7 ms·
A paper about eye damage in astronauts got pulled for “security concerns.” Huh?
- candytronxxx 9y agoAnd now a 'database error'. Coincidence? I don't think so!
- raverbashing 9y agoAnd HN remains one of the best ways of load testing your web site
- ktta 9y agoNope, Reddit takes the cake on that.
- gabemart 9y agoLast time I had something on the reddit front page it topped out at about 10k simultaneous users and I was serving data at over 5Gbps. Never had another traffic source come within 50% of that I have since moved from http to https, and I'm curious if I could withstand the same amount of traffic now. I think it's pretty hard to load test at that level.
- miemo 9y agodo you have a cat?
- sethammons 9y agoI can't recall the number of simultaneous connections it provides, but you could try loader.io.
- gabemart 9y agoThanks for the recommendation, I've tried it out and it seems great so far, especially for a free service
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoRemember when it was Slashdot? Those were the days.
- jochung 9y agoA single nginx instance on a lowest tier linode can withstand HN just fine. If HN is enough to bring you down, you're not even trying.
- katastic 9y ago- What if people don't want to pay for the extra bandwidth? - What if your site contains lots of bandwidth consuming content? (read: large/many images) Do you think your point would still hold?
- ryanlol 9y ago>- What if people don't want to pay for the extra bandwidth? Bandwidth costs nothing. Unless you're doing something really weird the HN traffic shouldn't cost you a cent. >- What if your site contains lots of bandwidth consuming content? (read: large/many images) Bandwidth still costs nothing, come back when you're streaming lots of 1080p video.
- 1024core 9y agoEven if it (bandwidth) costs nothing, you could still be throttled upstream. Every ISP is different.
- jochung 9y agoI know from experience that it does, yes. HN is a burst of traffic but it dies down quick, within an hour or two. You're not going to exceed your limit or break the bank unless you're being ripped off.
- Ice_cream_suit 9y agoThe article is: Role of Cerebrospinal Fluid in Spaceflight-induced Ocular Changes and Visual Impairment in Astronauts https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017161981 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017161981 It can be found, as usual at SciHub Moscow. So the Russians who use Sci Hub Moscow can read it, but American doctors who subscribe to Radiology cannot... The original article is worth reading, it talks about choroidal folds and visual impairment that lasts for years after space flight.
- krick 9y agoAmerican doctors cannot use SciHub?
- justinjlynn 9y agoWell, they can but they can't really publicly admit they do.
- aesclepius 9y agoI use it on a BID basis (medical).
- DennisP 9y agoSoon, maybe not, at least without a VPN: https://www.sciencealert.com/controversial-free-research-site-sci-hub-blacklisted-us-legal-blow-piracy-copyright https://www.sciencealert.com/controversial-free-research-sit...
- emilfihlman 9y agoFor those interested: the paper is available on researchgate.net apparently
- justinjlynn 9y agoStreisand effect in 5..4..3..
- Ice_cream_suit 9y agohttp://libgen.io/scimag/index.php?s=10.1148%2Fradiol.2017161981&journalid=&v=&i=&p=&redirect=1 http://libgen.io/scimag/index.php?s=10.1148%2Fradiol.2017161... Libgen and SciHub Moscow links to the censored paper.
- Reason077 9y agoThere's only a relatively small number of astronauts, so it seems the concern here is that the medical condition of individual test subjects is at risk of being disclosed by the paper.
- rlpb 9y agoI would consider it a condition of astronauts' employment that their medical condition will be made public where a link with astronautical activity is plausibly hypothesized (ie. with a very low standard of proof). They are test subjects, after all, funded at least in part by the taxpayer. Medical investigation is part of the point of their jobs. Suppression of the results harms scientific progress and is not in the public interest.
- matthewmacleod 9y agoI'm sure they wouldn't see it that way, and neither do I. There are lots of things that we could do to speed up scientific progress, but they're not all necessarily ethical. Making private individuals' medical records effectively public is quite possibly one of those things.
- j-pb 9y agoI'm pretty sure there are enough people that voluntarily give up their medical privacy AND want to go to space. If you don't want to disclose your medical record, fine. But don't expect others to funnel billions into you just to make your dream of going to space come true.
- nkozyra 9y agoMaybe they can do so voluntarily. If you exclude people from the program because they're not bending to the will of "my tax dollars" arguments you'll assuredly lose out on talented people in a small specialization pool.
- 9y ago
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoFrom the article, it sounds like NASA felt the author didn't respond promptly enough to their request for him to redact personally identifiable information (though he did redact it eventually), and is punishing him for it (by pulling both his research and the grant they gave him).
- timinman 9y agoThe page is not responding. I smell Bigfoot.
- mar77i 9y agoWait, why are you worrying about Scott Kelly's medical data? That's what he was in space for, right?