jibal

14 ms·

331.
by jibal 4mo ago
Python is interpreted so None is always tested for and will throw an exception if used in the wrong context. This is quite different from a SEGVIO. > But IMO having a “there is no value here” designation is not a bad thing. Sure ... if
332.
by jibal 4mo ago
They already said: > use the type system to help us use special values safely ... but this is not the place to explain what a type system is or what sum types/maybe/optional/etc. are.
333.
by jibal 4mo ago
The purpose of strncpy, which was originally part of the UNIX kernel code, was to copy file names to and from directory entries that consisted of a 2 byte inode number and a 14 byte zero-padded but not zero-terminated name field. I started
334.
by jibal 4mo ago
eke
335.
by jibal 4mo ago
Surprised that a minimal "website" only requires a small image = few pixels = few bytes to store it? Um, ok.
336.
by jibal 4mo ago
The guy claims that Richard Muller disproved the mainstream consensus of climate science. I don't think his claim of not being a Republican is credible.
337.
by jibal 4mo ago
Read this guy's other comments, like > Richard Muller have come in to disprove the mainstream consensus He's a dishonest con through and through.
338.
by jibal 4mo ago
Of course it's propaganda--the product of moneyed interests, as he said. It's ignorant, irrational, and dishonest to deny it. (And the rest of your comment here, and comments here, are in the same basket.) The statement was "
339.
by jibal 4mo ago
You're portraying Republicans as fundamentally intellectually dishonest people. I'm not one to argue.
340.
by jibal 4mo ago
"If you're an irrational racist sociopath, why should you want to fund people who undermine your baseless claims?"
341.
by jibal 4mo ago
There are numerous comments here from experienced people addressing this. Yes, that happens and a doctor who dismisses the concern can be sued for malpractice if something actually does show up, so they are put in a difficult position. For
342.
by jibal 4mo ago
Your "guess" is not merely incorrect but logically invalid ... such added tests (which ex hypothesi are all negative) have no bearing on false positives from tomography.
343.
by jibal 4mo ago
P.S. The responses ignore what I actually responded to, which was a claim that "The false positive thing is a nonissue" -- where the "thing" is 99% false positives. The only way to respond to information such that "
344.
by jibal 4mo ago
> If the false positive rate is demonstrably low Regardless of how accurate a test is, by Bayes Theorem if it's done on enough healthy people the false positives will swamp the true positives.
345.
by jibal 4mo ago
That makes no sense at all, unless you're saying that people should respond to all such information by ignoring it.
346.
by jibal 4mo ago
Math does indeed make for solid arguments. If you want to make a counterargument then you have to address their math, which you didn't.
347.
by jibal 4mo ago
Positive for what, exactly? Quoting convnet, above: > The downside, and the reason why most doctors do not recommend full body scans, is that every human body is a bit weird and there will almost always be something "wrong" tha
348.
by jibal 4mo ago
The fundamental problem is that you generally can't diagnose simply from shapes. Scans show shapes, shapes cause concern, concern leads to invasive procedures, results are negative.
349.
by jibal 4mo ago
"cancer is malignant by definition" > A distinction without a difference. What distinction? This is a phrase that this confidently wrong ignoramus apparently doesn't know the meaning of.
350.
by jibal 4mo ago
> The essay kind of misses the point That's a very charitable way to put it. The reality is Graham blatantly lied about what AOC wrote, and then went on and on addressing the strawman of whether you can accumulate a billion dollar
351.
by jibal 4mo ago
> What she meant was that it's impossible to get that rich without doing something bad — without cheating in some way. That's not what she meant. What she meant was that he was misusing the word "earn".
352.
by jibal 4mo ago
> Squamous cell carcinoma does not metastatize (sic) This is false; it does so, but slowly. https://www.moffitt.org/cancers/squamous-cell-carcinoma/diag...
353.
by jibal 4mo ago
Yes, I know you aren't, but they are taking it that way.
354.
by jibal 4mo ago
You're simply wrong. Again, cancer is malignant by definition. And again, you seem to be confusing "cancer" with "tumor" -- your description applies to the latter, not the former. https://jamanetwork.com&
355.
by jibal 4mo ago
This drug targets cells with a KRAS mutation that locks the KRAS switch in the ON state, driving uncontrolled growth. Cells with this mutation are abnormal and predisposed to becoming cancer ... so by definition are not healthy.
356.
by jibal 4mo ago
Long a police practice (it happened to me) that AI makes easier.
357.
by jibal 4mo ago
I just meant that this doesn't apply to lymphoma, which is not caused by KRAS.
358.
by jibal 4mo ago
> Benign cancers are a thing. No, they aren't. Cancer is malignant by definition. There are benign non-malignant tumors .
359.
by jibal 4mo ago
Sorry, it does not apply ... this drug inhibits (for the first time) the KRAS mutation (previously considered "undruggable") that is the primary cause of 90% of pancreatic cancers and 50% of colon cancers.
360.
by jibal 4mo ago
Not hyperbolic, just incomplete ... this drug inhibits the KRAS mutation that is the "master switch" for 90% of pancreatic cancers and 50% of colon cancers. KRAS was considered "undruggable" so this is a huge breakthroug

More ›