It's 100% relevant. If you have a pregnancy for which there is a high chance of an emergency c-section, an alternative is a scheduled c-section.
No it’s not. That’s a different comparison.
Readit Newschrisherring commented on Why are so many babies born around 8:00 AM? (2017) blogs.scientificamerican.... · Posted by u/batirch
chrisherring commented on Why are so many babies born around 8:00 AM? (2017) blogs.scientificamerican.... · Posted by u/batirch
No, but this opinion is demonstrably wrong. Read any of the ACOG literature, there are dozens of peer-reviewed studies about the safety and efficacy of induction, assisted deliveries like vacuums, and both scheduled and emergency c-sections.
Scheduled c-sections outperform emergency c-sections in every metric tracked. Scheduled c-sections are no worse for the baby than natural delivery, and if you take into account recovery time from surgery, no worse for the mother.
You can have an opinion on whatever you like, but to be blunt, if it's as stupid as this one you should get called out for it.
"Scheduled c-sections outperform emergency c-sections in every metric tracked."
The comparison is natural birth to c-sections. Comparing scheduled c-sections to emergency c-sections is a ridiculous thing to track, go compare GP visits vs admission to emergency while you're at it.
> it's hard to differentiate between someone genuinely playing at a level higher, and a cheater
Actually, it isn't! Great chess bots have very different play styles and there are people currently studying them. It's very unlikely someone will come out of nowhere so to speak (as in, not on some amazing rise as a young child) with these types of techniques. I'm nowhere near these levels of chess players but have played competitively for my county as a school-kid and still play a couple hundred games a year so have some idea.
A smart cheater isn't just going to replicate bot moves and make it easy to detect. They may just use it to decide between 2 moves they were 50/50 on already. Do this 2 or 3 times and it would make a big difference at the grand master level. This would be quite hard to detect.
chrisherring commented on Simple Bank Is Closing oregonlive.com/silicon-fo... · Posted by u/roberto8647
I can't get myself to pay for services like YNAB or mvelopes.com
I could see someone wanting to pay for a year or two until they've established the habit of disciplined saving. But to perpetually pay a service to present a (useful) facade over your money doesn't seem right if it's not also instilling habits in you that don't depend on software.
I've tried YNAB multiple times but would inevitably miss entering a transaction and then it would be a pain reconciling my bank accounts with YNAB. Without tracking the transactions I couldn't accurately use YNAB to determine how much was left in the budget.
Having an envelope like system built into a bank would be extremely useful.
chrisherring commented on Lessons Learned while Converting from ASP.NET to .NET Core stackify.com/15-lessons-l... · Posted by u/beyti
This is quite frankly an excellent list of why we won't be changing any time soon, with key points being:
> Things like virtual hosts, logging, security, etc.
> Newtonsoft now defaults to camelCase
> Log4net doesn’t work and neither do countless other dependencies, unless you target .NET 4.5
I mean a lot of those things are the reason we're using .Net over more other technologies to begin with.
.net core certainly does have security, logging etc. IIS, as opposed to kestral, has more features and you can host under IIS so this is a non issue.
The camelCase setting is a one line code change if you don't like it. Not at all a reason to avoid the framework. It's using newtonsoft for this so it may even be a change in the package itself? Anyway I changed the default and then ended up reverting back anyway since camelCase is a better format when using the objects in JavaScript.
It's not meant to support everything as the goal is cross platform. IMO it's a great platform if you understand its limits.
chrisherring commented on Go Game Guru – Learn all about the board game Go gogameguru.com/... · Posted by u/dukenuke
This is the single biggest issue with introducing go to newcomers. In chess, the goal is crystal clear - capture the king. In go, the goal of having more points than your opponent is somehow very challenging to grasp in an intuitive way.
There's a common advice to lose your first 50 games as quickly as possible (http://senseis.xmp.net/?LoseYourFirst50GamesAsQuicklyAsPossi...). This will give you some basic intuition about the game. After a couple more hundred games, go becomes very beautiful.
Plus you can generally see who's in front in Chess just by counting the value of the captured pieces. Where as I would not have been able to workout the result of the AlphaGo v Lee Sedol games just by looking at the final game board.
The beauty of the game is appealing however so I want to get better at it. I'll working on losing more then :)
chrisherring commented on Go Game Guru – Learn all about the board game Go gogameguru.com/... · Posted by u/dukenuke
The general principle is that captures aren't actually worth a whole lot. Territory (area under your control) is where it's at. If a capture is a means of getting more territory, that's grand, but on it's own it's not worth much at all.
Does this help your self diagnosis? If the computer ignored a capture it's because it didn't actually lead to a lot of territory gained, whereas whatever move it played probably did.
That thinking does help, I did read that on one of the sites as well but in some cases the capture appears to mean the loss of territory itself in addition to the actual pieces and it's hard to weigh up the value of each territory.
chrisherring commented on Go Game Guru – Learn all about the board game Go gogameguru.com/... · Posted by u/dukenuke
I took up Go about six months ago, after many false starts over the years. The secret for me was to stop playing computers and start playing humans online (I like online-go.com). Computers at lower difficulty settings make a combination of very strong moves and very weird moves, which are difficult for beginners to interpret. And the game is just a lot more fun when playing against people of similar skill level or a bit stronger, so you win about 50% of games and can understand your opponents' moves more easily.
Sounds like good advice. I have noticed some of these weird moves using the hint function - at times they've caused me to lose badly so I've gone back and done something else and came out on top which made me question the reasoning behind it.
chrisherring commented on Go Game Guru – Learn all about the board game Go gogameguru.com/... · Posted by u/dukenuke
I've started playing Go against a computer (SmartGo iOS on a 9x9 board) but I find the hard part is determining where you're making mistakes, what is a better move, why the computer did what it did etc. For instance the computer may ignore a capture to play elsewhere and it can be hard to work out why.
I learnt to play Chess when I was young so I can't make a fair comparison but it feels like Chess is much easier to self diagnose.
1. Unassisted (with and without medication)
2. Assisted (vacuums, etc.)
3. Scheduled c-section
4. Emergency c-section
The problem with #4 is that it often happens after attempting 1 and/or 2 unsuccessfully. The baby is in a much worse position, sometimes medically and often physically within the mother's body. You can't compare 1 and 4 without also comparing 1 and 3, 3 and 4, etc. Everything is interrelated.
Comparing outcomes of natural births as a whole vs scheduled c-sections is far more useful comparison.