Someone1234 (u/Someone1234)

Someone1234 commented on Microsoft keeps adding stuff into Windows we don't need theregister.com/2025/08/1... · Posted by u/rntn

mastry · 9 days ago

> We're discussing Windows and all its ad-ware/invasive changes, and someone brings up C#

I brought up C# because the article discusses a Microsoft Windows design philosophy that I feel is also reflected in their approach to C#. It’s a Microsoft thing.

I agree with you that the examples you mention were great additions to the language! But I still think the C# design team has some seriously screwed up priorities. My theory is that this one year cycle they are on is hampering their ability to make changes (like sum types) that require more than a year of work.

Someone1234 · 9 days ago

Could you give some examples of the bloat they've added to C# that represent their "seriously screwed up priorities" aside from not adding Sum?

Someone1234 commented on Microsoft keeps adding stuff into Windows we don't need theregister.com/2025/08/1... · Posted by u/rntn

orthoxerox · 9 days ago

Could you list the features you consider crap?

Someone1234 · 9 days ago

Yeah, I'd like to see this too...

We're discussing Windows and all its ad-ware/invasive changes, and someone brings up C# without giving a real explanation or examples.

The last few C# versions brought primary constructors, collection expressions, records(!), tons of Span<T> improvements/support, etc. I just flicked through the list, and nothing that stuck out to me as being bloated.

The main bloat C# has is older stuff that you really shouldn't be using anymore (e.g. ArrayList, dynamic, Thread, delegate keyword, etc).

Someone1234 commented on Claude Sonnet 4 now supports 1M tokens of context anthropic.com/news/1m-con... · Posted by u/adocomplete

Someone1234 · 13 days ago

Before this they supposedly had a longer context window than ChatGPT, but I have workloads that abuse the heck out of context windows (100-120K tokens). ChatGPT genuinely seems to have a 32K context window, in the sense that is legitimately remembers/can utilize everything within that window.

Claude previously had "200K" context windows, but during testing it wouldn't even hit a full 32K before hitting a wall/it forgetting earlier parts of the context. They also have extremely short prompt limits relative to the other services around, making it hard to utilize their supposedly larger context windows (which is suspicious).

I guess my point is that with Anthropic specifically, I don't trust their claims because that has been my personal experience. It would be nice if this "1M" context window now allows you to actually use 200K though, but it remains to be seen if it can even do that. As I said with Anthropic you need to verify everything they claim.

Someone1234 commented on Intermittent fasting strategies and their effects on body weight bmj.com/content/389/bmj-2... · Posted by u/lxm

funcDropShadow · 16 days ago

Do you have source for this? Because as you write I've always read to derive protein intake from the overall weight. That would indeed be a very important distance.

Someone1234 · 15 days ago

Yep, it is often repeated bad advice that was originally aimed at healthy weight adults and athletes and then misunderstood by people attempting to lose body fat. It is incorrectly repeated on hundreds of exercise sites and articles. Cite:

> Protein intake should range between 1.0-1.5 grams/kg of adjusted body weight. To calculate adjusted body weight, first calculate excess weight: Excess weight = current weight — ideal body weight (IBW). Adjusted body weight = IBW + 0.25 of excess body weight. This amount generally accounts for 20% to 30% of total caloric intake.

So a slightly more complex way of calculating roughly the same thing. I'd argue that for most people getting your ideal weight is a good enough approximation, and that using your overweight/obese body fat in your protein calculation is wrong by a lot no matter which calculation you use.

https://www.ajmc.com/view/chapter-2-clinical-nutrition-guide...

Someone1234 commented on Intermittent fasting strategies and their effects on body weight bmj.com/content/389/bmj-2... · Posted by u/lxm

strken · 16 days ago

I'm not sure that a reduction in body weight tells us all the relevant information. One of the possible downsides of fasting is loss of lean body mass, generally meaning muscle. This is a problem for older people in particular because it's harder to keep muscle as you age and because muscle protects from falls, frailty, etc.

Someone1234 · 16 days ago

Weight loss is linked with some loss of lean body mass, regardless of the method used. Intermittent fasting has been shown to match any other calorie deficit in terms of lean body mass loss, rather than more as you're implying.

Regardless of how you lose weight the advice is and remains:

> Eat a minimum of 0.36 grams of protein per day, per pound of LEAN* body weight. Increasing to 0.5-0.7 grams of protein per day, per pound of LEAN* body weight for older adults or when undergoing weight loss.

*LEAN is a vital detail for overweight people, they commonly miscalculate protein requirements due to this. The easiest way for overweight people to determine their requirement, is just find an "ideal body weight calculator" online, enter height and gender, and then multiply THAT figure by 0.5-0.7.

For example a man who is 6' tall and 400 lbs should eat 62 grams of protein per day MINIMUM, but during weight loss 86-120 grams of protein per day. It is common, unfortunately, to read online people in this situation miscalculate this to 280(!) grams of protein per day which is incorrect and harms their weight-loss goals.

Someone1234 commented on Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial trial.medpath.com/news/5c... · Posted by u/amichail

readthenotes1 · 20 days ago

Iirc, that pricing will change in the US as Trump will require that the price of drugs to Medicaid patients must match or be less than that of any other developed nation.

Since about 1/4 of the people in the US are on medicaid, close to 90 million, that means the drug manufacturers will probably raise the price for everyone else in the US because they got to get their profits somehow...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-pr...

Someone1234 · 20 days ago

Unfortunately, per the link, it sounds like a voluntary arrangement. Essentially they're asking drug companies nicely to stop ripping off Americans.

If they're serious about this, they would introduce legislation rather than send strongly worded letters to pharma companies.

Someone1234 commented on Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial trial.medpath.com/news/5c... · Posted by u/amichail

godshatter · 20 days ago

I'm not a fan because it's expensive and once you go off of the drug the weight comes back on (at least from what I've read). That's not a trade-off I want to take lightly.

There's also something to be said for gaining the discipline to do it yourself along the way, which may lead to keeping more of the weight off in the long run.

We also don't know what the long term side effects of it will be, if any.

I don't find any of that unreasonable to me. I'm saying this as a type-2 diabetic who could stand to lose a lot of weight.

Someone1234 · 20 days ago

> We also don't know what the long term side effects of it will be, if any.

The first GLP‑1 receptor agonist was commercially released in April 2005, meaning 20+ years. People who often repeat this: If 20-years, and tens of trials, isn't long enough to "know" then where is the line exactly?

Thalidomide by contrast was available for 4-years, Vioxx for 5-years, and Rezulin for 3-years by contrast.

> There's also something to be said for gaining the discipline to do it yourself along the way, which may lead to keeping more of the weight off in the long run.

That doesn't work; we know it doesn't work both from small and large scale studies, and population evidence since 1970s. So you're promoting the same thing we've been doing, and failing at, for beyond all of my lifetime. Feels like a religious belief at this point, rather than following the data and what we know from it (i.e. that objectively does not work, and has never worked).

Is there something new you know that health experts haven't known as Obesity as increase up through 40.3%+ (with overweight being 73.6%+)?

Someone1234 commented on Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial trial.medpath.com/news/5c... · Posted by u/amichail

thurn · 20 days ago

Are we close to having generic semaglutides e.g. available in India? Or locked into high prices for the foreseeable future?

Someone1234 · 20 days ago

Generic Semaglutide is already produced on a massive scale throughout the world. However, it is unlawful to import and sell and will remain so until 2032 in the USA.

In other markets, where it is under patent, it is significantly cheaper than the $500/month or more in the US currently. For example in the UK it is roughly $150/month USD privately (i.e. not through the NHS).

In China it will be out of patent within two years.

Someone1234 commented on Passkeys are just passwords that require a password manager danfabulich.medium.com/pa... · Posted by u/dfabulich

Gigachad · 20 days ago

The main benefit you get is that you don't have to type in 2FA codes anymore since 2FA was built to solve credential stuffing / password reuse which isn't a problem on Passkeys.

It is nice to just have a one click login for things.

Someone1234 · 20 days ago

First-generation 2FA solved basic credential compromise issues using code-based methods (e.g. TOTP/HOTP). Modern 2FA (e.g. push notifications) adds authentication integrity, phishing resistance, and user validation through real-time, context-aware approvals.

Passkeys replace passwords and also render basic TOTP/HOTP-based 2FA unnecessary. However, they do not replace modern, push-based 2FA, which may still be needed in higher-assurance or enterprise scenarios.

Regardless personally I am waiting for full FIDO Alliance interoperability/sync, so I'm not locked into a single password manager. I've already had to migrate password managers after my choice was taken over by Private Equity.

Someone1234 commented on Ask HN: Why was Windows ME so bad? · Posted by u/alganet

Someone1234 · 21 days ago

Windows ME was bad, but not due to anything specific they did with ME. Between Windows 95, 98, 98 SE, and then ME the hardware landscape absolutely exploded (e.g. tens of new categories of devices). Which meant more third party drivers than ever before. Drivers ran in the same address space as the kernel, without isolation, and BY DESIGN would monkey-patch the kernel (with different drivers sometimes stepping on one another). This was already a problem in 98/98 SE, but the whole thing just crumbled under its own weight around the time of ME.

2000/XP by contrast had strict user mode/kernel mode isolation, processes had their own virtual memory, and kernel address space was protected (making monkey-patching more difficult). In XP in particular they also started to adopt Driver Signature Enforcement, which at that time brought a cultural rather than technical shift (i.e. everyone knew it would eventually be mandatory, and so started to tighten processes).

Vista then made things even better with Mandatory Driver Signing (64-bit), PatchGuard + ASLR (i.e. no more monkey-patching the kernel), Code Integrity Checks (corruption detection), WDDM for more stable graphics drivers, and shifted some other drivers to user mode (soft failures instead of BSODs).

The official sales pitch of ME over 98 SE was: System Restore (new), System File Protection (technically ported from 2K, but new for the 9x line), faster boot (due to real-mode DOS being removed), Automatic Updates, Movie Maker, and improved home networking. It was a big upgrade for people coming from 98 and still a minor upgrade from 98 SE (which a lot of people skipped, even though it was a substantial improvement for just $20 upgrade cost).

PS - Vista moving to WDDM for graphics drivers, which everyone takes for granted today, is much of the reason why it was SO poorly received upon released. Vendors moved both to WDDM and in some cases to x64 for the first time, and it was a buggy mess there for at least a year -- which was blamed on Vista.