drecked

Nutrition researchers know a lot about diet. Or at least what constitutes a good diet.

The reason you think “they don’t know” is a media ecosystem that hypes weak minor contrary results that usually disappear in further research and an entrenched trillion dollar food industry that spreads misinformation to get you to continue eating the foods they sell that have the highest markups, such as processed foods, meat and dairy.

I don’t believe we are seeing the investments necessary that would indicate this will happen.

Memory makers, for example, have sold out their inventory for several years, but instead of investing to manufacture more, they’re shutting down their consumer divisions. They’re just transferring their consumer supply to their B2B (read AI) supply instead.

Thats likely because they don’t expect this demand to last past a few years.

> getting rid of Alan Dye.

All the reporting I’ve seen indicates that he left of his own accord and that Apple was blindsided, indicating that they didn’t even consider getting rid of him.

Or Cuba…

Another brilliant humanitarian crisis caused entirely by the U.S. for no good reason at all.

Your comment conveniently disproves itself.

> It is objectively bad to feed your children ultra processed foods

It’s not “objectively bad” To feed your children ultra processed foods.

Once you do the work of defining what ultra processed food is in the first place (which you cannot because there is no definition and your argument is already lost), you will find that many ultra processed foods are objectively good for children and adults.

But then your comment only tells you what parents shouldn’t feed kids. It doesn’t tell you anything about what they should.

And when you look into that things get a lot harder. Meat? Not ultraprocsssed but almost certainly bad for health, especially in anything more than minor amounts. You know what else isn’t ultra processed? Alcohol.

And I can’t help but comment on the ridiculousness of pointing to the percentage of children being the outcome of rape being less than 1% as a somehow low njmber, while ignoring that it was 64,000 children. And rape isn’t the only way parents may struggle or regret having kids. And you’re pretending post partum depression doesn’t exist. Then you ignore all the children born with illnesses that may make it difficult or impossible for parents to manage them. Then you’re ignoring all the states that allow abortions but parents may still not opt for them because of cultural, religious, or even personal ethical considerations. Then you’re ignoring the fact that so many American marriages end in divorce and even the ones that don’t may not remain as tight knit as they were when the parents made the decision to have a child.

Your entire comment is a whole bunch of wrong based on your personal experience, which thankfully appears to have been positive.

That’s not a misleading statement for what they’re trying to say.

They wouldn’t disagree with what you say. The point they’re making is we don’t know. Maybe 92% of the remaining money is being spent usefully towards programs and 0% as overhead. Or maybe 0% usefully and 92% as overhead.

The IRS disclosure requirements are not sufficient to know. And yet we will give those donating to both organizations the same tax breaks.

The argument is to increase disclosure requirements for organizations through which so much money is passing so that we have a better idea as to how nether those tax breaks we’re giving are actually giving us any value in return.

My issue with this post isn’t so much the post itself but with what it demonstrates about culture today.

20 years ago one would have written the same post on Blogger but the odds are it would have been framed as “here’s how you can clean up the Firefox menu”.

It’s not like vitriolic content didn’t exist. But the vitriolic content was usually limited to holy war posts, when a Mac user was disparaging PCs or vice versa, or if it was a vim vs emacs conversation. And even then there was an understanding that no one was being entirely serious.

But in today’s social media/political environment, every post is turned up to 11.

> It has enabled prosperity in some areas, like aiding drug research.

At first I scoffed at your idea that computing itself may not have been a good advancement.

And then I saw your example of where computers have helped and I’m wondering that even there, did the lives saved and the quality of life improvements from the accelerated drug research, outnumber the lives lost and the worsened lives quality of life because of hundreds of millions of people’s work now becoming being stuck in a chair behind a monitor and keyboard all day?

CLI tools are designed to provide complete documentation using —help. Given LLMs are capable of fully understanding the output then how is the MCP standardization any better than the CLI —help standardization?

If the U.S. is losing talent to anywhere else in the world isn’t it losing a relative advantage or increasing a relative disadvantage with China, even if China is not the one benefiting from the lost talent?

You’re right.

The only reason you see Indians is because Indians knly hire Indians. It can’t be anything else.

Completely unrelated, have you walked into a non nuclear/biomedical engineering engineering department in any IS college in the past 2 decades? I’m guessing those are also filled with Indians because their managers are insisting that only Indians can study engineering.

Hey, when American workers decided to spend the 3 years or so they had leverage over their bosses after the pandemic to insist that, well, actually, there is no advantage in working together and in person, and that there is no advantage to having an American college degree, is it really surprising that their bosses then decided, well, if that’s the case, why are we hiring people at 5x the cost we could get someone in a different country?

The assumption here is that clothes are being thrown away because they are worn out.

Except that’s not why the majority of clothes are thrown away. The real reason they are thrown away is because of size changes and fashionability.

HN probably has an over representation of the types of people who wear out clothes and even here it’s likely a minority that actually do wear out clothes.