jrpt

In that case, you have early onset essential tremor, not age-related essential tremor. I believe only age-related essential tremor has increased risk of dementia. For example:

In an adjusted model, ET cases with tremor onset after age 65 years were twice as likely to develop incident dementia than were controls (RR = 1.98, 95% CI = 1.14–3.45, P = 0.01), whereas ET cases with tremor onset < age 65 years and controls were equally to develop incident dementia (RR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.19–3.20, P = 0.79).

https://movementdisorders.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.100...

However, I think essential tremor needs more research in general.

First off, there's two different kinds: in young people and in old people (known as age-related or late-onset essential tremor). It's the same disorder but evidently different etiologies.

Personally I believe it will be cured with gene editing someday.

Also, it was already known that age-related essential tremor increases your risk of dementia.

I’m not an anti-car person but I think you have a few misconceptions:

- A lot of well off people who could flag a taxi or Uber still take the NYC subway because it is very convenient and has incredible coverage. All sorts of New Yorkers use it. Also, you can get from the airport to Manhattan just as fast if not faster on the LIRR, and at a fraction of the cost. (In the SF Bay Area on the other hand, the trains are pretty bad for getting to the airport!)

- Public transit is almost never intended to operate at a profit. They intentionally subsidize it, both for people with low income, and to make routes to suburbs where the route might not have the ridership to really justify it, but the planners think it is still important for political reasons (like if a district is paying for some transit service, everyone in the district should get some stations).

There’s already a lot of common sense things people can do: night lights, padded floor mats by the bed, handrails by the stairs, not leaving stuff on the ground where you might trip over it. I think I’d do that stuff before some sort of smart lighting system.

It isn’t standard to take part in clinical trials. Only about 5% of adults with cancer partake in a trial.

A lot of things can cause cancer. For example, prostatitis and inflammation likely cause cancer, and likely are also correlated with it metastasizing. (I'm not claiming it's the cause or a sole reason but the evidence suggests it increases the risks.) I've never looked into parasites but it's possible parasites are associated with an increased relative risk of cancer, and the mechanism of action would probably be inflammation.

My guess is people are in effect checked for parasites by way of annual bloodwork and annual checkups. If someone started losing weight, for example, they'd go see a doctor who might investigate for parasites if the symptoms point to it. There is probably not much reason to do an annual parasite-specific test in people. Livestock cannot talk to us about their symptoms, and eat all sorts of crap, so there's some important difference there.

Because cancer isn't a parasite. They are your own cells, just with various mutations. A parasite is a foreign living organism that lives off of another, for example, a parasitic worm. Anyone can easily confirm cancer cells are genetic mutations to your own by doing a genetic test - and in fact this is done regularly, it's called a germline and somatic genetic test, which can help identify if certain drugs would work well on the cancer. This is a form of personalized medicine.

I’m talking about long-term incontinence which is what people are most concerned about. You probably are reading about short-term incontinence. If you are having a radical prostatectomy done, you probably are hoping to live at least ten more years or even longer, so you’re basically saying you want short-term pain (surgery, pain, incontinence, etc) for long-term peace of mind (no metastases).

The vast majority of radical prostatectomies don’t have incontinence (like 95%), and impotence isn’t common either. Furthermore, they’re usually in older men who are already impotent.

Many years ago incontinence was a side effect but it isn’t common any longer as surgery has gotten better.

The story of how they discovered the nerves they were cutting that causes impotence is kind of crazy, because for years it is basically like nobody even looked into it. Then one day someone decided to and they figured it out pretty quickly. That was in 1982.

I’m not anti-roundabout but for $15 million could they have made it a highway interchange instead, raising one road, lowering the other to go under? Looking online it seems like it’d cost about the same amount for an interchange.

What are you trying to do more specifically? You can use https://docalysis.com/ for most document RAG tasks.

I agree that there's been some progress in therapies and robot-assisted surgery, but the reason for the improvement in mortality seems more to do with early detection. Cancer deaths overall are also improving due to fewer smokers, but that should be accounted for by "health standardized" measurements.

I think this paper explains it: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27175568/ "the major factors that accounted for these favorable trends were progress in tobacco control and improvements in early detection and treatment"

I feel like the treatment progress for most metastatic solid cancers have not significantly improved. A significant improvement wouldn't be just improving overall survival by a year or so. What seems possible to achieve (someday soon perhaps) is making cancer either a manageable condition, like HIV now is, or curable.

I run https://Docalysis.com/ and there’s a few use cases. The first is getting information out of various reports and papers by chatting with it, which is faster than reading an entire document. Another is automating data extraction out of files, which is part of many business processes.

They are going to add more abilities onto the system, for example, toolformers or goal planning (like the recent Q* stuff at OpenAI people are talking about). This will make the overall product very powerful.

But even if you’re looking just at the LLM it seems like there’s a lot of ways it can be improved still.

It seems like that would be better.

It’s not a really a “big lie” when they are upfront about RLHF. The H stands for human.

The problem with ChatGPT document upload is it tries to have the AI write and execute code on the spot for things you ask it. It will write code to read a PDF, then execute it. But this isn’t optimized for the job at hand.

I run https://docalysis.com/ which has human engineered AI document analysis features. I don’t have whole document translation yet (nobody asked for it) but people are using it for asking questions in one language when the document is in another language. If I wanted to add whole document translation, I’d do it as a custom thing that we code up, not ask the AI to try to invent it on the spot.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with processing by itself, it’s what goes in the food that is problematic. I think just saying processing is harmful is like saying baking is harmful. They should be focused on what the food actually is, not how it is made.

“Ultra-processed foods typically contain things like artificial sweeteners, synthetic colors, flavors, emulsifiers, and other ingredients that people don’t cook with at home, Nestle said.”

So maybe focus on the harmful ingredients, not the way it is made.

This is very important and why I wouldn’t consider her pro-startup.

The mistake you're making is taking a politican's words at face value. If you were to ask JFK he'd say militarily the US couldn't accept nuclear missiles in Cuba. But our own military was willing to accept it, in fact that was one of the options presented to him: do nothing. The reason he did something was all political, because he was running for reelection, needed to look strong on the topic after the Bay of Pigs, and had publicly committed to not accepting missiles in Cuba earlier (as the Soviets had also publicly asserted they wouldn't put them in Cuba).

The book "Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis" is somewhat regarded as a classic here that is worth reading.

Also, worth pointing out that I too can quote a Khrushchev (Nikita):

Q. How much did the crisis have to do with U.S. Jupiter missiles deployed in Turkey?

A. Zero. The missiles in Turkey were the same as the missiles in Italy and Great Britain. Why do you make the difference between those three missile bases? They are the same. They are the just the first step in a standoff confrontation in 1962 when both sides began to deploy missiles in their own territories. Those missiles in Turkey would be removed from Turkey anyway in two or three years.

From what I've read, most historians would agree with that take.

There's so much wrong with this comment but to start: the US didn't cause the Cuban missile crisis by first placing missiles in Turkey. This is known because historians have read documents and talked with people after the fact. The actual Soviet motivation was to use missiles in Cuba as a bargaining chip with respect to Berlin. Militarily, neither missiles in Cuba nor missiles in Turkey made much of any strategic difference.

We have >200 page PDFs at https://docalysis.com/ and there's on-the-fly retrieval. It's not more computationally expensive than something like searching one's inbox (I'd image you have more than 200 pages worth of emails in your inbox).

You can use https://Docalysis.com for that. Disclosure: I am the founder of Docalysis.

To their credit, they are apparently helping with conversions: https://sf.gov/news/san-francisco-announces-new-initiative-s...

Unless you know something specific that is getting in the way.

It seems like he had a lot of risk factors that they didn't have listed on his home, but once they had the images, his risk factor changed. So they are not renewing his policy. He can try to find another policy with someone else. That seems reasonable to me. You're just hearing one side of the story, from an outraged customer.

It is getting more difficult in California because the state lawmakers have made it so that insurance companies cannot price wildfire risk the way they should. State Farm and Allstate have stopped writing new property insurance policies in California, and Farmers has restricted their policies for new customers. To read more about this problem: https://calmatters.org/economy/2023/06/california-home-insur...

Also, as I understand it, for homes in cities like the SF Bay Area or the LA Area, typically the biggest risk you face is water damage, not fires. Leak detectors are probably the biggest low hanging fruit you can buy to help mitigate risk.

To the extent their actions delay the development and deployment of self-driving vehicles, they're responsible for deaths due to bad human drivers (since that's what self-driving vehicles are replacing). The faster we get self-driving vehicles, the better.

Use https://Docalysis.com to do that. There is an API too.

Universities aren't the only places research and development take place.

The 2020 protests were either dangerous or ok depending on where you were and the time of day. Minneapolis had a lot of damage and someone was even burned to death in their store. US insurance costs were over $1B.

Zuck is "very optimistic about how the Threads community is coming together. Early growth was off the charts, but more importantly 10s of millions of people now come back daily. That’s way ahead of what we expected."

I wouldn't count it out.