loeg

I didn't say that at all. Medical professionals use GLP1 conversations to discuss healthy lifestyle interventions. They are not mutually exclusive.

Of course. But this is not responsive to anything I wrote.

> A user-space daemon can saturate almost any network link using a single CPU core.

Not 200Gbps of 16kB block writes, that's for sure.

Agree with you on the rest about kernel vs userspace, just taking issue with the bit about a single CPU core.

The two explicitly identical people have the same TDEE.

> the one on [GLP1s] will lose more weight

This isn't true. Identical people on identical diets will lose the same weight, GLP1 or not.

> and have better biomarkers like insulin sensitivity

(That part is true.)

> Citation needed! it's not actually difficult, all you need is calorie deficit and it has been routinely done by bodybuilders, athletes, MMA fighters and movie stars/models and thousands of ordinary members on r/caloriedeficit subreddit or other fitness subs!

Bruh, we're not doing this anymore. If weight loss was easy, we wouldn't have an adult obesity rate of 40%. Yes, yes, a handful of extraordinarily motivated individuals can successfully restrict calories to lose weight. But very clearly most people can't.

> Ofc, they also result in an increased risk of gallbladder stones, bile issues, hair loss, and severe loss of lean mass, and we've got actual studies on this.

You're conflating association and causality. They're used by the obese and diabetics, so they're associated with all kinds of things associated with obesity and diabetes. (But the plausible cause is that the 3rd variable is obesity/diabetes.) Loss of lean mass is basically identical to any other similar level of caloric restriction without corresponding resistance training -- if you don't eat enough to maintain muscle mass, and particularly if you aren't resistance training, no shit, you'll lose muscle. (And guess what? It's still better not to be obese.)

A take you knew was so dumb that you had to create a new account to post it.

Eh, no, the vast majority of splashy headline studies that make it to HN show some associative result where causality is not established. They can not control for all possible confounding. The money sentence from the study is "semaglutide was associated with significantly reduced epigenetic aging relative to placebo across multiple generations of epigenetic clocks."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-026-72861-3

It kinda seems like a bunch of markers moved randomly and some of them happened to move together: "In contrast, causality-enriched epigenetic clocks28 AdaptAge, CausAge, and DamAge exhibited directionally heterogeneous and statistically non-significant changes." That gets you a publication but I don't know that I'd bet money on follow-up study results.

> Everyone I know that are using these looks gaunt and sickly.

This is a statistical fallacy where you're only identifying the extreme cases. The average obese person loses 14-20% of body weight. (Remember that the "obese" category is already defined as 20%+ above the high end of the "normal" range.) So the vast majority of people on these drugs just look normal, not skinny or gaunt.

> They also complain of constant nausea and eat like a bird because eating makes them sick

This is a high dose phenomenon. They can and should reduce their dose if it is preventing them from eating enough or being comfortable.

> I worry about ... medical professionals not using it as a brief intervention then steering towards lifestyle changes.

They absolutely do, of course.

1. Yes, for many of the benefits of GLP-1s, it's plausible the mechanism is weight loss. But actually achieving significant weight loss with other therapies is incredibly hard, so I think GLP-1s get some credit here.

2. Hunger signalling isn't the only thing GLP-1s do, so no, we should not just assume every effect stems from weight loss alone. E.g. the blood sugar regulation that makes them very effective for diabetes is not purely about weight management.

How big is the local LLM market? I have trouble imagining Apple will move enough units to make $20k/ea worth it for them as a business segment.

Yes, it's trivial for any state actor that wants to to get into these sites as users.

You shouldn't pay money to join TL but otherwise, yeah.

They're not especially closed and minimum ratio really isn't all that hard to maintain (if it's even required). There are usually mechanisms by which ratio isn't zero sum.

Previous discussion of Meta models / open weight / llama:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49541256

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49216946

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48767058

Others?

We're coming from (huge) C++ codebases, which aren't particularly fast either. It's not a major problem IMO.

It's easier to detect a broadcast than a passive receiver.

Seems possible there is some chance Alexandr knows what he's doing.

I'm less confident of you it was even directionally correct. And I'm not really a Meta or Zuck critic in general (the rest of the biz is doing great and Metaverse didn't hurt too much).

Everything I don't like is fascist. Bed time is fascist. Blah blah. This is an incredibly naive take.

As usual for an article critical of Passkeys, this one, too, is total nonsense.

> The lesson here is that in situations where you have a clear public good that (almost) everyone needs and consumes, like roads and infrastructure, it's better for (almost) everyone if the government simply pays for it out of the general fund and doesn't try to nickle-and-dime the populace to tax "usage".

I don't know how you took that from the article, especially the impression that almost everyone uses any particular piece of infrastructure. Most infrastructure will be used by a minority of the populace. Use fees are a fair way to fund infrastructure needed by its users.

This (as with defense) is kind of outside Google or Yandex's purview.

> HN is just filled with the same primitive tribal normies

Yes, but it's mostly the opposite tribe of the one you're complaining about.

I don't think any Rome signatory attempting to arrest a former US head of state would go well for them. And I don't think they would try.

International law isn't real. If Americans do crimes, they will be tried for them (or not) in American courts.

Why do you call Rubio a committed criminal? To my knowledge, he isn't.

It would be a farce to try, of course. The American Service-Members' Protection Act gives the president power to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court."

No, no... among people who voted, less than 50% of votes were for Trump (49.81%). Harris got 48.34%. I think this is what GP is referring to.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/2024

I can't speak to the Brave thing, but the Honey thing is another example of fraud, yes.