docdendrite (u/docdendrite)

docdendrite commented on U.S. cancer death rate has dropped by a third since 1991 wsj.com/articles/u-s-canc... · Posted by u/impish9208

wahern · 3 years ago

> While links between HPV and cervical cancer are quite strong and well-defined, the associations with the other viruses you cite are only correlative.

HPV is merely correlative, as well. That's basically how all endogenous cancers work. With Epstein-Barr Virus the association is quite strong, though the incidence of EBV-induced cancers doesn't seem to be quite as large as HPV--~1% vs 2-3%.

docdendrite · 3 years ago

HPV isn't correlative, it's causative. Additional co-transformation factors may be required, but it is well understood that E6 and E7 proteins directly lead to tumorigenesis. EBV pathogenic mechanisms are more autocrine and therefore a muddier picture, hence correlative.

docdendrite commented on U.S. cancer death rate has dropped by a third since 1991 wsj.com/articles/u-s-canc... · Posted by u/impish9208

myroon5 · 3 years ago

More vaccines seems like one of the most straightforward future mitigations since viruses like Hepatitis/HPV/mono/HIV/herpes/etc cause almost a fifth of cancer cases:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oncovirus

docdendrite · 3 years ago

That is a dubious claim. While links between HPV and cervical cancer are quite strong and well-defined, the associations with the other viruses you cite are only correlative. Also, Hep C, HIV and herpes have no vaccine, so unclear what your statement is referring to anyway? What has contributed to a drop in cancer mortality would be advances in treatment (like targeted therapies and immunoncology), better image/blood/genetic screening practices, and certainly the decreased popularity of smoking.

docdendrite commented on Splashdown NASA’s Orion Returns to Earth After Historic Moon Mission nasa.gov/press-release/sp... · Posted by u/zdw

n8cpdx · 3 years ago

It feels weird seeing boondoggles like the Senate Launch System actually deliver. On the one hand it’s exciting because we’re actually really possibly maybe finally going back to the moon. On the other hand, it is at the price of, minimum, $1,000,000,000/launch. A successful launch doesn’t actually change the reality that it was and still is largely politically viable only as a jobs/pork program.

I wonder if people felt this way about Apollo? In hindsight it feels worthwhile. But the big difference between Artemis and Apollo is that Artemis is coming after Commercial Crew/SpaceX has proven a different business/engineering model.

I’ve been waiting for this since I was in the fifth grade, so I should be happy. But then, I was promised a path to Mars with boots on the Moon two years ago.

docdendrite · 3 years ago

Yes, many did feel that way and you can hear this for yourself in a small part of the documentary “Summer of Soul” by Questlove. In the film they show archival footage shot at the Harlem Culture Festival on the day of the Apollo 11 landing. The interviewees are resoundly unimpressed with the achievement. They cite the expense of the program, especially in lieu of the lacking services and dire maintenance of Harlem, NYC as a key reason for their lack of support.

docdendrite commented on Judge sets October trial for Musk-Twitter takeover dispute latimes.com/business/stor... · Posted by u/gamblor956

glouwbug · 4 years ago

He's drawing it out so the markets recover

docdendrite · 4 years ago

Exactly this. His entire "beef" is only due to the fall in Tesla stock price.

docdendrite commented on Amazon Chime chime.aws/... · Posted by u/runesoerensen

Zach_the_Lizard · 9 years ago

And what do all the PRISM documents say?

You don't admit this as it's bad for business.

docdendrite · 9 years ago

They say corporate data centers were surreptitiously wiretapped.

docdendrite commented on The limits of Google’s openness blogs.technet.com/b/micro... · Posted by u/pablosanchez

briandear · 13 years ago

The only thing is that this isn't anti-trust. If you want to use a google product, then you have to follow the google rules. I think the rules are a bit ridiculous, but YouTube doesn't have a monopoly on online videos. Well, except maybe cat videos.. so there might be a case in there somewhere. No app or company has a "right" to create Youtube apps. For anti-trust, one would have to prove a monopoly and they would be difficult despite the ubiquitousness of Youtube.

Also, Google isn't preventing Microsoft from creating a Youtube app, they are only requiring that it meet certain requirements. Since Microsoft is a direct competitor in the search (and therefore advertising) space, it's not unfounded that Google do what they're doing.

I personally think it's crap, however Microsoft brought this on themselves by blatantly violating the Terms of Service.

However, when all is said and done, Microsoft deserves it -- they are, after all responsible for Internet Explorer and while it isn't related to Youtube, they deserve to suffer for all of the hours and hours developers have spent trying to make their products compatible with that hell-demon of a browser.

docdendrite · 13 years ago

I'm not so sure. You don't have to prove a monopoly. You have to show a selective targeting of a competitor. Manufacturer's using Google as a search engine allegedly have a different set of standards for their YouTube app than manufacturer's that don't use Google as search default. Whether or not that's how things actually transpired, it sure smells awfully fishy to an FTC regulator. This isn't about following rules or APIs, it's about provoking regulatory authorities to investigate Google so they maneuver more conservatively. And watch, now that Windows app will be approved post haste!

docdendrite commented on The limits of Google’s openness blogs.technet.com/b/micro... · Posted by u/pablosanchez

docdendrite · 13 years ago

Could this post be designed to provoke a reaction that might lead to (or contribute to pre-existing) FTC anti-trust inquiries about Google's practices?