>Trying to divide foods into healthy and unhealthy is impossible.
They don't try to "divide foods into healthy and unhealthy". They try to divide diets of food, including amounts and limits, into healthy and unhealthy.
>I do not understand how the study you've given supports what you're telling me.
The study contradicts what you wrote in your comment above -- I never claimed it supports what I tell you in my comment below it, which touches on another aspect.
It's not inversely correlated. The relationship is non-linear, how does that bear on their healthiness?
Unlike strawberries where relationship is linear, unlike many other vegetables. Put a healthy exercising population and the correlation disappears, I guess foods are no longer healthy in that case.
It's not negatively correlated, they have not measured the effects of >1 egg/day. It doesn't change anything. Saying that the food is healthy is vacuous.
Eating 1 egg per day for the average member of the measured population seems to be healthy. It does not mean eggs by themselves are healthy or unhealthy.
This might suffer from the same issue the alcohol consumption study lacked.
People that aren't consuming eggs might do so because of health issues. Meaning that they are more prone to feel the side effects.
Similar effect happened in the alcohol study, where moderate consumption had a lower mortality than those consuming nothing. It turned out that those abstaining from alcohol were more prone to get side effects immediately. After adjusting for these errors in data reporting, the u-curve disappeared and the relationship was linear (more alcohol you consumed higher the mortality).
I was also, embarrassingly, citing the alcohol study, since then I've realized the first reaction to a paper should be doubt and I'll definitely abstain from acknowledging epidemiological diet studies in the future. Even meta-analyses taking them into account.
One of the best examples is that many meta-analyses conclude that dietary cholesterol does not increase serum cholesterol (proven risk in CVD). Disregarding the fact that many of the aggregated studies do not measure baseline cholesterol, and it is assumed that there's a linear response on serum cholesterol to dietary cholesterol when it's a 20 year old information that response is non-linear.
>People that aren't consuming eggs might do so because of health issues.
The authors are aware of this, and excluded people suffering from several common health problems for this reason:
"In the present study, we excluded individuals reporting medical histories of cancer (n=2577), heart disease (n=15 472) or stroke (n=8884), or having prevalent diabetes (n=30 300) defined by self-reported diabetes or on-site plasma glucose testing (fasting blood glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L or random blood glucose ≥11.1 mmol/L). We made these exclusions to avoid a prevalence–incidence bias and minimise the effect of reverse causality led by potential confounders such as lifestyle factors."
This isn't all possible sources of reverse causality, but it does at least make it less likely.
> dietary cholesterol does not increase serum cholesterol
The link between diet and cholesterol seems to be indirect.
Take for example coffee. Non-filtered coffee increases serum cholesterol even when it does not contain cholesterol. Coffee oils (diterpenes like cafestol and kahweol) mess up body’s ability to metabolize and regulate cholesterol.
Coffee contains 1% of diterpenes. Fortunately normal paper filter removes most of the oils. French press and Turkish style are the worst.
> We would like to add to her discussion of the significance of former and occasional drinker biases in this literature and highlight how they can cause both overestimation of cardioprotection and underestimation of cancer risks across the whole drinking continuum. The underlying theory here is that, as a population ages, a selection bias operates whereby individuals with poorer health are more likely to cut down or stop drinking completely. Such individuals are often still classified as ‘abstainers’ and used as a reference against which all current drinkers are compared. In simple terms, they make drinkers at all levels of consumption ‘look good’ by comparison.
Guys above then adjust for the mistake. The benefits disappear. Mortality risk grows as alcohol consumption increases. Yeah, there are people with protective genes, but on a population scale, recommending to go from 0 to N glasses of alcoholic beverage a day is insane.
I have personally increased my alcohol consumption, which was obviously dumb, given that the data was flawed. After this study I don't think I'll have more than couple of drinks per year.
Like what? A chat client that uses 1+ GB of RAM and melts batteries faster than a flamethrower? No thanks!
It almost looks like this Electron/JS trend was started by CPU manufacturers who realised that current CPUs have more than enough power for everyday tasks, and needed a way to create demand for even faster CPUs. I’d say Electron (and JS in general) was pretty effective at that.
> manufacturers who realised that current CPUs have more than enough power for everyday tasks, and needed a way to create demand for even faster CPUs
Lol.
It's a common trend across software. Try comparing office 2003 to office 2013. Office 2003 starts instantly on a modern desktop and uses minimal RAM. Office 2013 takes a good four or five seconds to fire up and uses a few hundred mb memory. And they both do exactly the same thing. With cpu speeds and ssd proliferation there's no incentive to keep things low footprint any more.
Not at this scale though. Office 2013 uses maybe 2x or 3x the amount of RAM compared to Office 2003.
A chat client like Slack routinely uses up to 1GB while a native equivalent would use 100MB or less. We’re talking about a 10x increase here - that’s unacceptable.
Slack is essentially fancy IRC, so we can take any IRC client as a baseline for how much RAM it should really use.
Let’s take HexChat (https://hexchat.github.io/) for example - it does most of what Slack does, plus has advanced features not available on Slack like a Lua, Python & Perl plug-in API. It used less than 100MB or RAM after running for days on a Linux machine.
Slack is usually well into the GB of RAM after running for a few days.
The keyword here is fancy. Hexchat is an IRC client, sure, but it is minimalist. That would be like comparing a text file to a PDF and asking why the PDF needs so much more RAM when they're basically the same.
I feel like you're mutating the argument from "electron uses 10x RAM compared to native apps" into "an IRC client doesn't need to use so much RAM"
The proper comparison would be either a full, feature complete native Slack client with all the same bells and whistles that runs under 100mb, OR an electron port of hexchat with its text only interface that uses 1GB+
Well, I would understand a chat client taking more RAM should I ask it to pare & display some HTML, or videos, or PDFs. I'm not. I'm using Slack just like IRC - 3 users and a single channel even. No images, no videos, no HTML, no link previews, etc. That thing still absolutely melts down my CPU and RAM.
I get what you're saying, but we already know that electron (specifically embedding a whole browser with DOM) is the culprit. There are some native UI toolkits with bindings available for NodeJS, if slack was refactored to replace electron with one, it would probably peak at 2x as much RAM than HexChat rather than averaging 10x to 100x.
100x now? You're saying there are electron apps in the wild using 10GB of memory? I was trying to argue that the 10x claim was an exaggeration but you've just leapfrogged that.
I'm not surprised. After finishing my degree, I went to optimize a couple of production lines. I didn't get much detail and thought it was for plastic/glass bottles (filling liquids and moving them around - many tiny grabbers, simple movement, not that wide tracks).
After about 2 months of work, and after the production line got parallelized and speed drastically increased I went to see it work.
What I saw shocked me and I immediatelly quit. It was a production line for handling of female and male young and grown chicks. Debeaking, throat slitting. I was absolutely shocked how none of the superiors told me exactly which product was being handled.
After seeing the horrific product of my work I quit.
Since then, I'm not surprised, given what horrors we do to living animals, that we are ready to do them to each other.
I doubted the meaning of my work at university, what did I do? Spend 4 years at college to create killing machines? I didn't think I'd ever do that.
> Since then, I'm not surprised, given what horrors we do to living animals, that we are ready to do them to each other.
I sometimes think this is why we don’t see any intelligent civilizations out there. Intelligence gives rise to deceitfulness and eventually, one selfish actor can bring down an entire civilization intentionally or unintentionally since the weapons get so powerful.
I've noticed that DeepMind completely ignores imitation learning area of research. I never saw them citing any of the fundamental papers, despite a bunch of their reinforcement learning ideas explicitly match those ideas that are now 8+ years old.
Exactly. The amount of energy spent on heating and cooling is huge. Then it's transportation and agriculture. Then somewhere far behind is the whole Internet and efficient electronic devices.
I use the same argument when it comes to bitcoin. That stuff is so tiny in our profiler. Sane thing to do is to optimize the slowest functions.
When hardware has a two year average life cycle, the environment is not benefiting from any of the hardware's efficient characteristics. You seem happy with your new phone though, I guess that's the main thing.
