax”?

Yes, people can choose to do some things without wanting authorities to force them to do other things. Astutely observed.

Yes, Florida for instance recently had their first documented cases of malaria in decades - immediately following the launch of a GMO mosquito manufacturing and distribution lab.

Not to worry: the scientists at lab promised the two events were totally unrelated.

Right, the issue comes when a trusted writer is logging data that is sourced from an untrusted party.

Imagine a transaction log being a blob per-customer with many lines corresponding to price, sku, etc, that additionally have some “memo” field provided by the customer. A trusted distributed worker process is responsible for taking incoming requests by the user, pulling their blob down, appending the line based on the request, and CAS’ing it back in (retrying on failure). With enough effort, a particularly devious user could issue many requests with ‘memo’s engineered to not alter the MD5 of their log. This would cause some lines to be lost. An audit of their account transaction log would be unable to accurately reflect the requests they made to the service, and the failure would be invisible.

This is obviously a bit contrived – I’ll be the first to admit. But if the incentives were to exist for this to be worth someone’s time for some system, I think it would be likely to see it come up eventually.

Sure, but theoretically you could have a system where a distributed log of user generated content is built via this CAS//MD5 primitive. A malicious actor could craft the data such that entries are dropped.

Sure! Another way you might take it is that the pointy stick is the most advanced: it started out before language, and has had considerably more effort put into modernization.

What’s weird is asking the question and just nope-ing out of the resulting conversation.

Good point, a reasonable response to the who debacle would be to get the legislature to mandate that a HTTP headset similar to do-not-track must be configurable on a browser basis and all requests that hold it must be seamlessly executed as if the user had pressed the “do not agree” button previously.

There’s an open question of who is to blame when poorly written legislation causes companies (with fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders) find ways to follow the letter of the law but not the intent and create end results that are worse for the public.

The American perspective tends to be that if millions of users are suffering because thousands of companies are interpreting the laws created by a single legislature, we should tell that one legislature to fix their shit. (Note: not that they actually do fix their shit, but that’s who we yell at)

The European perspective tends to be that the thousands of companies should each be individually yelled at to fix their shit (Note: not that they actually do fix their shit, but that’s who they yell at)

Neither way is all that effective tbh. But looking at the end results, I must say I prefer using the internet outside of the EU. I always use private browsing, and the implementation of EU rules when browsing the web in Europe makes this an absolutely insufferable experience. Pages and pages of legalese I have to click through to access a single google result - when guess what, none of that applies because I’m browsing in private. The natural response for me would be to then disable private browsing and let google store its “you clicked through our bullshit” cookie to make my life easier — resulting in the exact opposite of the intended effect of the law.

Like I said, neither side is perfect, but using the internet “privately” is actually much easier outside of the EU vs in it. To me, that means we need to yell at the legislature. Opinions may very.

I’ve held the same position on that since the beginning.

You laugh, yet you laugh alone. Look in a mirror.

Again, looking for a third party to confirm this is inline with the modern liberal groupthink and not just the rantings and ravings of some particularly murderous extremist.

Indeed. A lady at a bar in Portland once inquired what I thought humanity’s most advanced technological achievement was, after a slight pause I said the modern microprocessor. She laughed in my face at the suggestion. But when I pressed her for an answer of her own, she refueled to say, instead would only insist that my answer was ridiculous. Odd lady.

Those 400k humans were pointing their guns at you? And they deserve to die because of it? And the 400k humans on the other side too? Wild. Wild.

Do you feel the same about the Iraqis, I wonder?

Yes, I see that it’s been years. That’s why all your examples are ancient news. Consider other people might be active, and that you never actually refuted my point.