Arm's Cortex-A76 CPU Unveiled: Taking Aim at the Top for 7nm - <AUTHOR> https://www.anandtech.com/show/12785/arm-cortex-a76-cpu-unveiled-7nm-powerhouse <comment><USER2> It's telling that the only place in the entire article you see Apple's chips mentioned is one performance graph, where the new ARM chip at top speed (which Anand doesn't think is reasonable) matches the 2 year old Apple chip.

In power savings (where ARM claims 40% better) we don't see a comparison to Apple either.

Early in the article they say ARM claims the new chip is far beyond any of their (unnamed) competitors.

It seems clear they don't consider Apple competition. Possibly because it would make them look much worse.

Obviously no one else can buy Apple chips for their products, but it seems disingenuous to claim you have the most efficient chip by ignoring the one you're just now catching up to.</comment>


Hitchbot, the hitchhiking robot, bums 1st ride - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/hitchbot-the-hitchhiking-robot-bums-1st-ride-1.2719585 <comment><USER2> I don't exactly get the point of this experiment. Granted, I haven't done too much research on it, but how is this any different from a person seeing if they could get across the country by hitchhiking?

<comment><USER3> _It 's part of a Canadian research project looking into the evolving relationship between people and technology._

Fourth sentence in. Hard to research the relationship between people and _technology_ by studying interactions between people and _other people_.

<comment><USER2> I understand that. I guess what I meant is that people appear to still be involved in the process. In the video there seemed to be people doing most of the interacting.

<comment><USER3> I agree the video is confusing. I think that was special for its maiden voyage. It seems like it will be on its own thereafter, hence:

 _[…] if Hitchbot 's power runs out when it is waiting for its next ride, written instructions on its body will tell people how to strap it into the car and plug it in, and direct people to a help website._</comment></comment></comment></comment>


An Open Letter to the Uber Board and Investors (from Mitch and Freada Kapor) - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@mitch_freada/an-open-letter-to-the-uber-board-and-investors-2dc0c48c3a7#.ujloha8gv <comment><USER2> There are now at least five submissions of this, and at least two of them have at least one comment. Here are a few ...

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13717321](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13717321) (14 pts, 3 comments)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13717066](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13717066) (7 pts, 1 comment)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13717016](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13717016) (The original, 2 pts)

Mods - please, make a decision to avoid a split discussion.</comment>


Get My Fingerprint - <AUTHOR> http://www.uniquemachine.org <comment><USER2> I tested this with Chrome twice - just as a regular tab once and once with a VPN in an incognito tab. They produced different Browser Fingerprints for some reason. Is this supposed to happen?</comment>


Why we choose profit - <AUTHOR> https://m.signalvnoise.com/why-we-choose-profit-e511efc4dcb9#.alb28yo1w <comment><USER2> Profit is not a "choice", it's a _requirement_.

The one thing we can say for certain about tomorrow is that it will be _different_ from today. We don't know (and likely _can 't_ know) how it will be different - only that it will be.

To survive and prosper tomorrow, we probably need to _stop_ doing some things we currently do, _start_ doing some new things entirely, and do some things we continue to do _differently_ than today.

Making these changes requires resources. We need raw materials and machinery (if we are making things), we need skilled labor, we need management, and we need capital. We must _invest_ in our enterprise.

Chances are, we don't have the capital just lying around. Soundly run companies are generally fully invested. So we must _get_ capital from _outside_ of our enterprise. We may get it in the form of equity, by selling stock, or in the form of debt, by getting loans.

Either way, that capital has a _cost_. Shareholders expect to make money through increasing in the value of their stock or dividends paid or both, and how likely they are to _buy_ depends on how likely they think they are to make the desired money on their investment. Lenders are interested in whether we are good for it and will _repay_ the loan. They charge interest on the loan, and the _amount_ they charge will reflect their perception of the risk they assume in _making_ the loan. The stronger your balance sheet, the less risk they will perceive, and the lower your rate will likely be.

The usual mantra chanted by profit making enterprises is that they wish to make as high a profit as possible. It's the wrong answer.

The correct _question_ is "How much profit do we _have_ to make to cover our marginal cost of capital?" For many firms, the answer to that question will be _higher_ than their most optimistic estimate to how much they _can_ make. They're in trouble.</comment>


Monitor earthquakes with the motion sensor of your harddrive  - <AUTHOR> http://qcn-web.stanford.edu/index.php

<comment><AUTHOR> This is so cool!</comment>


How to compile and install Lua 5.3.3 and C modules from sources on Windows - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/is73/Lua-5.3-Portable-Batteries-Windows-10-32bit/blob/master/manual.md <comment><USER2> > Some principles as far as I understand them

(on LUA_PATH/LUA_CPATH/PATH)

If it's a .lua file, it goes in LUA_PATH. Lua libraries with collections of files usually have a main file and a folder, so libXXX might have a main file XXX.lua and a folder XXX with auxiliary files. In this case, the main file and folder go into the same directory on the LUA_PATH.

.dll (linux: .so) files that are lua module entry points, i.e. they are loaded by the lua executable itself when you do a "require", go in LUA_CPATH.

You can see why by typing require"XXX" into the lua console - it'll say that XXX was not found and print out a list of LUA_(C)PATH entries that it searched for - note that .dll and .lua ones are looked for in different directories. So require"lib" will find a lib.lua on the LUA_PATH or a lib.dll (lib.so) on the LUA_CPATH.

If it's a dll that's not loaded through a require, but from one dll to another - like the lua ssl library loads the openSSL ones (libssl32.dll) - then it goes wherever the operating system looks for libraries, since it's the OS and not lua that'll be doing the looking. On windows the PATH is a good place to start, on linux I usually set LD_LIBRARY_PATH to pick up ones in non-standard locations.

<comment><AUTHOR> > If it's a dll that's not loaded through a require, but from one dll to > another - like the lua ssl library loads the openSSL ones (libssl32.dll)

In this manual the task is to create _standalone_ distro so everything what normally goes to OS PATH goes in Lua's \bin directory in this case. This means if you copy this c:\work\lua folder on the freshly installed Windows it will run out of the box. And that's cool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Building it with MS Visual Studio is pretty painless, so I'm not sure why they are going the MinGW route. Just because of the libraries?

<comment><USER4> Yeah, was going to say the same. I remember way back when you had to do some hoops to turn off doubles by default. Even then building with VS was pretty straightforward.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Soon this will be outdated, since Windows users will be able to use the same instructions as on Linux, using Windows Subsystem for Linux.

<comment><USER6> Windows developers might, but if I'm trying to create lua dependent software that runs on Windows for other people, I can't mandate that they install WSfL before they can run my program.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> For anyone not familiar with Lua, this guide includes instructions for adding on several bonus packages beyond the base Lua interpreter.

To just get Lua itself up and running, given a C compiler, the only step that's necessary is 3.

</comment><comment><USER8> It's sad how "compile something _on Windows_ " is something deserving elaborate how-tos. How hard can it be to provide a sane development environment?

<comment><USER9> > How hard can it be to provide a sane development environment?

There is a sane development available under Windows: It is called PowerShell + Visual Studio Tools. But it's not UNIX.

<comment><USER8> Installing Visual Studio is enough of a russian roulette that it hardly qualifies as sane.[1]

Having to troubleshoot compiler installation is something that just shouldn't be necessary.

[1] ex.: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33855177/multiple- errors-...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33855177/multiple-errors- installing-visual-studio-2015-community-edition)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Step one: Enable Linux Subsystem for Windows

Step two: Install "Bash for Windows aka Ubuntu root"

Step three: compile as normal

<comment><USER11> "The Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) is a new Windows 10 feature"

whereas with the solution here presented (and with the binaries provided on the GitHub):

"At the end you will have standalone Lua distribution for Windows which:

\- runs on Windows 7, 8, 8.1, 10 ... 32/64 bit (if you can run it on XP let me know :)

\- doesn't require from its user to install any additional libraries, runtimes, frameworks into his operating system to run correctly

\- you can distribute to your friends, collegues or clients with your scripts as a zip archive

\- you can take with you on USB key"

It's supercool, something that has been missing.

I've tested it, if the whole zip is unpacked to d:\t

Then in any directory on Windows where the test.lua is I can just invoke

        d:\t\lua_ok\bin\lua.exe test.lua

and everything works, even without any environment variables!

Great work. And to use this occasion, is73, thanks a lot! Consider making a paypal donation page for you. Wow, now I see, you also make a portable PHP 7.</comment></comment>


Two New Books About Jorge Luis Borges - <AUTHOR> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2013/07/two-new-books-about-borges.html <comment><USER2> With re Borges' attitude to Hitler and Nazism: clearly, neither the interviewer (Cavett) nor the author of this article (O'Connell) seem to be very familiar with Borges' writings.

No one who has read Borges' half a dozen essays on the war (written before and during WW2, collected in "Selected Non-Fictions") could accuse him of "refusal to engage with politics", at least as far as Hitler was concerned.

I quote:

"If I had the tragic honor of being German, I would not resign myself to sacrificing to mere military efficiency the intelligence and integrity of my fatherland; If I were English or French, I would be grateful for the perfect coincidence of my country's particular cause with the universal cause of humanity.

It is possible that a German defeat might be the ruin of Germany; it is indisputable that its victory would debase and destroy the world. I am not referring to the imaginary danger of a South American colonial adventure; I am thinking of those naive imitators, those homespun Ubermenschen that inexorable chance would bring down upon us.

I hope the years will bring us the auspicious annihilation of Adolf Hitler, this atrocious offspring of Versailles."

"Those who hate Hitler usually hate Germany; I have always admired Germany. My blood and love of literature make me a natural ally of England; the years and books draw me to France; but in Germany, pure inclination. I am certainly not one of those fake Germanists who praise the eternal Germany in order to deny it any participation in the present. I am not sure that having produced Leibniz and Schopenhauer cripples Germany's capacity for political action. Nobody asks England to choose between its Empire and Shakespeare, nor insists in France that Descartes and Conde are incompatible. I naively believe that a powerful Germany would not have saddened Novalis or been repudiated by Holderlin. I detest Hitler precisely because he does not share my faith in the German people; he has decided that to undo 1918, the only possible lesson is barbarism; the best incentive, concentration camps..."

"Things are much worse in Russia, I hear people say. I infinitely agree, but Russia does not interest us as much as Germany. Germany - along with France, England, the United States - is one of the essential nations of the Western world. Hence we feel devastated by its chaotic descent into darkness..."

Does this sound like "refusal to engage with politics"?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I filched this from an old mainstay of the web, the Arts and Letters Daily ( [http://www.aldaily.com/](http://www.aldaily.com/) ), and submitted it with the ALD blurb that caught my attention: "Borges never wrote a work of fiction longer than fourteen pages". It comes up midway through the piece:

 _Borges never wrote a work of fiction longer than fourteen pages. "It is a laborious madness and an impoverishing one," he wrote in 1941, "the madness of composing vast books—setting out in five hundred pages an idea that can be perfectly related orally in five minutes."_

This is not complimentary, a backhand comes up next. The writer is critical of Borges, mostly on rather shaky grounds at the end, but he does offer a few worthwhile contributions.

</comment><comment><USER3> I thought that one of the comments - to the effect that this article tells us relatively little about Borges and perhaps more about the author - was very perceptive. I am going to try to remember not to fall into that trap.

<comment><USER4> Nabokov, who as a novelist was similar to Borges in many ways, wrote a whole book about this - _Pale Fire_. Of course it's about many things, but that is a major theme.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> With respect to O'Connell's highlighting of Borges' apparent anti-woman views, I think that there is an interesting conversation to be had about looking at authors from prior eras with ethical standpoints only developed relatively recently. I recall a professor asking me whether Plato was sexist because there were no women in the academy (a clearer example), and having similar thoughts to those I had when reading that section of this article.

<comment><USER6> At the same time, it's naive to look back on the past as a monolith, where just _everyone_ was racist, sexist, etc. until - what's our cutoff point, the 60s, 70s, 80s? 90s, even?

Borges' best work was arguably done in the 40s, and he was at the peak of his fame probably in the late 70s (thanks in part to promotion by the Videla dictatorship, which he supported). That's a while ago but not classical Athens. There were a lot of people with more progressive views on women around during those years, many of whom Borges considered political enemies.

</comment></comment><comment> da-bacon A response concerning the claim that Borges was not political: [http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/borges-politics-and-the- pos...](http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/borges-politics-and-the-postcolonial)

</comment><comment><USER7> Where is the reference to 14 pages in the article? (Think I read the whole thing and didn't see it, but I am on my phone)

Edit: Note: The title a moment ago was something like "Borges never wrote a work of fiction longer than fourteen pages"

<comment><USER7> Ok. See it now. I was confused seeing that as the title -- but don't need to weigh in on the whole HN perennial titling debate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> fwiw, if you have basic spanish, he's _very_ easy to read in the original. very clear, simple prose (and you only need to read one story at a time).

<comment><USER9> This is kind of surprising, because he is typically considered a tough read for native Spanish readers. I wonder if the reason for this is that, although he uses a much wider vocabulary than other authors (making it harder to read for native speakers, specially young ones), he writes in such a precise and masterful way that it ends being easier for non-native readers. [or maybe because he is like a programmer between writers; his writings have some kind of formal language feeling in them]

<comment><USER10> Do you have any references that he's hard for Spanish speakers? I'm curious.

I find him easier to read than most other Spanish short story writers. Could be the logic.

<comment><USER6> Had an old boss who was a Romance languages PhD dropout. He told me that Borges' first language was English (his father was half-English and it was the primary language at home), he went to boarding school in Switzerland, so he basically doesn't write Spanish as a native speaker. This can make his writing in Spanish more accessible to English speakers, but jarring and dissonant to native Spanish speakers.

Can't judge the merits of it myself, but it seems plausible.

<comment><USER9> Borges use of the Spanish language was perfect. He had a very deep knowledge about the precise meaning of words native speakers use in a more careless way. And he had the accent, etc. of a native speaker. People might find it hard precisely because he uses the language with an exactitude and a vocabulary that is really uncommon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> not a single post has mentioned the brilliant taxonomy, Borges "claimed" to have discovered in a Chinese text entitled "Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge", and mentioned in a 1942 essay by Borges on John Wilkins.

Highly Recommended reading (and only a hundred or so words): [http://eendress.com/acts-of-knowledge/](http://eendress.com/acts-of- knowledge/)

</comment><comment><USER12> For any who care, Christopher Hitchens had a delightful essay on Borges. It was reprinted recently in his collection "Arguably".

</comment><comment><USER13> For anyone curious this is the complete text of "Borges and I". It is much more nuanced than what is implied by the article. I have made minor stylistic changes to Antonios Sarhanis' English translation available at [http://anagrammatically.com/2008/01/31/borges-and-i- borges-y...](http://anagrammatically.com/2008/01/31/borges-and-i-borges-y- yo/):

"Borges and I" by Jorge Luis Borges

To the other one, to Borges, is to whom things happen. I walk through Buenos Aires and I pause, one could say mechanically, to gaze at a vestibule's arch and its grillwork; of Borges I receive news in the mail and I see his name in a list of professors or in some biographical dictionary. I like hourglasses, maps, eighteenth-century typefaces, etymologies, the taste of coffee and the prose of Stevenson; the other shares these preferences, but in a vain fashion that turns them into the attributes of an actor. It would be an exaggeration to claim that our relationship is hostile; I live, I let myself live so that Borges may weave his literature, and that literature justifies me. It poses no great difficulty for me to confess that he has achieved some valid pages, yet these pages cannot save me, perhaps because whatsoever is good does not belong to anyone, not even to the other, but to language and tradition. In any case, I am destined to lose myself, definitively, and only a fleeting moment of myself will be able to live on in the other. Little by little I am ceding everything to him, even though I am aware of his perverse tendency to falsify and magnify. Spinoza understood that all things strive to persevere in their being; the stone eternally wishes to be a stone and the tiger a tiger. I will remain in Borges, not in myself (if it is that I am someone), but I recognise myself less in his books than in those of many others, or in the laborious strum of a guitar. Years ago, I tried to free myself from him and went on from the mythologies of the slum to games with time and the infinite. But those games are now Borges' and I will have to conceive of other things. Thus my life is an escape and I lose everything and everything belongs to oblivion, or to the other one.

I do not know which of the two is writing this page.

"Borges y Yo" por Jorge Luis Borges

Al otro, a Borges, es a quien le ocurren las cosas. Yo camino por Buenos Aires y me demoro, acaso ya mecánicamente, para mirar el arco de un zaguán y la puerta cancel; de Borges tengo noticias por el correo y veo su nombre en una terna de profesores o en un diccionario biográfico. Me gustan los relojes de arena, los mapas, la tipografía del siglo XVIII, las etimologías, el sabor del café y la prosa de Stevenson; el otro comparte esas preferencias, pero de un modo vanidoso que las convierte en atributos de un actor. Sería exagerado afirmar que nuestra relación es hostil; yo vivo, yo me dejo vivir para que Borges pueda tramar su literatura y esa literatura me justifica. Nada me cuesta confesar que ha logrado ciertas páginas válidas, pero esas páginas no me pueden salvar, quizá porque lo bueno ya no es de nadie, ni siquiera del otro, sino del lenguaje o la tradición. Por lo demás, yo estoy destinado a perderme, definitivamente, y sólo algún instante de mí podrá sobrevivir en el otro. Poco a poco voy cediéndole todo, aunque me consta su perversa costumbre de falsear y magnificar. Spinoza entendió que todas las cosas quieren perseverar en su ser; la piedra eternamente quiere ser piedra y el tigre un tigre. Yo he de quedar en Borges, no en mí (si es que alguien soy), pero me reconozco menos en sus libros que en muchos otros o que en el laborioso rasgueo de una guitarra. Hace años yo traté de librarme de él y pasé de las mitologías del arrabal a los juegos con el tiempo y con lo infinito, pero esos juegos son de Borges ahora y tendré que idear otras cosas. Así mi vida es una fuga y todo lo pierdo y todo es del olvido, o del otro.

No sé cuál de los dos escribe esta página.</comment>


To Make It as an Artist, I Recommend Having Unlimited Time and Money - <AUTHOR> https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/to-make-it-as-an-artist-i-recommend-having-unlimited-time-and-money <comment><USER2> All kidding aside, hasn't this always been the case? Being an artist, a historian, a novelist -- these have always been much easier for people who were already independent and financially secure. Virginia Woolf made this point a century ago.

</comment><comment><USER3> Or talented with an enabler.</comment>


I wrote congress re: SOPA, & this is the reply I got. - <AUTHOR> http://sss.proinbox.com/Buerkle%20Reply.pdf <comment><USER2> Looks fake. PS - SOPA is over.</comment>


Ask HN: Why don't emails have a unique ID in the subject line? - <AUTHOR> Thinking about this earlier this morning as I swim through my inbox. I feel like it'd be easier to track down an email if there was a unique ID attached in the subject line. Had a co-worker ask me: "did you see that email so and so sent the other day?"
Of course I did, but I also have 10-15 emails from that same person on that same day. I feel like it'd be easier to track down if someone asked "Did you see email E2YKW3 that Michelle sent the other day asking for follow up?"
Perhaps a shower thought, but wanted to get the community's take on this. <comment><USER2> There's the Message-ID field, but do e-mail clients (apart from Mutt) let you search for the message with a given Message-ID?

<comment><USER3> E.g. GMail supports rfc822msgid:<id> searches.

<comment><USER4> But is it not that the whole thread has same id? I was trying to send myself a text message everytime I get a certain status email. Problem was that all emails had same subject. I was using Google Apps Script. I ended up marking each email processed's arrival date & time when processed; & later skip all whose date time already exists in sheet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> How would you remember a random string if you cannot remember a subject line (or even body text) worded by a human? All email clients allow you to search the subject, body, presence/absence of attachments, from, to, etc. Message-ID, References, In-Reply-To...there are already several headers created and managed (though in a hidden way) by email clients. But the values of these headers are usually long strings that humans cannot easily remember.

Open up an emails from different email threads (preferably one that has been sent later in the reply chain) and see the raw headers. There's a lot of information there. Something in it could be useful to you or for you to devise something better than the status quo.

</comment><comment><USER6> I use email all the time and have never even remotely encountered a point where I would need something like this. Why wouldn't you simply refer to a subject line? And why would someone say "Did you see email E2YKW3" I can't imagine a single person saying that frankly.

</comment><comment><USER7> This is what the subject line is for. If you don't read the existing subject line they write, which distinguishes the various messages from a single person, and gives some indication of the topic, why would you remember some random string of characters that is otherwise meaningless?

</comment><comment><USER8> That's an interesting thought. I'm working on a desktop IMAP client in my spare time so my burgeoning IMAP knowledge is...getting there.

Would this ID be prominent? Appear on hover?</comment>


Pedestal: An open source tool set for building web applications in Clojure - <AUTHOR> http://pedestal.io

<comment><USER3> From the docs:

"There's nothing magic about these function names. There are no required names here. One of our design principles in Pedestal is that all the connections between parts of your application should be evident. You should be able to trace functions from call to definition without any "magic" or "action at a distance" metaprogramming."

Excellent. This is something that has irritated me greatly about a framework I've been working with, and it seems to be unduly popular.

<comment><USER3> To clarify, the framework is Salesforce, and this isn't even the worst thing about it. _shudders_

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> What pain-points of Leiningen and Compojure does this framework aim to solve?

I'm sure its an excellent framework, but there way too much for me to consider using it right now. My concerns:

How difficult would it be to switch out Datomic for PostgreSQL?

What if I don't want ClojureScript at this moment?

What happens if I want to switch X with Z or drop ABC?

How hard will it be to minimize and erase all the things I don't want?

Why are there so many extra words needed for the routing templates?

I've always felt Clojure would get a boost from a Rails-like framework, but I'm concerned that a large, opinionated framework will break the very promise of Clojure: flexibility and easy DSL creation. Once we are faced with something that needs to be reverse-engineered or broken, then this promise is ruined.

I'm all for new frameworks and ideas, but its a little funny to think that Noir was dropped, in part, for being too large and complicated.

Despite my "not-for-me" criticisms, I do hope that you have some nice success in this framework and it attracts people to Clojure.

<comment><USER5> > What pain-points of Leiningen and Compojure does this framework aim to > solve?

There are no problems with Leiningen solved. It's based on it like other Clojure libs with project templates etc.

With Compojure it's another story, it only gives you a handler function. Pedestal makes a routing table available, enabling reverse routing. The route definition is data based. It's less repetitive to define routes.

> I'm sure its an excellent framework, but there way too much for me to > consider using it right now. My concerns: How difficult would it be to > switch out Datomic for PostgreSQL?

Not difficult at all? Have you looked at the datomic tutorial? It does nothing besides setting up a connection and querying the database. What dbs do not support that?

>What if I don't want ClojureScript at this moment? What happens if I want to switch X with Z or drop ABC? How hard will it be to minimize and erase all the things I don't want?

Well, you go through and pick the libraries you want to use?

> Why are there so many extra words needed for the routing templates?

It's a comprehensive description of all aspects of the flexible routing dsv, including the programatic inteface to define routes at runtime.

> I've always felt Clojure would get a boost from a Rails-like framework, but > I'm concerned that a large, opinionated framework will break the very > promise of Clojure: flexibility and easy DSL creation. Once we are faced > with something that needs to be reverse-engineered or broken, then this > promise is ruined.

It's not rails. We've all seen where that got.

> I'm all for new frameworks and ideas, but its a little funny to think that > Noir was dropped, in part, for being too large and complicated.

It's a set of libraries, not a framework.

Also, it doesn't add state for everything everywhere. Instead it takes the current concept of Clojure web apps and takes it to the next level.

In Compojure you define lots of routes, mostly calling separate handling functions, only passing out the routes parameters. That what pedestals routing does by default. That's just one example of many.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for the answers. I think they are really good.

<comment><USER5> A little snarky at times, probably. Let me know if you're interested in anything else or in more detail.

I'm just digging into pedestal myself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is there any easily digestible information regarding what Pedestal actually provides? Beyond the general statements on the front page, I didn't see a concise overview of what Pedestal is giving me.

Apologies if this is all covered in the full docs

<comment><USER7> full disclosure: I'm a Relevance employee and have been working on this a great deal.

Pedestal provides a few distinguishing values in this space overall:

\- Same language on the client and on the server. You can get this with something running on the native OS in both locations, or with javascript and node, or with clojurescript and clojure. ClojureScript and Clojure can sit on top of the browser platform like javascript. We're opinionated and would rather solve problems with Clojure than with Javascript.

\- A server-initiated communication mechanism that can send data to those clients without parking a thread or process in order to maintain all the information for managing the communication. Our Server Sent Events mechanism lets clients initiate HTTP connections to the server and hold the connection open. On the server side, we can park those connections without eating a thread to do it, and pick up the connections to send new data down to clients as appropriate.

\- A pretty powerful set of libraries for developing client applications in ClojureScript. The libraries let you isolate the scope of change to HTML document trees so that changes to underlying data reflect small changes up to the presentation layer. This foundation has created lots of interesting abilities, like being able to record a set of interactions and replay them with a new presentation layer, or being able to replay specific sets of data being sent from the server to clients.

There's a lot more that we've built up, based on our experiences trying to solve problems for people in Clojure, but I think these are three things we do that deserve giving us some of your time for evaluation.

<comment><USER6> Regarding client-server communication, are you using an existing library (socket.io, sockjs, etc) for the client->server communication, did you roll your own, or is this an "exercise left to the reader"?

<comment><USER7> Communication happens over HTTP at the wire level, and we use the Server Sent Events standard (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server-sent_events>), and particularly browsers' EventSource implementations as the foundation on the client side.

Pedestal Services have a balled up implementation that transmits the data from the server side.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This looks very interesting -- I don't love the web development story in Clojure/ClojureScript right now, so I'm excited for anything that makes it easier. And I get that this is an alpha.

That said, one of my biggest pain points with Clojure is poorly documented libraries. This NEEDS a high-level description of what is provided and where, and the example app needs a lot more documentation so I can figure out what it's doing.

EDIT: Whoops, I found the link to the full documentation:

<http://pedestal.io/documentation/>

Much better. I still wish the sample chat app had more documentation, but if I have time I'll try to contribute that myself.

<https://github.com/pedestal/samples/tree/master/chat>

<comment><USER9> Duly noted. It's been a real whirlwind getting this stuff out the door in time for Clojure/west and better documentation is one of our major goals following the release.

\- Ryan @ Relevance

<comment><USER8> Thanks Ryan. I've read through more of the documentation, and I like what I am seeing. The client-side state management and push rendering looks especially cool.

My play Clojure / Clojurescript stack is a weird combination of libraries like Noir (+ Chris Granger's Clojurescript libraries) / Lobos / Korma / Hiccup / stuff I ripped from Clojurescript One.

The example explains how to use Datomic with Pedestal, and I notice you're using Domina for DOM manipulation. Is that basically the minimal stack for a database driven app? It'd be nice to see an explanation of what the rest of a Pedestal app might look like, what libraries Pedestal might replace (especially something that integrates with Postgres / MySql).

Congrats on the release and a sincere thank you to you guys at Relevance for all of your Clojure work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It weirds me out that nowhere in the docs does it just list the libraries it builds on. Browsing through, I see Domina, Ring, Datomic, something called "slf4j", and a bunch of functions within the Pedestal namespace... and it never really explains what those external libraries are.

Definitely doesn't seem targeted at newer Clojure users. Also, the use of Datomic as a default data store rubs me the wrong way, mainly because I've never even seen it outside of a few HN articles :p

<comment><USER11> Not that it matters a whole lot, but slf4j is a facade over common JVM logging packages, allowing for runtime selection of logging framework.

<http://www.slf4j.org/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Excited to see what the Relevance team and others roll out with this. Clojure could really come into its own if a tool set like this picks up steam.

</comment><comment><USER13> I just listened to a pod cast with Tim Ewald (recorded March 8) where he talks for 60+ minutes on Pedestal([http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/2013/03/18/pedestal- podcast-e...](http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/2013/03/18/pedestal-podcast- episode-027)) and it sounds good, but I bet the learning curve will be steep. I am fetching the chat example right now to read the code.

</comment><comment><USER5> [http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/2013/03/18/pedestal- podcast-e...](http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/2013/03/18/pedestal-podcast- episode-027)

</comment><comment><USER14> My takeaway from the presentation at Clojure West is that Pedestal is a generic perception library, and rendering UIs is just one of many things it will be used for.

Also, this is very alpha stuff, so many of the details are yet to be worked out.

<comment><USER5> Really? In the podcast they say it's similar to what they used for over a year in production, made available to get feedback from others and that's why it's released as alpha.

<comment><USER9> Ryan from Relevance here. It is true some of the ideas behind pedestal have been around for a couple years, but always as tweaks and hacks over top of existing frameworks. Every project has had its own unique and most importantly, local, implementation.

Pedestal is a culmination of those efforts into a new set of libraries. Some of the code from other projects inspired what there is today, but an even greater portion was created from scratch to make it more generally applicable. We haven't had the chance to use this incantation of the ideas in production yet, but we wholly intend to. We hope this experience, and that of the community, can help us bring this to beta or fully production ready.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I just watched Tim Ewald present this and it sounds _incredibly_ complicated.

<comment><USER16> Is that presentation available for viewing online?

<comment><USER15> Not yet! I think they intend to release the video, though.

<comment><USER16> thanks, looking forward to it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I will stick with Elnode and its Sinatra clone. <http://github.com/ober/thinatra>

</comment><comment><USER18> <http://pedestal.io/documentation/service-war-deployment/>

Why is the creation of a WAR file more complex than it is currently with lein- ring?

</comment><comment><USER19> Some thoughts on complication and number of components. Isn't it a one of main paradigms of LISP and functional programming, that 100 functions over 1 dataset is better then 10 functions over 10 datasets?

</comment><comment><USER20> Just a heads up: The navigation bar at the top of the browser takes up 1/3 of my screen. (Blackberry 9900)

<comment><USER21> I lost a significant vertical chunk of my MBA 11" as well, and reclaimed it with

      .fixed { position: relative; }
      body { padding-top: 0; }

in Stylebot. I'm seeking some CSS which disables position: fixed banners globally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Can I use it with clojureCLR or clojurePy?

</comment><comment><USER23> it reminds me meteor in some way :)

</comment><comment><USER24> How many gigs of RAM it uses to perform a simple external DB table lookup and fill a templated html table?) External authentication?

What if 100 pending requests and a few stalled connections (third-world wifi/GSM?)

<comment><USER5> Brabra. Put in the headline Clojure, dschiptsov hates for sure.

<comment><USER24> It is not Clojure, it is Java, also the way Clojure is pretending to be a Lisp, being Java with parenthesis and immutable collections.))

It is not illegal to be a purist.)

<comment><USER25> Funny... No latter than yesterday I used something very similar to Lisp macros to add function profiling to Clojure functions. Took very few lines of code, like you'd expect from a Lisp.

Parenthesis serves the purpose of homoiconicity and it looks like Clojure _is_ homoiconic... sexp / lambda expressions / HoF / macros / etc.

You know: _"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."_

Regarding people like you, the "haters gonna hate" type of people, here's what Rich Hickey has to say:

 _"Life is too short to spend time on such people. Plenty of Lisp experts have recognized Clojure as a Lisp. I don't expect everyone to prefer Clojure over their favorite Lisp. If it wasn't different in some ways, there'd be little reason for it to exist."_

I'd add that you're commenting on a board created by a real Lisp hacker who created its own Lisp and, if I'm not mistaken, who's now recommending Clojure has the Lisp dialect to learn for Lisp newcomers.

<comment><USER24> The whole point is that it isn't like duck. The general evaluation rule with _few_ special cases is broken, it is a whole bunch of special cases. Adding data-structures to a Lisp ruins it. It become a mess of a wired syntax, various comprehensions and unnecessary explicit conventions.

The beauty and elegance of a Lisp lies in that there is nothing to remove - <USER2> _few_ selected ideas put together - and _one_ common for code _and_ data underlying list structure. This leads to a compact, readable code with relatively easily "maps to" machine code, because the memory is flat.

I don't care what Rich Hickey said. For me he is much better _salesman_ , than engineer. He is very clever at selling, no doubt. But the whole Java scam is about clever selling of unnecessary complications from the very first days.

Moreover, those Lisp experts I have learned from didn't even mention Clojure.)

<comment><USER26> > Adding data-structures to a Lisp ruins it.

By this standard, Common Lisp is a "ruined" Lisp. Source: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp#Data_structures>

In Clojure the data structures work consistently across the language, which to me is one of many reasons why Clojure is a better Lisp than Common Lisp (but CL has its place).

> Moreover, those Lisp experts I have learned from didn't even mention > Clojure.

On the contrary, Clojure is and has since its inception been praised and often adopted by prominent users of Scheme and Common Lisp (the list is too long, but for example the late Daniel Weinreb declared Clojure the future of Lisp). The Clojure conference in Portland this last few days is a perfect example of the cross-fertilization between the Racket/Scheme logic programming subcultures and the Clojure logic programming subcultures.

<comment><USER24> Come on. Arrays are absolutely necessary for certain algorithms, so, they are here, so are efficient hash-tables. Structures (records) were standardized, but they are nothing but a bunch of macros. And that is good-enough.)

I'm a virtual student of prof. Brian Harvey (and reader of pg and Norvig).

And there is nothing special in trying to "port" the ideas form the "old" Lisp world to Clojure and present them as a new. Simple trick. All those logic programming buzz is from karen, query language of datatomic is from old expert systems, etc.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The ultimate productivity hack: Have kids - <AUTHOR> http://qz.com/802254/the-ultimate-efficiency-hack-have-kids/ <comment><USER2> The ultimate productivity and savings hack is to have the grandparent(s) around to take care of the kid(s) during the day while both parents work. Spend the childcare savings on house cleaners for you and your in-laws' home and pocket the rest.</comment>


Machine learning generated paintings on tshirt - <AUTHOR> http://www.paintomatic.com <comment><USER2> Page doesn't load for me.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback. Can you provide me your browser version ? I will look into the logs.

<comment><USER2> macOS 10.13, FF 71.0. Working now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Can an Algorithm Tell When Kids Are in Danger? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/magazine/can-an-algorithm-tell-when-kids-are-in-danger.html?_r=0 <comment><USER2> Only with a lot of false positives I'm guessing. Probably a dream come true for helicopter parents, either way.</comment>


An honest Postmortem for Klipboardz.com  - <AUTHOR> http://www.klipboardz.com/klipz/comments/1636 <comment><USER3> I'd really like to see more of these - postmortems for sites that _didn't_ succeed. There's a big survivorship bias in the accounts you hear - <USER2> writes about their failures. We'd have a more accurate picture if we had more information about things that didn't work.

Come to think of it, I wrote a postmortem for FictionAlley a couple years ago that I ought to share...

</comment><comment><USER4> Not sure why you're giving up. The fundamental problem with your website is that it has (by now) been done to death. You aren't going to get away from that particular problem with this:

_It's a new site that will allow you to keep all of your day to day information online, so you can access it anywhere._

Just some honest advice here, coz' I'd hate to see somebody spend months and months to do something so unspecific and, well, done-to-death.

Did you notice that news.yc became reasonably popular almost the second that it started? Well, Paul Graham has a built-in audience, and that's how it happened. reddit is popular for a similar reason: Both pg and Joel Spolsky gave it some promotion. So, you know, you can't expect a similar trajectory.

<comment><USER3> I dunno about that: "Write Yourself a Scheme in 48 hours" became popular within 48 hours after it was published, and I have no built-in audience. I posted it to the Haskell-cafe mailing list, someone _else_ posted it to Reddit, and when I woke up the next morning it was on the front page of both Reddit and Delicious. It's now the top Google result for "haskell scheme" and on the front page of results for "haskell tutorial".

I think the secret to getting widespread publicity is to build something that people want _and are eagerly awaiting_. I wrote "Write yourself a Scheme..." because I'd seen complaint after complaint about how there were no Haskell tutorials that build a practical project or deal with IO, so I started with some practical IO in the first chapter. When the tutorial appeared, it merely fulfilled a niche that everyone wanted to be filled.

FictionAlley was the same way, though I wasn't around for its birth. Basically, everyone was complaining about how Fanfiction.net sucked and the servers were always down and they eliminated the forums and arbitrarily removed stories. So eventually, some of the leading members of the HP fandom said "Well, let's start our own site then." And since everyone was already dissatisfied with FF.net, it spread easily through word-of-mouth.

<comment><USER4> Two differences:

1\. Your example is _extremely_ specific, and so will match up closely with the needs a particular (small) percentage of people. A news aggregator is very general. The whole reddit audience could shift to klipboardz tomorrow with little effect. That "little effect" is actually a bad thing. Little bad effect, but also little good effect.

2\. Your example is a document, and not a service. In short: There are many, many more websites that make it to the top of reddit or digg, than there are reddits or diggs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Maybe there's a whole category of apps to be built like this: they don't make money themselves, but they educate the creators and connect them to things that will make money (he mentioned three new opportunties).

Also, this shows an impressive ability for self-assessment; I'm curious to know whether he thinks we would have done better by quitting and jumping into it with both feet.

<comment><AUTHOR> It really might have helped if I had jumped into it completely but I really just couldn't make that move financially. I'm sure that it would have made a difference though because the need to eat is a great motivator for success.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Idea two sounds like GMail/GCal's got it covered, you're just suggesting a different input mechanism. Not that it wouldn't be a good programming exercise, but... mynameishere has a point.

Your proposed dynamic input mechanism does, however, sound like the right granularity for IM/SMS. As in, an IM/SMS to your service with the contents "contact: Paul Graham firstname.lastname@example.com" updates your address book. "money: 9.48 Quiznos" updates a ledger. "note: news.yc needs UTF-8 meta tag" sends a note. Twitter's taking off; a context-aware Twitter seems like a cool idea.

Just don't give it a name that implies Chester Cheetah should be skateboarding all over your site. Radical.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think it's possible to succeed in one of two ways:

(1) come up with a radically new idea (e.g., human computation)

(2) apply existing ideas to a specific domain in a novel way

You will probably have a much easier time with (2), particularly as people are already familiar with those ideas (e.g., tagging, social networking, etc.).

</comment><comment><USER8> The idea at the end sounds very similar to <http://stikkit.com/.> How will this be different?</comment>


Firefox Classic Theme Restorer - <AUTHOR> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/ <comment><USER2> I find it odd people are so eager for a project like this when the implementation people are raging against is demo'd. Now, right now is the time those who hate it most should use it 24/7 to provide objective feedback to the developers while there's still time to change it.

When this hits stable, that's the time to decide on ticking the classic option or not.

Like the w8 beta, day 1 people where finding registry tweaks to undo various changes. Dooming the product that care so much to test an advanced copy of to never work for them by ruining all the usage metrics with crazy registry hacks barely a percent of users will do.

<comment><USER3> I've been on the UX branch for quite some time, but I miss the addon-bar (aka statusbar) at the bottom</comment></comment>


Web scraping with Node.js - <AUTHOR> http://baudehlo.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/web-scraping-with-node-js/ <comment><USER2> This makes me just a bit nervous. You're scraping bank websites using a headless WebKit browser, which is presumably vulnerable to future exploits. You have my username and password (and probably verification questions) either stored on or accessible from that same server. Who's to say that one of the sites you crawl won't get compromised and used as a vector to compromise your crawler box and--potentially--your customers' banking credentials?

</comment><comment><USER3> I found casperjs (<http://casperjs.org/>) to be a pleasant framework to work with.

<comment><USER4> Even just PhantomJS is a dream compared to Node.js

<comment><USER5> You're kidding, right?

I've got heaps of experience with both, and I cringe every time I have to touch the phantomjs API.

It feels like a half-assed imitation of node's, and for the most part isn't even internally consistent. For example, you can render to a file, or to a Base64 string. But heavens no, you can't render to stdout -- the file type is decided by the file name, so /dev/stdout is out of the question and the only workaround is making a pointless symlink. That's not to mention the showstopper bugs with it being literally impossible to exit() the process from inside a script in certain cases.

Don't get me wrong; phantom is awesome and it's great at what it does. But it's not "a dream compared to Node.js".

<comment><USER4> Keep in mind that I am talking specifically about the context of web scraping. For any other application, I would choose node in a heartbeat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This article should have mentioned node.io (<https://github.com/chriso/node.io>) for completeness. It hasn't been updated in a while and I'm not sure if other frameworks have popped up, but I've had a pleasure using it for some big scraping tasks.

</comment><comment><USER7> I wonder how they get around the two level authentication problem? Even if I give my password to the scraper an extra credential would be required. How do you workaround that?

</comment><comment><USER8> Isn't it almost always against the terms of service to scrape content off of websites?

<comment><USER4> There are plenty of legitimate uses for web scraping. For example, say you have a client with a hundred static HTML pages that need to be converted to put into a new CMS. You _could_ go and copy the content by hand from each page.

Or you could write a script that scrapes the site and pulls the content out automatically. That will probably save you time right off the bat. And if the client realizes that they want another piece of information pulled from each page, you just make a minor tweak to your script and rerun it.

<comment><USER9> "Scraping" implies remote, possibly "unauthorized" access. For your example static html files, converting them to some other format might not be scraping as we understand it, plenty of editors and browsers have options to dump the data as some other format.

Once you remove the requirement for remote, unauthroized access, then every data transformation process become "scraping".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> >There's no way to download resources with phantomjs – the only thing you can do is create a snapshot of the page as a png or pdf. That's useful but meant we had to resort back to request() for the PDF download.

That's not a "problem", you shouldn't be using Webkit to download files.</comment>


What I learned from reading over 100 weight loss studies - <AUTHOR> https://www.intentapp.com/blog/weight-loss-cost/ <comment><USER2> The weight loss is not really what matters. anybody can lose weight. with a little education you can do it. the problem is doing it in a sustainable way and to actually keep it off.

the hardest part about weight loss is keeping it off. you have limited will power and unless you are willing to change the way you live your efforts are in vain. Sure it may make you feel good about yourself and your journey but it's doomed to fail.

i'm going to repeat this: if you are not willing to adjust your lifestyle and consistently make the better choices when it comes to diet you will fail.

also, weight loss in 90% kitchen, 10% gym. Do go to the gym, but if you are eating unhealthy it's not going to matter.

LE: while we're on this subject. If there is one thing you can do today that will have a positive impact on you for the rest of your life is to stop eating sugar and refined carbs. If you only do one change to how you eat and you do this, in the long run, you'll be most successful than 95% of "dieters". Also keep in mind that this is a marathon, not a sprint.

<comment><USER3> The hardest part of dieting is realising that in order to keep it off, you will have to continue like that forever.

In the back of your mind, you want to think that the diet is temporary. Once you have lost the weight, you can go back to eating all the great tasting foods that you ate before.

True success is the acceptance that, no, your life will be worse in very real ways. You will no longer be able to just eat whenever you feel like it. You will no longer be able to eat until you are full, ever again. And you have to accept that this trade-off is worth it.

<comment><USER4> _True success is the acceptance that, no, your life will be worse in very real ways. You will no longer be able to just eat whenever you feel like it. You will no longer be able to eat until you are full, ever again._

None of these things are true. With a good diet and exercise, you will feel better and be happier, with way more energy. That makes your life better, not worse.

As another commenter mentioned, abstaining from sweets increases your sensitivity to sweetness. If you go long enough, you'll find most candy cloying rather than addictive. So throw away those cheap, mass market candy bars. By some expensive dark chocolate candy from a reputable chocolatier. Eat one piece instead of a whole bunch and just take your time to enjoy the flavours. It is sooooo much better!

The way I see people (including myself at times) eat candy bars and potato chips bears more resemblance to a starving dog than a human who really enjoys good food. Stop being a dog! Take your time and enjoy something really good instead of swallowing a whole bunch of junk in front of Netflix.

<comment><USER3> > None of these things are true. With a good diet and exercise, you will feel > better and be happier, with way more energy. That makes your life better, > not worse.

I never said your life won't be better overall. I said it will be worse in real ways.

Eating pizza, Soda and so on are awesome. There is a reason these foods are popular. No amount of pretending is going to make that not true, and a life where you could eat them with no downsides would be better.

<comment><USER5> > Eating pizza, Soda and so on are awesome

It depends what you are used to eat. A few years ago I would have agreed that pizza and Soda is great. But today after changing my live style I cook for myself fresh vegetables from CSA and small bio farms I do not like pizza and all the crap any more. That goes so far that I can not go to restaurants anymore, because 95% of them serve crap for my todays taste.

<comment><USER6> > That goes so far that I can not go to restaurants anymore

I would call that a direct impact to quality of life (if only because you're missing out on the social experience), which is the exact point the GP made.

<comment><USER5> There are some restaurants with high quality food. And I enjoy them. After all my quality of live is way better than before. My social experience improved because I met interesting people with the same interest / taste at my local Foodcoop for example.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> A couple of years ago I found myself weighing 250lbs. Basically morbidly obese.

I decided to change that. I went through all the food I bought during the week and decided to do some culling.

I removed anything with sugar and replaced it with Stevia. Removed the soft drinks, alcohol, and carbs.

I follow this diet 6 days a week. One day a week, I indulge myself: a pizza or burrito or have a few beers.

I also go to the gym 5 times a week. Run 5k in 25 minutes plus one hour of weight lifting. Nothing to intense mind you.

I have lost nearly 80lbs with the last 24 months. The trick is to do it slow and steady.

I always cringe when I read about the latest fad diet: Lose 5 lbs in one week or some crap like that!

In the end, it takes time and will to achieve results but once you get into a routine, if very easy to keep going.

During my holidays, I usually drink, smoke and eat whatever I want but as soon as I get back home, I go back to my routine.

Some people think that this is boring but honestly, unless you are an athlete competing at a high level, you don't need to eat carbs every day.

This is just my experience. Results may vary.

<comment><USER8> Fasting is the ultimate weight loss tool. It also facilitates (muscle) growth and healing.

<comment><USER9> It also can put a strain on your organs if you are not too healthy. Consult a Doctor before trying it.

<comment><USER8> Any references for that claim (assuming 5 days water fast or less)?

<comment><USER10> "[I]ntermittent fasting diets may actually damage the pancreas and affect insulin function in normal healthy individuals, which could lead to diabetes and serious health issues." ([https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/20/fasting- diet...](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/20/fasting-diets-raise- risk-of-diabetes))

The National Council Against Health Fraud "strongly advises against the use of prolonged fasting for health purposes, and believes that requiring children to fast is a form of child abuse." [https://www.ncahf.org/articles/e-i/fasting.html](https://www.ncahf.org/articles/e-i/fasting.html)

<comment><USER11> Your first link talks specifically of fasting every other day, and is about rats. That is completely irrelevant to 5 day fasting in humans, whereas [0] is.

Your second link is from 1995; A lot has happened since. Yes, children should probably not fast. Other than that, more recent data (as well as old, but ignored, data) show that water fasting is good for you. And Valter Lango's research (see [0], and google for more) shows that it's actually extremely beneficial in many cases, especially during chemotherapy.

[0] [https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/five-day-fasting- die...](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/five-day-fasting-diet-could- fight-disease-slow-aging)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I had read somewhere that after about 45 minutes of cardio your body will start using it's fat stores, and continue burning fat for 6 to 8 hours afterwards. So when I found myself overweight I started doing long trail runs or bike rides, about 2 hours long, 3 times a week. Insomuch as I looked forward to doing the exercise, losing 3-5 pounds a week was nearly effortless. My appetite actually goes down during these periods because I'm burning my fat stores and my body isn't demanding that I replace those calories, and it's doing it for hours after I've stopped.

I've had people tell me that getting exercise is not a good way to lose weight, but my experience tells me that if you're doing the right kind of exercise, then, yes it a good way. Maybe there's just no reasonable expectation that most people will do enough cardio at a high enough level to activate fat burning.

<comment><USER13> What was your starting weight? Losing 3-5 pounds a week sounds like a lot, unless you were starting from a high weight to begin with. Also, most people trying to lose weight aren't fit enough to run/ride for 10 minutes long, let alone 2 hours.

<comment><USER12> The first time I had 20 pounds to lose, from 195 down to 175. Last fall I lost 15 pounds using the same method. I've been active enough through most of my adult life that I can snap myself back into good fitness pretty fast presuming I haven't been on my ass for more than a few months, and it wasn't until my mid-30s or so that I would start to gain weight during sedentary phases if I wasn't being careful. Throughout my 20s my weight didn't change much at all. So my weight issues have been minor, and I dealt with them handily before they had a chance to become not-minor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> _Amphetamines were popularly used to suppress appetite in the mid-20th century, but addiction and abuse proved disastrous._

He glosses over amphetamines. They are _highly_ effective at weight loss. So much so that ADHD patients have the stereotypical "Adderall skinniness" after 1-2 years of use. Addiction is a problem with stimulants, but psychiatrist routinely assess for addiction in the ADHD population. Why not prescribe Adderall for weight loss and similarly monitor those patients?

Which is better? A BMI of 40+ or a BMI of 25 and taking a daily stimulant?

The FDA agrees with the latter in at least one case. In 2015, the FDA approved the amphetamine lisdexamfetamine (brand name Vyvanse) for the treatment of binge-eating disorder.

<comment><USER15> I have lost kilos post raves just from not being inclined to eat for days afterwards, but even just a dexie leaves me feeling scattered and non functional the day after. I assume you adjust to ongoing rather than occasional usage?

<comment><USER16> I've been on a low dose of Ritalin for about half a year now, I experience very few side effects, but appetite inhibition is definitely a thing.

Even after half a year, it has barely changed at all. I usually don't really feel hungry until I'm at the point where I get a bit lightheaded because I haven't eaten for too long.

The most annoying part isn't even the inhibited hunger impulse, it's that even _if_ I take that into account, and plan my meals accordingly, I don't really feel like eating much, and I'll eat like you would if you were daydreaming about a potential lover.

The most effective solution I've seen so far is to not chain the doses like it's usually advised, ie, one pill every four hours, but to plan your meals and your pill timings such that you'll eat when the medication is wearing off. It's annoying, because of course this half-hour to hour period after medication wears off is very annoying, but it's the better alternative, especially if you take into account that Ritalin has a more stable and gentle impact if you take it on a full stomach.

Taking Ritalin on an empty stomach is like drinking two double-espressos on an empty stomach after a bad night's sleep, right after you wake up. :c

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> To me, it would seem that there's a couple things that aren't considered in most of these studies. A lot of them have a lot of controls in place for the starting size/weight range of the individuals. Given this, and the change in hormone (particularly insulin) response it's not always the same advice depending on how overweight you are, how much you are showing insulin resistance or elevated/deflated insulin response.

I think that resting insulin levels should be part of annual exams for everyone. It's much easier to explain, hey you're heading towards diabetes clinically when people still feel relatively well and healthy.

My own advice to younger people, and to those who aren't very overweight is to limit meals to 2-3 a day, don't snack between meals, and don't drink anything sweetened or containing calories during the day outside of meal time. Limit sugars to around 20-30g/day, and if having more, limit it to a single treat/dessert every other week.

If you're more overweight, or "pre-diabetic", then I suggest reducing total carbs to 100g/day, and limiting to 1-2 meals a day.

If you're obese/diabetic, omad (one meal a day) and ketogenic macros.

If you're on higher doses of insulin, add a 3-7 day fast once a month. And a 48hr fast at least once a week.

The worse off you are starting the harder it is... fortunately, you can work your way up the scale/advice above as you reach closer to an ideal weight.

After you get used to not snacking and reducing sugar/sweetened things between meals, it gets easier. The first week or two can be grueling and if you're a social eater, it can be very hard too.

<comment><USER18> Every annual physical and every work-related health exam I have had here in the US has included some kind of fasting glucose test.

<comment><USER17> An A1C test will only show problems _after_ you've gone through a cycle of your body resisting insulin and your pancreas being overworked (resting insulin 4-7x normal) and then your pancreas wears out (damaged beta cell production) and then your resting glucose rises. This process can take many years. A resting insulin test will show resting insulin rising years before an A1C test shows a problem.

<comment><USER19> A1C is not the fasting glucose test.

<comment><USER17> It's not, the same stands... you'll go through years of elevated insulin before you see fasting glucose or A1C rise. A glucose tolerance test could be useful too, but a bit of a pain compared to simply testing insulin levels and comparing to the prior year.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> There has been quite a lot of new, exciting and actually useful science in recent years about how to have a healthy body, but I think most people only look at calories. Some may look at fat/carbs. And some may also look into excercise as well. But in order to have a healthy body long term it seams you need to look into all of that, and sleep quality, and mindfullness/stress control.

That may sound like a lot, but each piece helps you out a little to keep the other pieces in check. Having a full night of sleep keeps your impulses in check. Excercise helps you sleep, keep muscle mass and fat at desirable levels. Eating healthy makes sleep easier etc. And they reinforce each other.

So keeping yourself in this healthy steady state is actually quite easy, as long as you take a holistic apriach and not over specialize in each area.

This is a hunch of mine though I havent really found any studies that take all of those things into account, just the specific interactions between those things.

</comment><comment><USER21> Interesting review (that first graph in particular is definitely non-obvious to me), but under the diet section I think it understates the current body of research regarding low-carb/keto diets - some studies have begun to show energy expenditure[1] and insulin[2] benefits that uniquely exist with low- carb. I think we'll find out soon enough that a lower-carb approach, given the current American diet, does definitively perform better than other dieting approaches on average.

[1] [https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k4583](https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k4583)

[2] [http://annals.org/aim/article-abstract/718265/effect-low- car...](http://annals.org/aim/article-abstract/718265/effect-low-carbohydrate- diet-appetite-blood-glucose-levels-insulin-resistance)

<comment><USER22> Those are both _very_ short term studies. The only critical factor in weight loss is how much people weigh in the long term as in 5+ years.

"20% of overweight individuals are successful at long-term weight loss when defined as losing at least 10% of initial body weight and maintaining the loss for at least 1 y." Things get much worse in terms of 5+ year weight loss.

<comment><USER23> I'll just say that American culture in general makes it extremely difficult to stick to a healthy and disciplined lifestyle, no matter the specific diet. In keto communities I see people who have met lots of success but find it rough being bombarded by family, friends, and dining out options in general all going against their way of eating.

It's getting better, with restaurants especially. But it's still a large hurdle to any diet and/or healthy lifestyle. I'm sure it's better in some areas of the country than others.

<comment><USER17> I find that I do okay (with keto) at most restaurants, usually have to modify a meal, but can usually find something.

The vegetarian centered places tend to be much harder for me. I'm allergic to legumes, cranberries and blueberries, and just don't do well with grains anymore.

Last week, I had a cheat day with out of town friends and I'm still recovering from it. It's actually worse than the keto flu when starting out on keto in the first place, followed by increased hunger after eating carb heavy one day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I feel like the studies of specialty diets bring misleading conclusions, because they always count calories for both sides.

If you're on a calorie controlled diet, then calories in calories out holds. But most speciality diets (I'm on something pretty similar to slow carb) are targeting adherence, a factor that's removed if you're only measuring calories in and calories out.

Without white carbs I find it much much easier to reduce my calorific intake. To compare my diet with any other — if you're enforcing the same number of calories — is kind of pointless, as I specifically don't want to count calories, nor do I want to feel hungry.

<comment><USER25> _Sometimes_ feeling hungry is ok and likely healthy. _Always_ feeling hungry is brutal.

For me, low carb works like magic and with limited aggravation once past the first week. The problem is, if I never learn to be (sometimes) hungry, it all comes apart when I go off the diet and back to living in the land of infinite crap carbs.

<comment><USER26> You should spend some of each day feeling at least a bit hungry. If you're not hungry when you sit down for a meal, you've eaten too much already.

There's a huge difference between "a bit hungry" and actually properly hungry. Most people with weight problems probably never let themselves feel more than peckish, and so their perception of hunger adjusts to amplify that feeling. When I'm below my target weight (sitting at a fairly low body fat percentage) and I try to maintain a calorie deficit, the hunger I start feeling is insanely more intense than when I'm a bit chubby and losing weight.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I have a friend who I watched try a bunch of diet systems. Pills from amazon that she researched. Trying to not eat as much. Calorie counting. More expensive pills. Doing one of those "we send you all your meals" programs. Nothing worked or was even close. Maybe she'd lose 5 pounds and then immediately gain it back.

Finally she went to a clinic. The Dr. gave her a prescription to phentermine and she had to show up every week for evaluation. It worked great, the pounds melted off her, and she has kept it off. She lost something like 35 lbs in a few months (from 160). It basically made her not want to eat, her daily calorie count was stupid low, but it never really affected her energy levels - she didn't have any health issues.

The doctor said her body would get used to the drug in about 3 months and it would be less effective, and that was true. So you can't really stay on it continuously, I guess..

<comment><USER28> That isn't addressing the underlying problem of eating too much. There was quite a study at Odense University Hospital where they enrolled women that had tried everything to lose weight. They was asked to meticulously write down everything single thing they ate. They they was admitted to the hospital and they was fed exactly what they had written for the past month.

Every single woman lost a significant amount of weight.

So if your friend have counted calorie counting without losing weight she didn't count correctly or truthfully.

<comment><USER29> Maybe it does. People eat too much because they have cravings, low pleasure response to food (so they need to more to feel the same as healthy people) and maybe low dopamine levels (that's my hypothesis based on my problems and some experiments).

I think eating too much is a symptom of an underlying problem and drugs may help with it. This is also why I think regular exercise is very important for weightloss. Not because calories burnt but because neurotransmitters levels and their impact on mood and impulse control.

>>So if your friend have counted calorie counting without losing weight she didn't count correctly or truthfully.

She very likely knew she is eating too much. It's not rocket science and calorie counting won't help unless you are in very deep denial. The problem is controlling yourself and constant cravings you have to fight. It's just way more difficult for some people than others the same way some get easily addicted to drugs and some use them recreationally for years without problems or sign of addiction.

<comment><USER28> > The problem is controlling yourself and constant cravings you have to fight. > It's just way more difficult for some people than others

And that is the problem people should be focusing on. It's easier to take a pill from the doctor, but that's a last resort when your health dictates that you must lose weight right now. You will have to somehow control your eating one way or another at some point if you want to control your weight.

There is no easy solution.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> From personal experience * with weight loss, diet is good for short terms but will not work in long terms.

I have tried limiting calories, intermittent fasting, and keto. The only thing worked long term was loving exercise and setting challenges (cycling 20 miles a day, running 10k .. etc). Exercise will allow me to eat the food I like (within limits) and not caring if I will gain some weight as I will lose it potentially with exercise.

* I lost 20% of my body weight in 8 months doing strictly 1500 calories a day for 8 months with moderate exercise then gained 10% of it back and since then I will lose/gain 5% every now and then.

</comment><comment><USER31> Is there any major weight loss system that looks at genetics?

According to this article there are a few genes which will alter your success with either _any_ excercise cersus _only high intensity_ exercise, and low carb versus low fat being a better weight loss diet.

[https://rockstarresearch.com/these-5-genes-predict-what- kind...](https://rockstarresearch.com/these-5-genes-predict-what-kind-of-diet- and-exercise-is-best-for-your-body-2/)

</comment><comment><USER32> The problem with this meta analysis is that it doesn't really account for the motivational factor related to money and other things.

Moreover, that people with more weight to lose might likely opt for the more major programs.

When your doctor says "You now have diabetes, and you're going to die young unless you get your weight under control" ... well, that might motivated people.

As opposed to someone who just wants to lose 10 lbs and is otherwise fairly healthy.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think this is a fair point, and the final section of the post attempts to address this. For what it's worth, most studies do not selectively draw from a highly-motivated cohort - participants are rarely the most severely obese, and they also usually aren't people who are actively looking for clinical trials or free weight loss programs. Money is also controlled for, since the interventions are almost always offered for free, and any time or work involved with the study will be compensated as well. From my perspective, if anything, the motivational factor may actually be _too_ well-controlled in many of these studies, so the observed result does not translate properly to real-world settings.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> My anecdote: I lose weight very easily by CICO. Over the course of of a few months in college I ate a very strict diet of x calories. At the time it was something like 1100/day as a ~200lb 21 year old. Supposedly dangerous, but a lot of things are. Anyway, by keeping an excel sheet of the exact calories I ate every day, minus my calculated metabolic rate, I knew exactly what %/lb I lost per day/week. I kept such good track that by measuring my weight every day I was able to reverse calculate my metabolic rate by the daily weight loss (it was very close to online calculators so I wouldn't bother going out of your way to try it).

The most important thing for me is seeing it as a game. Being able to see daily results even if they are fractions of pounds a day or week. Knowing exactly what I'm aiming for at the end of the week and how I'm getting there.

The most difficult party is meticulously counting calories and ratios when making things. A kitchen scale is essential.

Anyway I was 50 lbs lighter when I quit. It has come back over the course of 6 or 7 years but I'm a pig and I will just lose it again when the time comes.

<comment><USER34> I'm about 145lb 22 y/o, and also doing 1100 calories/day but usually in the form of one meal for dinner. How did you calculate the amount you should lose per day/week? I'm interested in filling such a spreadsheet myself.

<comment><USER33> When I started I used a metabolic rate calculator.

[https://www.active.com/fitness/calculators/calories](https://www.active.com/fitness/calculators/calories) for example.

The amount of calories lost per day = the metabolic rate from the calculator - the amount of calories you eat that day.

The amount of pounds lost per day is: burned calories (above) / 3500 (number of calories in a pound of fat).

After a couple months of measuring my weight daily and knowing exactly what my caloric intake was, I calculated my real average metabolic rate by doing the reverse.

total calories lost in a period = lbs lost * 3500

calorie burn (metabolic rate) = total calories burned + total calories eaten

The above is per period so I calculated the average values for the days in a month and used them.

I didn't exercise much so the basal metabolic rate was fairly close to my real burn.

<comment><USER35> If you aren't exercising much,the assumption that all loss is fat is optimistic, and lean body mass has only 600 kcal/pound instead of 3,500 for fat.

<comment><USER33> Yes that is also true. I accounted for about 20% of lean mass loss included and then had to hit the gym after the few month diet :)

Though it wasn't my biggest concern since I overshot my loss by about as much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I feel like this article neglects the most important thing, which is sustainability.

I've recently come across the idea of fasting for weight loss. Turns out most people can safely fast (eat nothing, only drink water that is) for many days, sometimes as long as 40 days if they are overweight. Switching to a diet of eating minimally processed food afterwards - which is what we're used to from an evolutionary standpoint - can apparently be quite sustainable.

I'm young and thankfully don't have weight problems, but if I had I think I'd give it a shot.

<comment><USER37> I remember seeing an article about a long term study of former participants of the show "The Biggest Loser." If I recall, almost all of them had gained the weight back and due to the extreme caloric restrictions they had placed on themselves during their time on the show the reduced their base metabolic rate significantly.

</comment></comment><comment> a-saleh While we are discussing diets, anybody has a good replacement for snacks? Few years ago I realized I am really prone to stress-eating.

If I am not stressed, I can go about my day, eating 2 big meals a day (and a small breakfast), and even slowly loose wight.

But if I am under pressure I can eat another large meal worth of snacks. And I really don't like it, because then I am gaining weight really fast :-/ Anybody in similar situation? What helped you there?

<comment><USER28> Snack on something like carrots, cucumber, and other vegetables that aren't sweet or fatty. You'll significantly cut down on the calories and gain some healthy food too. Just don't create dipping sauce or the like. Raw vegetables only.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Over a decade ago I DIY'd going from 225 to ~165 and have kept it off.

The main success factor in my opinion was becoming single and staying single, as well as restructuring my life in general, especially how/who I socialize with.

It's pretty easy to do what's right for you when you go solo.

The process isn't really different than a drug addict trying to go clean and avoid relapse. It's all about the friends and environment, you have to change it all.

<comment><USER39> Not gonna lie when I got married and had a kid and started a new job all at the same time my weight went up like almost 30kg.

<comment><USER38> To be fair, it's entirely possible to enter a family, social, and employment situation that reinforces healthy choices.

My point was more along the lines of the existing environment being largely responsible for the emergent property of being overweight/unhealthy.

Unless you change the environment, it makes it very difficult to sustainably alter the emergent outputs, which is what we are.

I found it easiest to simply replace and/or eliminate the major environmental problems rather than try modify them in-place. Nobody likes to be forced to live differently, and in my experience, the relationship's happiness was largely derived from the shared unhealthy activities.

After enough time living the healthier life as an individual, access to the healthier environments improves. Healthy members of the opposite sex that have also figured it out become attracted to you, employers who secretly discriminate against unhealthy employees start making offers, same for friend circles. But it's a privileged lifestyle, so it's not the easy/likely default option open to all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I quit sugar five years ago, didn't diet, and was surprised when I lost of ton of weight. It never came back. I can't be the only one.

</comment><comment><USER41> What I'd like to know is if there are any studies into whether the frequency with which a person weighs themself can have an effect on weight loss? The theory being the quicker feedback would lead to quicker results by motivating more change and making it easier for the person to stay motivated and correlate changes in lifestyle with weight loss.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yup - there are several studies [1][2] that have looked into this, and regular weighing (e.g. daily) looks like it has a small but significant effect that helps with weight loss.

[1] [https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa061883](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa061883)

[2] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3788086/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3788086/)

<comment><USER41> Thank you!

(It also looks like it helps with keeping the weight off once it's lost.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> They seem to have focussed on Diets but neglected _diet_.

As in rather than going on a Diet, adopting a different diet, a new habit if you will.

A Diet is a New Years resolution, a diet is for life.

The article says 75% of Americans are overweight. Therefore 25% aren't. What are they doing right? I doubt they're all having liposuction.

</comment><comment><USER43> Everyone has their own thing that works. Personally I calorie counted and lost 90lbs (250 to 160). I think the hardest part is keeping it off, especially if something is causing you to eat more than you should be in the first place or if you use it as a coping mechanism.

</comment><comment><USER44> As somebody who went from 240 to 180 lbs (I'm about 6 5" tall btw) and stayed there for long, the hard thing to cope with is homecooking. Once i had kids I had no more time for cooking, and hurried pasta/pizza dishes just drive me fat.

</comment><comment><USER45> Thorough and thoughtful.

</comment><comment><USER46> Under Medications he writes "Unfortunately, none of the drugs have generics yet, so they cost between $200-300 per month." ...and they are not too effective. ...and amphetamine is illegal and addicting

So: read more studies and discover DNP. A molecule that once was. Safer than many meds (of course unless you are an idiot and overdose). More effective than anything on Earth. But one that will never come back because guess what, it can't be patented. So happy research if interested. Just keep in mind there is plenty of misinformation (even on Wikipedia) that doesn't have any ground in scientific trials.

</comment><comment><USER47> It is very simple. There are 8000 calories in 1kg of fat. If you want to lose 10 kg you'll need to burn 80,000 calories through deficit, either through diet or exercise.

Personally I find it easy to live on a strict diet and limiting alcohol intake to once every few weeks

<comment><USER48> Everybody who's trying to lose weight knows it is about sustaining a calorie deficit. The problem is how.

<comment><USER47> Pick any number of options!

<comment><USER48> There goes that simplicity then. How do you pick one? How do you stay on it? How do you decide whether to switch, when to switch and what to switch to? How do you motivate yourself to try again once you've failed? And on it goes.

<comment><USER47> How do you pick any activity that encourages you to burn more calories than usual?

I would expect that comes down to finding something you enjoy doing.

Exercise and eating well is a way of life. If your life dictates you do neither, you will get fat. I don't really understand how its complicated. You just do it for the benefits.

Personally I eat chicken and veg 5 days a week (with occasional carbs when I train), train for 3 days and climb once a week. I also mostly hit my 10k steps per day.

<comment><USER48> I mean this respectfully. Think about it this way:

If there's an obvious solution that so many people are having trouble implementing, what is more likely?

1\. That all those people are stupid or have no willpower, or 2\. that the obvious solution doesn't work for everyone?

<comment><USER47> They have no willpower. You are the only person who controls what you eat everyday. If you are in stuck in an office you need to block out time for exercise.

How can there be any other excuse?

I know people who look great and eat entire cakes each day but they do 4 hours of high intensity exercise everyday. I can't do that as I am fundamentally lazy and only exercise/diet for vanity.

<comment><USER48> IMO you have an oversimplified view of this based on limited experience. You have abstracted away the diverse and complex reasons this doesn't work for everyone behind the excuse that people make excuses. It's not so simple. People are different; their circumstances are different; we can't just write them off by blaming them for being obese or addicted.

<comment><USER47> A legitimate reason I can think of is that eating healthy food is expensive and people in poverty can't afford the luxury or spare the time.

I have meals prepped and delivered twice a day and a trainer 3 times a week which obviously helps somewhat

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Fasting works best for me

<comment><USER50> Do you mean intermitten fasting or longer than 24h? Did you consult your doktor before longer fast?

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> You ever read about other people's experiences and it seems utterly alien to you? SSC had a post sort of on this theme[0]. I just don't understand how people can fail to lose 5% bf. Over 12 months, even! Just eat a bit less. 100kcal per day is enough to lose 5 kilos in 12 months, how hard can it be to eat 100kcal less than normally? It's literally one slice of cheese.

I have regular cut periods where I lose more than 5% in a matter of weeks and it's the most trivial thing in the world. What are these people doing?!?

[0] [https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/17/what-universal- human-e...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/17/what-universal-human- experiences-are-you-missing-without-realizing-it/)

<comment><USER52> As someone who has never smoked, never had more than a few drinks, and never done heroin, I find that it takes zero effort to not buy cigarettes, not buy drugs, and not drink to excess. What could be easier than not doing something, after all? I just have to sit here and play on my computer. And yet, obviously, many people find doing these things (or not doing them, rather) to be incredibly difficult. I can't just shrug that off, even if I lack any personal experience with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> If that stat that _almost 25% lost 5+% of BW using a placebo_ is true, then the most cost-effective treatment is to give everyone placebos.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is a good point - I'll caveat this in the post. Most medication/placebo studies tend to involve a bit of coaching in addition to the medication, usually 1 session per month or less with instruction on diet and exercise. So the 25% result is essentially "coaching-lite + sugar pill", which may be considerably more expensive than a simple placebo. This result could be much weaker if it's just the placebo alone.

<comment><USER17> Not only that, but tracking alone raises a lot of awareness and a tendency to be more "healthy" or compliant.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> ALL DIETS WORK IN THE SHORT TERM... The problem is keeping it off.

Please, please, please read the Obesity Code by Dr. Jason Fung: [https://www.amazon.com/Obesity-Code-Unlocking-Secrets- Weight...](https://www.amazon.com/Obesity-Code-Unlocking-Secrets-Weight- ebook/dp/B01C6D0LCK)

He provides all the science behind the current obesity epidemic, backed up with studies done on humans.

Obesity is a hormonal problem... Insulin makes us fat.

Current fads suggest eating ALL THE TIME.

This puts people in a state of high insulin all day, everyday. This is bad.

Intermittent fasting based around a common sense diet (limit sugars and starchy food to special occasions) will lower insulin levels, and cause the body to burn fat instead of insulin.

The keys is not what to eat, but when to eat and how often... and drink Apple Cider Vinegar. :P

<comment><USER29> You are probably downvoted because there isn't enough convincing evidence for insulin hypothesis. I like Jason Fung and I love the idea of fasting for health and weight-loss. I think though that advocates of both fasting and low- carb make a mistake getting too attached to insulin. They may die on this hill while being right all along but for different reasons.

My understanding is that we don't know if it's insulin or something else that makes many people wanting to eat less once they are accustomed to regular fasting or low-carb diet. It would be better to focus on a proven fact that it does work for many people and trying to understand the mechanism instead of picking just one possible one (insulin) and staking everything on that being full explanation.</comment></comment>


How the Times Zeroed in on Key Facts in 900 Pages of Documents in 10 Minutes - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/reader-center/times-documents-reporters-cohen.html <comment><USER2> In some part by leveraging an optical character recognition tool to do keyword searches</comment>