Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | wpasc's commentslogin

but what would you say... you do here?


genuinely curious if you have some sources I can read on the subject? most of the benefits/papers I've seen have not touched on or included studies for patients on GLP's where weight loss was ruled out as the factor?



Actually even in the very beginning I saw numerous studies showing effects outside weight loss, I'm sure a search would find them. I remember seeing at least 3-4 a couple years ago.


im surprised this is earning such downvotes. idk about the "opinionated" vm perspective but I think it needing its own engine oe not is at least something worth considering. firefox has been my go-to alt browser for years as my backup to chrome. it was what I would use to "test again in another browser" but as time has gone by, more and more stuff just doesn't work on firefox :(


It's already problematic to have Chromium dominating/near-monopolizing, and add salt to the wound letting Gecko die this way.

Chromium is so prevalent as an engine, that most developers don't test their code on Firefox and just tell everyone to use Chrome/Chromium when they run into issues.

This has the unintentional side-effect of strong-arming the W3C into compliance with the engine and not the other way around. Why do we bother with the W3C then? if they are powerless and Chromium can do as they please?


But if firefox ran chrome, it wouldn't be a problem. Vivaldi, Opera, and others are doing just fine.


The problem is

  >> This has the unintentional side-effect of strong-arming the W3C into compliance with the engine and not the other way around.
I don't want any engine to have that much dominance, but I especially don't want that dominating engine owned by an ad company who's main goal is to spy on people.


Did you read the comment your replied to?


> idk about the "opinionated" vm perspective

What I mean is, it's basically a VM. It's got a screen, inputs, storage, networking.


not height per se, but d2f


I thought the FDA guideline was once the internal temperature reaches 160 or 165 or something it didn't need to sustain that temperature? it was only the lower temperatures that required some duration to achieve the same log reduction as reaching 160/165?


Yeah, table 3 (path 37) here: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media_file/202...

That gets you your log7 reduction of salmonella, so it is safe to eat, but I don't know if it would be "cooked" (changing to an acceptable texture) if you could instantaneously bring it to 165 F.

I have no idea what that cooking process is like. In a water bath, I run chicken breast at 62C instead of 60C because the texture is better for dicing and putting in kid's lunches or wraps. I might try 60C if I was searing and serving whole. I haven't done dark meat this way, but I suspect it'd need a higher temperature or time to break down connective tissue. And I know that for lower temperatures (58C? - I haven't made that in years), you need to hold short ribs for a couple of days.


I can say I've cooked chicken sous vide incorrectly before that had cooked long and hot enough to be safe, but the texture and feel of the meat could only be described as a meat gusher, if you've ever had those candies. Every bite exploded with liquid and the meat itself was squishy, it was very disgusting


Are you certain the person you just replied to is not in a marginalised group? If that person is, would you be running afoul of that law with "Don't be a moron."?


I'm going to say yes, and no.

Mens rea underpins the British legal system.


Any chance you mean the ACA? (affordable care act). GP I think is talking about the AMA as a body that artificially constrains the supply of dr's (at least that is my guess as GP also mentions reducing limits on building hospitals).

IMO the GP is touching on removing regulatory burdens (more traditionally republican/conservative ideas) and adding in funding/care via medicare for all etc (democrat position). the combination of reducing/improving/simplifying regulatory burdens while increasing government spending seems to be a combination of ideas that hasn't been winning enough support. afaik, Ezra Klein in his book Abundance is one of the only voices trying to push this balance.


Yes, I meant to write ACA and that's what I (mis-)understood OP was talking about.


aaaand then?


No and then.


The Universe asked me, "Guess what? I'm decaying"

I said, "Dude, you've gotta give me time to guess"


I was curious too; here's an HN link spelling it out and discussing in context of working there:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27571707


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: