johnthealy3

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be the first real acknowledgement in science that RA, lupus, and autoimmune disease in general could be CAUSED by mental health issues? FTA:

"It’s also unclear whether simply treating inflammation could be enough to alleviate depression. Clinicians are still trying to parse whether depression causes inflammation or inflammation leads to depression. “It’s a sort of chicken-and-egg phenomenon,” Nemeroff said."

If this isn't the biggest failed opportunity to name and shame, I dunno what is. People like this should be eviscerated in the same social media sphere they work in.

I think one of the only things preventing the US from implementing Australia-style pandemic policies was the number of guns in civilian hands. As such, the pandemic taught me why America tolerates this sort of thing repeatedly.

This is the type of voice used to railroad people into a certain point of view. It's trying to stonewall and invalidate and gaslight anyone who dare even consider the possibility of the lab leak. As an American in my 30s I've grown up used to seeing this tactic anytime Israel is mentioned in the news (until the last few years). Hopefully we are at a point where people are becoming more sensitive to this kind of tactic, especially in the mass media.

As other people have noted, there isn't much new here. The findings about potential origins in Laos are still in preprint AFAIK, much as all information (real or not) has been throughout the pandemic.

To be fair, this man's job was to identify the type of person who is likely to succeed at startups, and by most accounts he was very successful at it.

Understanding personality traits and how they relate to the people you're looking for has felt critically important as I work on my startup. It has come up over and over again in hiring (including MANY more inbound, exploratory conversations than I would have expected) and in client management (identifying the best point of contact on their side, but also keeping clients on track and responsive during an onboard).

Agreed that it's right to be suspicious of the motives of any venture capitalist that makes a post like this (nothing against Fred Wilson personally). One thing I noticed at my last few startups is that the initial option agreements tend to have less diligence around them, say a very small strike price and more favorable terms on stuff like acceleration. Naturally, later-stage VCs would seek to skew the terms more in their favor, and redoing option grants yearly allows this to happen.

On a more general note though, golden handcuffs can benefit the employee just because they are a guarantee. There's no possibility of future faking when it's up front and signed into a four year vesting schedule (e.g. "we'll give you a few percent next year but we need to get through this raise first").

Yep came in here to see if this was flagged and it was. Reinforces the author's point, and of course HN is part of the problem.

To add to this, you don't even need to know what the antibody looks like, or even if it exists. Very simplified example: It's possible to grow a dish of cancer cells (because they divide quickly and are immortal, e.g HeLa cells), "purify" away everything that isn't protein (cell lysis), then run the proteins through a gel that separates them by size (Western blot). Comparing these to a control will show you which proteins enabled survival, which gives you your candidates for sequencing and further tests.

However, right now we have humans synthesizing large amounts of antibodies that are proven to work (because the humans creating them survived and cleared the virus). It may ultimately be faster to isolate antibodies from the serum and engineer cell cultures (through adding DNA to them, "recombinant DNA") to create more of those antibodies, resulting in much stronger synthesis of a single antibody (so-called "monoclonal antibody drugs").

It's nearly certain that both of these are happening many times over around the world right now. All of the science here was already in lab use the first time I worked in a bio lab in 2003, and nowadays we have methods that didn't exist then (such as CRISPR for DNA manipulation and fast sequencing of both nucleic acids and proteins).

This is the type of thing that can really benefit from public disclosure and discourse. What's "acceptable" varies so much by person and over time that having the censoring done in a black box will never be the answer.

The guidelines in the article seem overall reasonable given the range of possibilities versus the number of people working on it. I hope this stays out of the reach of government as long as possible.

I was feeling okay about this article until seeing this colossal punt:

> That said, the real intention behind this pattern is to keep the API/view/controller lightweight and free of excessive logic, which is something we would strongly advocate. Having logic inside model methods is a lesser evil, but you may want to consider keeping models lightweight and focused on the data layer. To make this work, you will need to figure out a new pattern and put your business logic in some layer that is in between the data layer and the API/presentational layer.

Having fat models is definitely a problem I'm having, and it's nice to see it's a problem for the author too, but the advice "figure it out" is presented without any explicit suggestions.

This article resonated with me quite a bit, the Bridgewater connection notwithstanding. People love to sensationalize Ray Dalio as a cult figure and, at the same time, seem to not be able to stand how successful his firm has been. My encounters with Bridgewater staff (interviewers, friends, and a day onsite) all struck me as unusual but refreshing, even though at the time 7-10 years ago I could not succeed in that environment. Nowadays, I find myself shooting for a similar level of transparency in my work and personal life and being much more successful because of it.

This is a case study of distorted news from an individual who understands the motivations behind it like few others, because he has been targeted by this sort of distortion more consistently than most. Those motivations include:

- pressure from management to spin a story a certain way - the reporter's personal desire to confirm his/her point of view - the desire to put down success stories to feel better about oneself

The distortion of news is not the only place in the world where these forces are at play, but given the platform news organizations have, we must find a way to control for them.

The article makes a number of points that resonate with me and were the initial reason I felt obligated to start my own company:

* Corporate and management issues / misalignments * Uninteresting work content (e.g. fixing old bugs all the time) * Time and energy drain

I've been reading the two books about Google culture recently (Work Rules! and How Google Works), both of which cover similar issues and (ostensibly) how Google has responded to them. I understand there must be a huge pool of people out there in similar situations, many of whom are the best of the best. It's also clear that a few large companies are trying to figure out how to appeal to this group, while most large companies continue to be consumed by egos and the day to day grind and fail at this.

The most important benefit to having my own company has (by far) been the time management. I feel like I could have the proper amount of time and energy to devote to a child or two, which would have been unthinkable in previous jobs (mine were in consulting, but the same seems to apply to tech).

However, I've also learned a lot about communication from my company, especially when it comes to things that would cause unhappiness or conflict (not agreeing with management, setting boundaries around time, etc). The biggest leap was realizing that if people react negatively, 1) you don't want to work with these people, and 2) there are a ton of people out there who want to work with you because of this. I hope the OP is able to find people who share his/her extremely positive traits to work with.

(Incidentally, I've learned a lot about communication from the poly community as well, and I'm not at all surprised to read OP's about section after reading this post.)

The exemption would be limited to companies organized in and with their principal place of business in the United States or Canada. The exemption would not be available to companies that:

* Have not filed ongoing reports required by the rules during the preceding two years.

So does this mean that a company wishing to raise capital under A+ needs to file "annual, semiannual and current event reports" for two years prior to the offering? If so, wouldn't this regulation effectively force seed-financed companies to start filing reports immediately? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this, but that seems like a significant burden.

As much as I loved the concept of turntable, it was always a music service for me rather than the interactive experience they intended. The best part about it was that other users, not bots or radio station managers, determined the playlist and therefore led to new and interesting tracks. However, the interface didn't really support my usage and hearing familiar tracks became more and more rare as the rooms became more established.

Their decision to focus on virtual events makes sense from a monetization standpoint, and I couldn't agree more with their approach. I do think there's a sweetspot to be had for user-generated radio, as Pandora is too repetitive while Turntable was not repetitive enough.

I started working with Django in 1.3.1 as my first REST framework. When I got to the views, it was easy to understand how the function responded to an HTTP request:

if request.POST:

validate

save form

redirect to success page

else if request.GET:

show the form

Learning the views this way was very helpful when I barely understood how the internet worked. So naturally, when I took on an intern this year, I got her started with the Django tutorial, then gave her the above pseudocode as an example of how to write a simple form. After she worked on it for a while and got very confused, I looked over the Django 1.5 tutorial with her and saw those awful, overmagicked generic views they use now. I spent an hour trying to implement what would have taken me two minutes if the views were written manually, until I gave up and rewrote all of her code while standing on my soapbox.

Needless to say, I've been hoping for something like this project ever since.

You bring up a great point that some people are naturally great fits for startup life and terrible fits for corporations. As the ecosystem improves for startups, fewer and fewer of these types will be forced into corporations which hopefully leads to more productive and happier people overall ("improved overall utility" if you're an economist).

The article talks about startup founders having low risk because of money and stability, and that's absolutely true in my experience (especially of people who jump into startups immediately out of college).

What the article fails to mention, and I think is just as important, is that the RELATIVE risk of the startup lifestyle continues to decline as traditional, "stable" jobs slowly become a thing of the past. I'm part of a small (but growing) freelancer agency, and when I try to convince others to join my firm, relative risk is a large part of my pitch.

When the "safe" option is to work at a bank or consulting firm, is it really all that safe? Many students think so, but have to be reminded that some of these firms average less than two years of tenure per new employee. Large tech companies have been somewhat safe over the past 5-10 years, but still put you at the mercy of corporate-scale layoffs that may have more to do with your product and the company's finances than your skills.

In a startup or small company, the risks are much more upfront and come with corresponding compensation, usually in the form of equity with growth potential. Large companies typically do not reward their employees for the risk they assume, because there is a perpetuated assumption that they provide a high level of security. So if we're all forced to bear a high level of risk, at least we should be compensated for it.

I always thought using fans to repel mosquitoes was common knowledge, but thinking back it was a trip to China where I learned about it. In fact, it was the same trip where I discovered the plug-in hormone packs AND the electric fly swatters. The rest of the world, where mosquitoes carry disease and there aren't spraying programs, seems to have figured out how to repel the bugs better than we have, and for lower cost.

I'm lucky enough to have an air conditioner that points right at my bed. While the main purpose is to keep cool, I haven't been bitten in bed this summer (unlike in the spring when the aircon was off).

In a way, I'm happy I'm not the only one who has thought about this situation.

I do this every time I'm on an outbound 7 train in New York. The train runs first through a hipster/young area, then a number of distinct ethnic neighborhoods, and finally ends in Flushing (the city's second Chinatown). Needless to say, strategically standing next to certain people in seats is the way to go.