Readit News logoReadit News
lores commented on U.S. drinking rate at new low as alcohol concerns surge   news.gallup.com/poll/6933... · Posted by u/sfjailbird
jader201 · 8 days ago
From the WHO [1]:

> Alcohol is a toxic, psychoactive, and dependence-producing substance and has been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer decades ago – this is the highest risk group, which also includes asbestos, radiation and tobacco. Alcohol causes at least seven types of cancer, including the most common cancer types, such as bowel cancer and female breast cancer. Ethanol (alcohol) causes cancer through biological mechanisms as the compound breaks down in the body, which means that any beverage containing alcohol, regardless of its price and quality, poses a risk of developing cancer.

The risk of developing cancer increases substantially the more alcohol is consumed. However, latest available data indicate that half of all alcohol-attributable cancers in the WHO European Region are caused by “light” and “moderate” alcohol consumption – less than 1.5 litres of wine or less than 3.5 litres of beer or less than 450 millilitres of spirits per week. This drinking pattern is responsible for the majority of alcohol-attributable breast cancers in women, with the highest burden observed in countries of the European Union (EU). In the EU, cancer is the leading cause of death – with a steadily increasing incidence rate – and the majority of all alcohol-attributable deaths are due to different types of cancers.

[1] https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/04-01-2023-no-level-of-...

lores · 8 days ago
I am very skeptical of this report, not because I think the numbers are wrong, but because their presentation seems as skewed as it can be.

4% of cancers are attributable to alcohol [1]. That's borderline negligible in the grand scheme of things. How do they manage to attribute half of that to light alcohol consumption? No clue. No quantification of the risk either, which is nowadays nearly always a reason to summarily discard the information, as alarmism reigns. Tidbits like "steadily increasing incidence rate", technically true but deliberately misleading in context as it's entirely expected since Europe keeps getting older, Eastern countries' life expectancies match the West's, road safety improves, people are more aware of nutrition, etc.

Taken together, this screams more of the "never do anything that might potentially maybe harm your health" approach to medicine than an actual solid case.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147020452...

Deleted Comment

lores commented on Google admits anti-competitive conduct involving Google Search in Australia   accc.gov.au/media-release... · Posted by u/Improvement
Aurornis · 12 days ago
If you want a real answer: If one country started implementing fines so massive that it was devastating multi-national companies then many companies would simply stop serving those countries.

We got a little peek into this when the GDPR was rolled out and many small and medium companies simply blocked GDPR countries rather than risk the massive fines spelled out in the GDPR. This has lessened somewhat as it has become more clear that those massive fines aren’t being handed out and the language has been clarified, but I sat through multiple meetings where companies were debating if they should block GDPR countries until the dust settled even though they believed themselves to be compliant. They didn’t want to risk someone making a mistake somewhere and costing the company a percentage of global revenues.

Talking about massive fines that destroy big companies and crush their executives is really popular in internet comment sections but it would be extremely unpopular if people woke up one day and found Google was blocked in their country for fear of violating some law with extreme damages.

lores · 11 days ago
But that's great for capitalism and competition, isn't it? Ethical startups popping up left and right to take over from big evil incumbent. What a market to seize.
lores commented on I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me   grell.dev/blog/ai_rejecti... · Posted by u/serhack_
SalariedSlave · 23 days ago
Publishing anything about it, regardless of content, is already a hill.

I like that people blog about these experiences and enjoy the insights, but I think it's never good for the authors..

lores · 23 days ago
Everyone should. The only way to balance corporate power is collective action by individuals, and sharing information is a requirement for that. Corporations can't get away with quite as much brazen sociopathy if their actions are transparent and reported without - or a different - spin.
lores commented on Belgium's Arrest of IDF Soldiers Could Be a Watershed Moment   jacobin.com/2025/08/belgi... · Posted by u/e12e
hn_throwaway_99 · 24 days ago
That is such ridiculous nonsense, but par for the "every time something happens that I disagree with, it must be because of bias/cabal/conspiracy on the other side" course that you see everywhere in online discourse these days.

"pro-Israel narrative"??? On HN? You must be reading a different site.

While I didn't flag this, it's really not hard to see how (a) there is nothing about it that is relevant to tech, hacking or entrepreneurship, but more importantly (b) it's the topic that predictably leads to a dumpster fire of comments.

lores · 24 days ago
While HN comments don't tend to be blindly pro-Israel, it is a fact that posts about Gaza _always_ get flagged, while other posts of general interest about vinyl records, Sudan or CIA training don't.

With the known sophistication of Israel's tech and PR sectors, it's less of a cabal and more of an inevitability.

lores commented on Tesla Diner   tesla.com/tesla-diner... · Posted by u/poly2it
dzhiurgis · 25 days ago
Coolest part is pre-order in your car, eventually via grok.

Suddenly it's obvious every car should have that for every drive-thru.

lores · 24 days ago
Until the time all orders become wurst and sauerkraut.
lores commented on A.I. researchers are negotiating $250M pay packages   nytimes.com/2025/07/31/te... · Posted by u/jrwan
MichaelZuo · a month ago
They just want the best, and they’re afraid of having second rates, B-players, etc., causing a bozo explosion. That seems like all the motivation that’s needed.

Why why would they need fears about a quasi-facebook chatbot?

lores · a month ago
Just like in football, buying all the best players pretty much guarantees failure as egos and personal styles clash and take precedence over team achievement. The only reasons one would do that are fear, vanity, and stupidity, and those have to be more important than getting value for the extraordinary amounts of money invested.
lores commented on Hawley and Democrats vote to advance congressional stock trading ban   cbsnews.com/news/hawley-d... · Posted by u/hhs
digitalPhonix · a month ago
> This isn’t going to stop it, but perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of better.

There are less "causes" that have the ability to fund a $300k bribe so even with that argument, we're still better off. (And it costs those causes more, bigger paper trails etc.)

lores · a month ago
The pettiness of bribes has always surprised me. 3K, 5K, that kind of money. A few thousand dollars is all it takes to buy a senator, and they are largely already multi-millionaires. Raising their salary won't help, because, just like Trump cheating suppliers, there's no way the issue is money.
lores commented on The United States withdraws from UNESCO   state.gov/releases/office... · Posted by u/layer8
bobnotbob · a month ago
If only there was some way to exchange one type of an asset, such a motorcycle, to another, such as food... Too bad nothing like this was invented yet.
lores · a month ago
What's the actual reason you created an account to only make crassly ignorant and genocidal comments?
lores commented on Delta moves to eliminate set prices, use AI to set your personal ticket price   fortune.com/2025/07/16/de... · Posted by u/toss1
lotsofpulp · a month ago
Analyzing any single transaction, it seems trivial that what benefits a seller (lower price) hurts a buyer and vice versa.
lores · a month ago
Life isn't a zero-sum game, and individually profit-maximising actions may not be in even the profit maximiser's interest long-term, let alone society's.

In the European Antiquity and Middle-Ages, at least, there were laws against merchants taking too much profit. It didn't matter if a high price optimised the allocation of a resource - the gouging was seen as more deleterious to society than the inefficiency, and malefactors were punished harshly, with heavy fines or even exile or death.

I feel like we're due for a medieval revival.

u/lores

KarmaCake day712April 13, 2016View Original