For sure we still need to find out many related outcomes.
Last year it become known that it increases (high relative risk, low absolute risk) non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), ie sudden, sometimes permanent vision loss.
To save others the click: It increased the likelihood to 1 in 10,000 in adults with type 2 diabetes.
Diabetics are already more prone NAION. This studies contribution was to show that diabetics on GLP-1's are MORE prone. It does not show that the general population is more prone when taking GLP-1's.
I didn't check to see if other studies prove that.
It is well known that forcing a sudden drop in chronically high average blood glucose (like, from 200+ to a normal ish range) with insulin can cause vision loss. I wonder if it's the same mechanism?
Regarding 1, horses in particular are known to jump off two hind legs and land on their two forelegs, putting a lot more force on them than their stationary weight.
On 2, I believe that's the GP's point too — human leg bones (or horses') can obviously take a lot more than their standing/walking/running weight.
As I mentioned elsewhere, eg. femur can take at least 30x body weight, and we've got two to carry us. If a giant is 10x the size, and femur is just scaled linearly, even with 10x the relative weight, it can still take 3x giant's body weight. So perhaps no jumping on one leg anymore, but walking or light jogging should be fine.
But, their bones could also have larger cross-section and a giant could be stockier yet still appear "human like".
Yes, there is always a failure mode. But if do a search or have some result set, it is convenient to have paging work as close to expected as possible.
Say you are processing/shipping orders. You do the first page and then advance to page 2. The very next order may no longer be the next order that would have shown depending on how many orders came in. In fact if order are coming in fast it will be impossible to page through a search result. But if you incorporate the last I’d seen you will get something closer to what the user expects. Naive offset won’t give you this.
Median also lies more than 99th/100th percentiles because in many workloads the same client is making multiple parallel requests and often waiting for the slowest.
See this piece from Jeff Dean [0]
Quote:
"""
Component-Level Variability Amplified By Scale
A common technique for reducing latency in large-scale online services is to parallelize sub-operations across many different machines, where each sub-operation is co-located with its portion of a large dataset. Parallelization happens by fanning out a request from a root to a large number of leaf servers and merging responses via a request-distribution tree. These sub-operations must all complete within a strict deadline for the service to feel responsive.
Variability in the latency distribution of individual components is magnified at the service level; for example, consider a system where each server typically responds in 10ms but with a 99th-percentile latency of one second. If a user request is handled on just one such server, one user request in 100 will be slow (one second). The figure here outlines how service-level latency in this hypothetical scenario is affected by very modest fractions of latency outliers. If a user request must collect responses from 100 such servers in parallel, then 63% of user requests will take more than one second (marked “x” in the figure). Even for services with only one in 10,000 requests experiencing more than one-second latencies at the single-server level, a service with 2,000 such servers will see almost one in five user requests taking more than one second (marked “o” in the figure).
Don't let kids have an internet-connected phone, the same way they can't have a bottle of wine.
If they really need such device make sure that device is locked to a small list of app/contacts possible.
There's no need to lock down the rest of the internet because the responsible person of such kid can't tolerate their complaints. It is a parenting issue.
You totally ignored the point OP was making! Even if it is a parenting issue, simply declaring that will not make parents parent better. It's the same reason why we ban children from drinking wine, because parents cannot be relied upon here.
Unless your point was that we should legally ban kids from handling phones, which I think is too extreme.
I have seen religious parents been vocally opposed to their children seeing or even discussing anything related to sexuality.
An example from the past:
"The National Legion of Decency, also known as the Catholic Legion of Decency, was an American Catholic group founded in 1934 by the Archbishop of Cincinnati, John T. McNicholas, as an organization dedicated to identifying objectionable content in motion pictures on behalf of Catholic audiences."
You have to appreciate the level of audacity required for a catholic organization to claim they are protecting children from harms regarding sexuality.
Just put your kids in a bubble so not a single adult is the slightest bit inconvenienced by having to exercise any social responsibility for their well being. Easy.
I've recently tossed all my coated pans (my favourite were the Anolon, but those too shed) and moved to stainless steel, save for a cast iron and carbon steel pan.
In the journey here the best I could find was a Hestan nanobond pan, which unfortunately laminated and has shown some pits after few months of use. They refunded me but titaniums isn't yet where stainless steel is.
Now I'm using a mix of Demeyere, De Buyer, and Made In.
It takes a bit of time to get used cooking in them without a ton of fat.
Look up Leidenfrost effect on youtube and you'll learn pretty quickly how to use stainless steel and do not let anything stick even fish.
Simple fix: don't cook with extra virgin olive oil on high heat. The smoke point is one reason. Flavor is another. Cost is a third (less expensive fats are better suited for this task)
Rare (but not outlandish) warning - A friend's entire family had ongoing symptoms of fatigue and upset stomach. They ran blood panels and found that everyone had off the charts iron levels. They had switched to cast iron only in the kitchen a few years back, and switching to stainless pans solved the problem.
I wonder if they were scouring the cast iron every time they cleaned it? Normally a layer of carbon "seasoning" develops and I would think that would limit the direct contact of food and iron.
I clean my cast iron pans with hot water and a brush or scraper only. No detergent (or maybe a small amount to break up oil if I cooked something really greasy). No scouring.
I want to call something out here so people don't have to click / don't just gloss over it, because his videos are what made me go "hey, wait a minute..."
Most tutorials on stainless steel completely fail to mention turning the heat down or adding oil/butter. If you've been using stainless steel for a while these are probably "well duh" things, but coming from nonstick these were both surprising.
With nonstick, you can just leave the heat at medium the whole time, and usually need to to maintain the heat. The pan heats up a lot slower and doesn't get as hot. And because of the nonstick surface, oil/butter is unnecessary - I never used it the whole time I was on nonstick. But stainless steel heats up a lot better, so leaving it at medium it'll just keep heating up and burn your food (mentioned in the video), and the leidenfrost effect doesn't really work on some substances without oil/butter to act as an intermediary (I couldn't explain the physics of it, just that my pancake batter was burned to the skillet on one side and liquid on the other - it was so extreme I was concerned I just couldn't make pancakes with it, while adding butter the next attempt was like magic).
Scrolling around the comments here on HN, a lot of people are mentioning how good stainless steel can be at not sticking, in a thread about nonstick surfaces, without mentioning any of the additional steps.
If you cannot cook eggs that do not stick in stainless steel you are doing it wrong. I never have an issue. Over easy, non-stick, every time.
The trick I found is to take the pan off the heat after the droplets start jumping and add a bunch of butter and then add the eggs and put it back on low heat.
Yep! And I don't even bother taking it off or lowering the heat! As soon as the water drops bounce, I throw everything in the pan and it works every time. I make sunny side up and scrambled (and poached, but obviously that doesn't apply here).
Thanks! I’m getting into cooking and have basic teflon pans (Rachel ray pans given to us by my MIL) and I’m looking to get nice ones and be done with it
I use it in several projects. You're still open to a few seconds of possible downtime (depending how often you flush the WAL to your remote location, and how bursty your writes are), and you need to have all of your db on disk on the process doing the reads, but it's been great.
Last year it become known that it increases (high relative risk, low absolute risk) non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), ie sudden, sometimes permanent vision loss.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/prac-concludes-eye-conditi...