And 8% milk would taste bad and ruin most recipes.
I don't know why we're comparing completely different categories of number though. In a business context getting a project done a few percent faster, or more accurately one step done a few percent faster, barely affects revenue at all. And saving CPU time matters even less.
It's utterly unimportant. It's all research and all progress and all works towards our benefit eventually. The fact that an important discovery is still in the mouse stage and not yet in the human stage doesn't make it any less important or interesting, unless you are unutterably simple.
Put another way: the "in mice" doesn't matter because they are studying alzheimers, not mice. the mice are just the lab equipment of the moment. I don't care what kind of glassware or computers they use either.
It depends on what's being studied. There are mice studies on diet which obviously don't carry over to human beings since we don't have similar digestive systems. It may be true (arguable) that all research data is of some benefit, but don't expect people to be as excited about mouse research as human research.
How do they get the alzheimers mice? Article doesn't say. Usually in studies they take healthy mice and induce the condition artificially. That can be a confounding factor since the condition isn't induced in the specimens we care about (human beings). Is it even the same condition?
It doesn't matter how they give mice alzheimers, or any other condition. That's just part of controlling variables to test for one thing. It also doesn't matter that they were fed processed food rather than having to find things in the wild, unless the effect of diet was the specific thing they were examining.
It does not matter how they give Alzheimer's to a lab mouse providing they give Alzheimer's to a lab mouse – not a different disorder that happens to have the symptoms of Alzheimer's.
If this was a website for fundamental biology research I’d agree.
As it stands, the headline is misleading and clickbaity.
> the "in mice" doesn't matter
Of course it matters, because that has a direct bearing on how applicable it is to humans and how much time it’s likely to take to be of any benefit to humans, if it ever is. That’s the whole point being discussed.
Also see this comment to help understand why “in mice” is a huge qualifier in this case, because mice don’t naturally develop Alzheimer’s: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50218606
I started coding in 1981 on an VC20, learned a lot from it, but wonder how did the world benefit more from vic20s?
As a happy smartphone user, I think the world did benefit a lot e.g. from the Newton (loved mine, dropped a Palm for it, sad it died, but it was too heavy).
The world got more benefit because it was kids like us who learned on these Commodore machines who rose in ranks in the tech world in the 1990s and laid the groundwork for products like the Palm Pilot, the iPod, and the iPhone.
Don't worry, is gonna be soon. After all, fleets are way too small scale. Next week we'll be orchestrating ... What was the military term for a group of fleets again? Cohorts? Armada? Legions?
After that we can segment then into civilizations! The [?] processing unit is the limit!
Natural language as code has existed for thousands of years. Today we call it legalese.
It's excruciating to write, excruciating to read, and even legit geniuses with decades of hard won experience still leave room for essentially infinite interpretation. laws and contracts are all still swiss cheese and can be made to demand or prohibit whatever the party with the most money or other influence wants.
If law was code, there would be no need for judges to make decisions. Instead, a "judge" would be someone making a mechanical derivation of the judgement given the situation and the law.
The law is rather a complex set of guidelines which need to leave some space for interpretation, so that additional relevant information for the situation at hand can affect the decision.
Only the legislated part of law is codified. In our American common law system, case law is, by definition, uncodified. So what judges are doing, is taking the codified legislation, and applying case law decisions in layers on top, to reach a final decision.
This helpfulness reminds me of my new 4runner's transmission. It's not merely automatic, is a "learning" automatic, so it's behavior is always changing and never predictable.
It's always trying to adapt to the driver, but that is a fundamentally invalid concept.
I think there is (or should be) a principle that in any given system there can only be at most one spongy dynamic reactive element.
Everything else needs to be deterministic.
In a car, the human driver is unavoidably a spongy dynamic element, so the only slot available for one of those is already taken. You can't have both a driver trying to game the car and the car trying to game the driver at the same time.
This 30+ year linux user says you never have 2 or 3 different incompatible bash's.
You can have multiple different sh's, but you have to go out of your way to force them to be used. And evenn if you did, dash and ash and older versions of bash and sysv sh are a strict totally compatible subset of latest bash, and none ever has the problem of incompatible or missing modules or plugin library. Old scripts work in new bash.
The python to powershell comparison was valid. This false equivalence was not.
The fact that you can have 2 window managers is like having 2 mp3 players. It's not the critique at all.
I do favors and chores for friends & family, or at a hostel where you pay nothing & get nothing and everyone has to diy, not for someone who charges me money.
The new rules already clearly and explicitly describe leaving things "in a civilized way". No one is suggesting it's ok to destroy a place.
Most places a hostel is far less than any hotel in the same area at the same time, and offers equally less amenities. That's the definition and point of their existence.
If you live somewhere that only has bad deal hostels that no one should use, oh well. So do I probably. I've never looked in NJ. It just means there also exists hostels in the world that I would not use or would not do chores for.
reply