austinjp

I can't see a clear conclusion, unfortunately. 'Further study required' as ever. It also seems that 'resilience' to the stress of caloric restriction is key to gaining most benefit but it's not clear exactly what resilience is, and whether it's manipulable.

From the article:

Weight loss and metabolic improvements do not explain the longevity benefits of severe dietary restrictions.

Cutting calories by 40% yielded the longest longevity bump, but intermittent fasting and less severe calorie restriction also increased average lifespan. The dieting mice also displayed favourable metabolic changes, such as reductions in body fat and blood sugar levels.

However, the effects of dietary restriction on metabolism and lifespan didn’t always change in lockstep. To the authors’ surprise, the mice that lost the most weight on a calorie-limited diet tended to die younger than did animals that lost relatively modest amounts.

This suggests that processes beyond simple metabolic regulation drive how the body responds to limited-calorie regimes. What mattered most for lengthening lifespan were traits related to immune health and red-blood-cell function. Also key was overall resilience [...] The most-resilient animals lost the least weight, maintained immune function and lived longer.

In one of the most comprehensive clinical trials of a low-calorie diet in healthy, non-obese individuals, researchers found that the intervention helped to dial down metabolic rates — a short-term effect thought to signal longer-term benefits for lifespan.

But the mouse data from Churchill’s team suggest that metabolic measurements might reflect ‘healthspan’ — the period of life spent free from chronic disease and disability — but that other metrics are needed to say whether such ‘anti-ageing’ strategies can truly extend life.

Just to add (as I'm sure the contributors are aware) parent comment and grandparent comment are both true.

It would be nice if wfh wasn't such a polarised issue.

It's not satire. Ioannidis has a long history of pointing out flaws in scientific processes.

(Edit: spelling.)

There are many casual/family restaurants in France, Italy, Germany, Spain and other European countries with high-quality waiting staff.

>> you are ordering food and drinks, speed is not essentials, if you're in a hurry you don't sit down in a diner/restaurant

> Honestly if I received poor/slow service and management came back with this I'd be pretty upset.

Plenty of places will tell you not to expect fast service for certain dishes or drinks. If you order a cocktail at a bar and complain when it arrives after the cola, you'll raise eyebrows.

The confusion between you two in this thread may be partly due to the conflation of 'slow service' with 'poor service', they're not necessarily the same. Sure, if I ordered a cola and was still waiting after the table next to me received their 5 different cocktails, something would have gone wrong.

Here's a fun story. The other day, I was in Belgium. We ordered food at a restaurant. While we were waiting I had a beer, my partner had a negroni. We waited... and waited... and waited. Other diners arrived, ordered food, their food arrived, they ate it. And still we waited.

After a while we asked a waiter if our food order had got lost. They were apologetic, and pointed to my partner's still-unfinished drink, but said they'd get our food out ASAP. The food arrived rapidly (it was delicoius).

What had happened? Well, a negroni is an apéritif, so is drunk before a meal. The staff hadn't been inattentive; quite the opposite -- they were waiting for the apéritif to be finished. Serving the meal beforehand would have been... rude? Undignified, perhaps. And certainly something that all the other local diners would have been well aware of.

Sure, it was a leisurely situation, nobody was in a rush, this isn't a daily occurrence, blah blah. Anwyay, I learned a thing about apéritifs. Cultural heterogeneity is educational and enriching in a way that QR codes and social isolation are not.

This highlights the underpinning problem: wages are so low that people cannot afford to live. Restaurant margins are so low they cannot afford staff.

Why contribute to that system?

This highlights a problem: you need to be wealthy to have any privacy.

Why has privacy become something that is only available to a dwindling few? What price convenience?

They may record what I order (although the cafes and restaurants I go to use pen and paper or just plain-old human memory) but that's it. Even if they enter my order into some system for analytics or what have you, there's no cookies, no tracking, no transparent pixels, etc.

Look, all these micro-arguments about the micro-invasions of privacy are 'bread and circuses' [0]. We've entirely lost sight of what it means to be a private citizen just going about our own lives without every nanosecond being tracked, without every damn interaction being an opportunity for someone to skim a cent. Any micro-invasion can be 'justified': it's more convenient, I don't care about a restaurant chain knowing what I've ordered, I don't want to talk to other people, etc. But they all add up.

Societies are increasingly unhappy, anxious, overweight, polarised. The gap between ultra-rich and regular citizens is widening. It all adds up.

Yeah.. old man, cloud. Whatever. The overall evidence is stark and obvious, it just hides in the tiny details.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses

There are plenty of comments disagreeing with you, but I'm fully in agreement.

As for the arguments that QR codes are somehow a time-saver, they can be a real time waster. Find phone (not glued to my eyeballs), scan QR, swerve option to install app, wait for enormously bloated website to render badly, get frustrated trying to find what I want, get up to find a staff member to order something but with X instead of Y please if that's possible, can I pay with cash, etc etc etc.

Clearly, everyone's needs and experiences are different. If you like QR codes in cafes, fine, but we should recognise that they represent something other than supposed 'convenience'. They are there to gather data, and to allow cafes to hire fewer staff. They represent the creeping invasion of privacy in every possible aspect of life. The fact that cafes may want to hire fewer staff masks the issue that an increasing number need to in order to survive. Small business margins are squeezed by unreasonable costs and shrinking profit margins, and these pressures are instinctively passed down to the customer -- you and me. Rather than mindlessly capitulate to this and encourage the one-way downward spiral, I really would hope for communities such as HN to see opportunities to 'disrupt upwards'. How can businesses resist exorbitant rents? Why are our lives so hectic that talking to a waiter is seen as too slow? Why do we give away data without being an eyelid?

Some of it might still be here:

https://search.marginalia.nu/explore/random

Goodness me, this is very difficult to read. This article appears to describe some serious academic fraud (highlighting issues with arxiv.org along the way) but it repeatedly buries the lede under the author's haphazard writing style.

Perhaps a TLDR at the top would be useful. Just the FAQs. The central message is too important to lose amid the stylistic missteps.

I don't want academic-adjacent writing to be anodyne, but I do want it to be clear.

Referenced paper at [0] has annoying copy-paste protection. Key aspects of mouse exercise considered "maximal contractions" are:

Anaesthetised mice.

Electro stimulus of sciatic nerve to induce contractions.

10 sets of 6 contractions, each contraction sustained for 3 seconds, 10 seconds rest after each contraction (rest between sets not described).

Mice allowed to recover in a cage with water but without any food, this is thought to progressively increase activation of mTOR signalling.

Result: hench mice.

[0] https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1113/JP27...

From skimming the article and papers it references, the suggestion is that the higher the intensity (which seems to be rate of contraction of skeletal muscle rather than heart rate or respiration rate etc) the stronger the effect.

However, this assumption seems based on mouse experiments.

So, as ever, it's a case of 'watch this space'.

Yep! Local stores are 'happy' to refund since they tend to value customers. Megacorps... not so much.

Because the corner store has, in many cases, become a gigantic multinational monster that exploits the authors and the readers.

Some authorities may be legitimate, but a child (for example) may not be able to distinguish those if they find themselves constantly berrated: 'do as you are told'. The illegitimate authorities mask the legitimate, particularly when discussion, explanation or negotiation are denied. It's quite understandable that anyone who questions authority simply rejects the whole deluded 'game' once they realise they won't get any answers, or worse, when they're told that they themselves are the problem.

Seems to be from 2017? There aren't any comments in the thread.

OP can you expand on why you found this interesting?

The post says:

ACME is designed to be extensible by adding new JSON fields, which should be ignored by clients that do not understand them. Unfortunately, some of the earliest ACME clients were intolerant of new fields, which has made it hard to introduce new fields ... we have decided to add a key/keys to directory with randomly generated names in order to dissuade client developers from writing clients in such a way that prevents us from adding new keys in the future.

> you are applying an emotional judgment to what you see, and not being objective enough.

The notion that scientists can or should be emotionless, and that this somehow produces 'objectivity', should really be consigned to the history books. Expectation and promotion of emotional detachment leads to burn out, anxiety, unrealistic expectations, unsupportive working environments, poor judgement, dehumanising of experimental subjects, etc etc etc. See the majority medical and psychiatric science history.

I'd far prefer different terminology. Maybe 'calm' or similar. Expecting and encouraging scientists to be calm is more realistic and achievable, and doesn't deny the fundamental reality that much of human existence has an emotional component.

Panicking over microplastics in human brains is surely an entirely understandable reaction. Rather than criticising it, we can learn from it. I want my healthcare researchers to be calm but strongly motivated.

Hmmm, kiiiiiinda. But if we declare equivalences without providing any justification, there's little substance:

          We should look (up|down) to people who (do|don't) have X.

It's meaningless. In order to make this seem meaningful, you could dictate some premises, for example:

         We should look up to people who have inherited wealth. 

         We should look down upon people who don't have high IQ.

What issue does this illuminate? By declaring unearned wealth and unearned IQ (or unearned musical talent) to be comparable, what can we learn? Are they, in fact, comparable in any meaningful way?

It seems an odd approach. The initial premises seem to illuminate the person who selects them, rather than illuminating any societal issue. What can we learn from your selection, other than that you seem to feel an affinity towards those with inherited wealth?

There is of course one apparent distinction between inherited wealth and inherited ability, be it musical or sporting or intelligence or what have you. Wealth tends to be accrued, while talent can only be recognised when it is shared.

What's going on here? A new account, attracting several comments about a controversial figure. I'm not convinced the parent comment is actually bringing much to the party, yet it's getting traffic.

How do online communities discuss controversial subjects while ensuring good-faith participation?

The manual construction of the horno oven for roasting agave for mezcal is a lovely piece of traditional labour, long may it continue. The workers could do with some respiratory protection, though, looks smokey.

https://youtu.be/IEEsu6PFGF0

If you're hungry, surely the evolutionarily 'rational' action is to prioritise eating. That seems to be what's happening, certainly for those lucky enough to be able to control who eats and when.

The paper:

Nasal tau immunotherapy clears intracellular tau pathology and improves cognitive functions in aged tauopathy mice

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.adj5958

From personal experience, I'd wager that anyone buying that domain will receive a letter from a Facebook lawyer pretty quickly.

Apparently "Rust is named after a fungus that is robust, distributed, and parallel."

https://stackoverflow.com/a/16503989

As per @sanswork's sibling comment, I'd suggest avoiding the issue. The frenzied cycles of web front-end frameworks in particular seem pathological. I made a recent decision to look for a 'boring' technology, landing on Golang. I want something I can rely on for the long term.

For those who, like me, are not familiar with AdS/CFT, it's "anti-de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence" which is "a conjectured relationship between two kinds of physical theories", allowing quantum field theories to be made more mathematically tractable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT_correspondence

I kinda agree, but I think this itself represents an existential threat. Governments have a history of hard-line policies and intolerance when their populations face low wages and declining standards of living. This leads to isolationism, exceptionalism, and FUD. That's how wars start. We now have global communication at light-speed, anyone can say anything to anyone else. Dropping generative AI into that is like pouring jet fuel on a bonfire.

I think it's more nuanced than that. I used to walk to my bank, I can't do that any more because many branches closed. The bank now directs all interactions to happen via their app. In terms of emissions (and social interaction, particularly for vulnerable and isolated members of society) I think this is bad news.

But this is a complex calculus and - frankly - feels like a distraction from the issue. I don't want to get into the weeds of calculating micro-emissions of daily activities, I want climate responsibility and reduction in energy consumption across the board.

You may be interested in the venerable visidata: https://www.visidata.org/docs/graphics/