rscho

36 ms·

511.
by rscho 4y ago
Are you implying that giving prolog-like syntax to a language suggests ignorance about programming? Why would that be terrible? IMO, syntax is really not the main attraction, neither is it the main problem to solve when writing a theorem pr
512.
by rscho 5y ago
You could try something with a regular syntax. It doesn't work for everyone, but when it works it works really well. Racket comes to mind, and it has a progressive suite of languages from neophyte to full-blown. In addition to a commun
513.
by rscho 5y ago
Be the change you want to see?
514.
by rscho 5y ago
Racket. With typed racket.
515.
by rscho 5y ago
Because interstellar travel is probably much harder than extend people's lifespan to unreasonable extents. Your children will need room to thrive. Of course, you could argue it's others who have to die. But that seems a morally di
516.
by rscho 5y ago
Yes, you really should die. If you want to have kids, that is. What shouldn't be is growing old and weak. That's the real pain.
517.
by rscho 5y ago
> what advantages Pharo has that make it useful in a professional setting. Pretty much, the ultimate quick-and-dirty prototyping engine, especially for GUI projects. In the sense that you're prototyping largely from scratch, not cob
518.
by rscho 5y ago
Racket has been rated as 'an acceptable python' by a famous programmer. Well deserved, I think.
519.
by rscho 5y ago
I doubt we're speaking of the same thing, here.
520.
by rscho 5y ago
> The trick is figuring out who is who, because other docs won’t say Precisely. And I assure you, as a patient you can't possibly figure out who's who. Your bias is you think you can.
521.
by rscho 5y ago
> Big data is coming Big _bad_ data... Let's see how we fare in 5y, then. My prediction as a clinician with a special interest in stats: close to zero medical progress. But insurance priced by a ML algorithm, and much greater effici
522.
by rscho 5y ago
I have 10+ years of clinical experience in academic hospitals, and have worked in Boston at Brigham and Women's. From this experience, I can tell you 2 things: 1. Being a lecturer at Harvard does not correlate with being a skillful cli
523.
by rscho 5y ago
I personally prescribe loads of painkillers, including the whole range of the WHO ladder, and many of those patients have liver tests. It rarely happens that we have to discontinue Tylenol due to hepatitis. I see people on NSAIDs with kidne
524.
by rscho 5y ago
Statistics are not the problem. The data is. 'Big healthcare data' does not exist. Building what you are thinking of would require huge data gathering capabilities, that are very clearly out of reach. Most big medical co do a lot
525.
by rscho 5y ago
If data science was that efficient on healthcare records, we'd know it by now and everyone would do it. There is no 'big healthcare data'. We gather mostly noise, and records are full of blatant mistakes. Medicine is still mo
526.
by rscho 5y ago
They almost universally don't know their own rate. I don't know my own rates of complications. But, if I want you to go away because you seem to be the kind of guy that will come back to bite me, I'll gladly tell you I have
527.
by rscho 5y ago
The number of factors you'd have to consider to achieve that is huge enough that it makes it completely unrealistic, both practically and financially speaking. In fact, I'm 100% convinced that it's currently impossible to bui
528.
by rscho 5y ago
Other doctors? And where will you find those? No one will ever touch you, except if you pay more. Pay more for worse outcomes, really.
529.
by rscho 5y ago
Risk adjusted scoring is currently absolutely not viable. You underestimate the messiness of the healthcare system by a huge margin. We don't even manage to record basic vital signs consistently, so believe me when I tell you that you
530.
by rscho 5y ago
Surgeons will concentrate on easy procedures and will basically all have an almost identical track record of quasi perfection. So there will be nobody left to perform procedure Y, where Y has an intrinsically high rate of failure. Same thin
531.
by rscho 5y ago
> When I ask for hard data on the surgeon’s actual success rate for this type of surgery, well, they don’t track that—but look, just trust me, the guy’s realllyyy good. For good reason. Tracking of clinical outcomes is the wet dream of i
532.
by rscho 5y ago
> the "daily" recommended doses are for a single day. No. We've got thousands of people living more or less permanently on the maximum daily dose, including some children and vulnerable populations. Yes, some of those peop
533.
by rscho 5y ago
Cocaine is indeed an excellent decongestant. To the point that it'll pierce a hole through your nasal septum through vasoconstriction.
534.
by rscho 5y ago
This is wrong. Kidney failure from NSAIDs is very common, and also very dangerous. And can develop at recommended dosage.
535.
by rscho 5y ago
Robot?
536.
by rscho 5y ago
Ah, then I understand better. Was wondering why such a paper would be in Science.
537.
by rscho 5y ago
The bonferoni correction is known to be overly restrictive, though. But yes, probably many more models were fit and results are questionable. The author will at least be able to claim a Science paper... Also, adjustment of the p-value doesn
538.
by rscho 5y ago
Because it pushes us to treat cases where we expect a good outcome preferentially, i.e. biases the case mix towards easy patients and increases inequalities in access to healthcare.
539.
by rscho 5y ago
> implying that their paper should never have been published. That's really not what I meant. I have no problem with the publication. But put yourself in the shoes of someone such as myself, who's intubated tens of cases on adm
540.
by rscho 5y ago
Remember the start of the pandemic? Some prof published that we should withold steroids and intubate ASAP on the basis of preliminary evidence, throwing basically everything we knew about ARDS out of the window. Most reasonable ICU guys wer

More ›