i don't doubt this. i just find it questionable that one particular poster always gets in the spotlight when AI is the topic - while other conversations in my opinion offer more interesting angles.
Parent implies there might be some "boosting" involved, in which case, "upvote the conversations that you find to be more interesting" wont change anything...
Not saying this is the case, but it's what the comment implies, so "just upvote your faves" doesn't really address it.
I would like to see others, being promoted to the top rather than Simon’s constant shilling for backlinks to his blog every time an AI topic is on the front page.
Specifically: “ Although our pharmaceutical armamentarium is very good at the moment (the combination of statin-ezetimibe-proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 [PCSK9] can reduce LDL cholesterol [LDL-C] levels by 85%), new drugs are emerging through the different pitfalls of current drugs.”
It seems as if some researchers think that reducing this single metric without considering any other factors is inherently always a good thing and is very important.
Hardly “nothing else”. Two smoothies a day with 150g of oats blended in them will basically cover this. You’d still have plenty of room for other food.
But that's not what the study tested. The study showed that both calorie restriction, and calorie restriction combined with almost all calories from oats, reduced cholesterol; but that the effect was more durable for the latter case. No data was gathered on eating oats without calorie restriction in this study.
That's not as easy as just hitting the hyphen key, nor are most people going to be aware that even exists. I think it's fair to say that the hyphen is far easier to use than an em dash.
One interesting feature of DuckDB is that it can run queries against HTTP ranges of a static file hosted via HTTPS, and there's an official WebAssembly build of it that can do that same trick.
So you can dump e.g. all of Hacker News in a single multi-GB Parquet file somewhere and build a client-side JavaScript application that can run queries against that without having to fetch the whole thing.
DuckDB is an open-source column-oriented Relational Database Management System (RDBMS). It's designed to provide high performance on complex queries against large databases in embedded configuration.
"DICT FSST (Dictionary FSST) represents a hybrid compression technique that combines the benefits of Dictionary Encoding with the string-level compression capabilities of FSST.
This approach was implemented and integrated into DuckDB as part of ongoing efforts to optimize string storage and processing performance."
https://homepages.cwi.nl/~boncz/msc/2025-YanLannaAlexandre.p...
It is very similar to SQLite in that it can run in-process and store its data as a file.
It's different in that it is tailored to analytics, among other things storage is columnar, and it can run off some common data analytics file formats.
Hey jacquesm! No, I just forgot to make it public.
BUT I did try to push the entire 10GB of shards to GitHub (no LFS, no thanks, money), and after the 20 minutes compressing objects etc, "remote hang up unexpectedly"
To be expected I guess. I did not think GH Pages would be able to do this. So have been repeating:
Pretty neat project. I never thought you could do this in the first place, very much inspiring. I've made a little project that stores all of its data locally but still runs in the browser to protect against take downs and because I don't think you should store your precious data online more than you have to, eventually it all rots away. Your project takes this to the next level.
That's really cool, man. The music notation is beautiful. I hit play but couldn't get it to progress past the first note. Maybe I need to plug in a midi keyboard? It would be cool if I could "play" with my ASCII keyboard.
Listen was nice. That's really cool, actually. I encourage you to do it.
I was thinking more the numeric columns which have pre-built compression mechanisms to handle incrementing columns or long runs of identical values. For sure less total data than the text, but my prior is that the two should perform equivalently on the text, so the better compression on numbers should let duckdb pull ahead.
I had to run a test for myself, and using sqlite2duckdb (no research, first search hit), and using randomly picked shard 1636, the sqlite.gz was 4.9MB, but the duckdb.gz was 3.7MB.
The uncompressed sizes favor sqlite, which does not make sense to me, so not sure if duckdb keeps around more statistics information. Uncompressed sqlite 12.9MB, duckdb 15.5MB
Not the author here. I’m not sure about DuckDB, but SQLite allows you to simply use a file as a database and for archiving, it’s really helpful. One file, that’s it.
At a glance, that is missing (at least) a `parent` or `parent_id` attribute which items in HN can have (and you kind of need if you want to render comments), see http://hn.algolia.com/api/v1/items/46436741
I recall clickbait meaning "A way of describing what's behind a link, often inaccurately, so that you click on it". The completely non-controversial article seems to me to have a very hook-y headline which is exactly what the phrase refers to, at least to me. What does clickbait mean to you? Perhaps the meaning of the phrase has changed in different groups over time.
It’s not a buried sentence. It’s a section heading in large font saying “ The 777-200 Problem Is Not Safety. It Is Economics.”
Then there’s a whole paragraph stating “The Boeing 777-200 is not an unsafe airplane. As far as I can tell, that is not the issue even after the incident over Dulles over the weekend.”
Then just in case the reader jumped to conclusions, the first sentence of the conclusion again says it’s safe.
You are explaining exactly why the headline is clickbait: The article does not support the conclusions implied by the headline.
> just in case the reader jumped to conclusions
The author is correcting a problem of his own creation. He has already misled the reader with his headline. He means for the reader to misunderstand... and click.
I respectfully disagree. VAERS can absolutely be used to establish causality when followed by proper expert investigation (which is exactly its purpose as a signal-detection system). The IOM has relied on VAERS data to confirm causal links in 158 vaccine-adverse event pairs, including rotavirus vaccine and intussusception.
Here, FDA career scientists conducted that follow-up: they reviewed 96 child death reports and concluded at least 10 were caused by COVID vaccine myocarditis. That expert finding, not politics, is what triggered the stricter protocols. Healthy skepticism means demanding the full data for review, not preemptively calling it invalid.
The FDA memo citing 10 vaccine-caused myocarditis deaths in kids came _after_ the Sept. 2025 ACIP vote. ACIP had already dropped routine vaccination for healthy kids 6 mo-17 yr and moved everyone under 65 to "shared decision-making" (high-risk only) [1]
The detailed FDA analysis still isn't public. That's exactly why we should demand it instead of dismissing the claim.
Blame NYTimes for leaking the internal memo. In all honesty they should be fined for doing this.
We have no information about how highly motivated anti-vaxxers in positions of power over the FDA arrived at this conclusion except "the team has performed an initial analysis"[1]. That's literally it. Your claim that "FDA career scientists" conducted the follow-up can't even be based on this flimsy a statement. Moreover, these deaths have already been investigated by FDA career scientists and found these conclusions unwarranted.
Prasad spends the rest of the memo politically grandstanding (including claiming it was the FDA commissioner that was the hero here, forcing this issue, not FDA career scientists) and dismissing any objections to very obvious arguments against his claim (that have been made and published multiple times over the past five years) without any evidence, while providing no evidence of his own, in a memo addressing FDA career scientists.
Seriously, everyone should go read his memo. It's basically just a shitty antivax substack post, yet will apparently be FDA policy going forward. Another win for meritocracy.
> The detailed FDA analysis still isn't public. That's exactly why we should demand it instead of dismissing the claim.
The only "claim" here just sounds more official because RFKjr got a bunch of his best antivax buddies to be in charge of the FDA (same with the ACIP). There's no way to even consider it without evidence, so there's nothing to dismiss. Come back when you have something real.
The NYT shouldn't get a free pass for publishing a half-baked internal draft memo that even says "initial analysis" and then framing it as settled science. That's how you create panic and confusion, not transparency. Leaking unfinished work and splashing it on the front page is reckless. This should not be allowed.
Calling everyone "anti-vaxxers" is lazy. Most people I know who are skeptical of the covid shots (including plenty of doctors and scientists) are fully vaccinated against measles, polio, tetanus, etc. They just don't trust a product that skipped the usual 5–10 year safety window and got pushed with emergency authorization. That's not "anti-vax", that’s pattern recognition.
The memo is short on data and long on rhetoric, sure. That's exactly why we need the actual underlying review released in full.
You sound really invested in keeping those covid shots on the childhood schedule. Got a big Pfizer position in the 401k? Kidding, obviously. But the "anyone who asks questions is an anti-vaxxer" reflex is exactly why people stopped trusting the institutions in the first place. I respect every real skeptic, on any side. Asking questions is what moves science forward. Blind trust is stagnation.
reply