moldbug

11 ms·

61.
Why intelligence genes are hard to find(chronicle.com)
2 points by moldbug 14y ago|0 comments
62.
by moldbug 14y ago
Intuitive understanding gained by practice enough for you . If Haskell didn't exist, you could probably invent it. The result might even be better. Neighbor, how much code is there in the world? And how many coders as good as you? Divi
63.
by moldbug 14y ago
That's why I said special - I wanted to be sure I got the right answer.
64.
by moldbug 14y ago
I am not particularly fond of GC either, but at least it is semantically opaque to the programmer (at least in theory). Optimizing compilers run large numbers of algorithmically complex optimizations that are equally opaque. The abstractio
65.
by moldbug 14y ago
I could code comfortably in Haskell many months before learning HM as well. This is a better argument for you than for Haskell. I wasn't disputing that there's a set of people who can intuitively command an incredibly recondite black box
66.
by moldbug 14y ago
That's a brutal critique which comes close to a charge of scientific fraud. I'd be curious to see a response. If there isn't one, I know what to think.
67.
by moldbug 14y ago
Special relativity is a few formulas, not a "whole subfield of physics." But yes - I didn't really regard this as a serious scientific criticism. I can present LR parsing in a lecture as well. However, if you had to understand LR parsing
68.
by moldbug 14y ago
Sure. I'm not saying that solving the hard problem of learning a black-box system is either impossible, or even necessarily un-fun. I'm just saying that there is no such problem when it comes to learning, say, PHP. Or any other "townie" l
69.
by moldbug 14y ago
The problem is that the best, most expressive functional languages (lookin at ya Haskell) are mathematically based on this theory. If you want to use these languages, you have a choice between (a) learning the theory, and (b) not fully u
70.
by moldbug 14y ago
It's because the drugs themselves prove ineffective, unsafe or both. Statements like this prove the systemic abuse of statistics that is pharma regulation. You've - quite unconsciously, no doubt - reversed the definition of proof, assert
71.
by moldbug 14y ago
Honest question: would you be less bitter about your grandfathers' death if they had been given some unproven, entirely experimental risky drug...and then died immediately after because of said drug? I'd feel much better about it. Becaus
72.
by moldbug 14y ago
This drug went from being a 'candidate' molecule to having gold standard data and FDA approval in 5 years. Five years! I know that's fast by industry standards. Why, it's only one more year than it took us to win World War II. Also, for
73.
by moldbug 14y ago
Ok, I'm taken aback by that - people actually think that people who are dull and dishonest become scientists? I mean I can understand that they become - frauds -. But scientists? Well maybe not in my country, but perhaps where you live. I
74.
by moldbug 14y ago
- There is concern that long term use may increase the risk of intestinal or stomach cancers (based on mouse studies) - So far the longest term test has been 6 years (somewhat longer than your 28 days theory). In fact, 28 days is a stand
75.
by moldbug 14y ago
Identifying the protein targets could be a lifetime's work. Identifying drug interactors is another big project, verifying efficacy takes time, synthesis takes time, verifying purity, determining best method of delivery to the patient, hal
76.
by moldbug 14y ago
It seems we've doubled our life expectancy in the last 50 years. Medicine isn't working you say? Mostly gains in infant mortality, plus antibiotics. We're coasting on the mid-20C golden age of medicine. Modern medicine is great - postmo
77.
by moldbug 14y ago
Basically - any single chaotic factor outside the narrowly defined boundaries you have mentioned, will bork your entire system. Sure. If you're stupid. Science isn't for the stupid. There is a common if implicit belief that systematic
78.
by moldbug 14y ago
Omeprazole has been about for nearly quarter of a century; and is fairly well understood - hell I can walk down to my local drug store and pick up a load from the shelves. You say this like it follows. I can too. I can read the label as
79.
by moldbug 14y ago
Spontaneous remission, while it happens, is not a significant confounding factor in pancreatic cancer. See above for comments on statistics.
80.
by moldbug 14y ago
I can't reply again, but, um, are you trolling? I didn't see this message the first time. Truly remarkable comment. Am I trolling ? I'll answer with a text from 1863, by the English historian James Anthony Froude: In the ordinary bran
81.
by moldbug 14y ago
Statistically you'll need quite a few This is exactly the problem: statistics. In a problem where every case is unique, any use of statistics is an abuse of statistics. The roots of Western medicine are arguably pre-scientific, and cer
82.
by moldbug 14y ago
You're absolutely right that this is the mentality that future treatments need to take. Yeah, and I'm sure our regulatory infrastructure will catch up sometime in the Obama administration. That is, the Malia Obama administration... If t
83.
by moldbug 14y ago
just how difficult it is to judge effectiveness of treatments and preventions in even extremely controlled studies. Translation: "just how difficult it is to be absolutely absolutely absolutely * 10^7 sure we're not selling quack medicine
84.
by moldbug 14y ago
I'm going to be a heretic and argue that the problem with cancer research is institutional, not biological. The biological problem is clearly very hard, but the institutional problem is impossible. You might or might not be familiar with t
85.
by moldbug 15y ago
I wouldn't call this "hacky" - it's exactly the right way to do it. For one thing, it makes the address of your arena constant. Unfortunately my experience is that a lot of C environments handle this very poorly.
86.
Ask HN: have you had a bad experience trying to learn or use Haskell?
10 points by moldbug 15y ago|9 comments
87.
by moldbug 15y ago
At least this makes you ineligible for my most important piece of advice. But others may care so I'll say it anyway: never go to grad school, especially in Computer Science, before both (a) you're old enough to drink, (b) you have actu
88.
by moldbug 15y ago
Neighbor, please. It's hard enough trying to reinvent the wheel by myself. With any help it'd be downright impossible. There's a great anecdote about Jessica Mitford from the '50s. Mitford had spent years writing an autobiography and, dur
89.
by moldbug 15y ago
That shit be old , man. Well, not the code... the blog. Lesson 1: your research project is not an open-source project. Until it's done. Lesson 2: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That said, if you want to see some ver
90.
by moldbug 15y ago
Neither Hayek nor Marx is "politics." Politics is Olbermann and/or Glenn Beck. Hayek and Marx are history and literature. If you're not supposed to talk history and literature at the workplace, you may be in the wrong workplace. Hayek is

More ›