Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements - <AUTHOR> https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/11/10/666545527/vitamin-d-and-fish-oil-supplements-disappoint-in-long-awaited-study-results <comment><USER2> "Fine and Manson stressed that vitamin D and the omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil are important nutrients, but the best way to get them is as part of a well-balanced diet. That includes eating fatty fish like sardines, tuna and salmon, and vitamin-D fortified cereals, milk, and orange juice."

Ah, okay. So instead of taking supplemental Vitamin D, you should get it from natural sources, such as..... foods that have been artificially fortified with supplemental Vitamin D.

<comment><USER3> It's espacially weird given that D vitamins can be produced easily in the human body as long as you expose the skin to the sun. It's in no way required to be provided from external sources.

A daily 15 minutes of exposure for the face and forarms is enough, and it contributes to recalibrate the mood and circadian rythm as well. It's free, healthy, and simple. Why would anyone recommand a supplement to people that have access to the sun is beyong me.

Omega 3 is harder, but still.

<comment><USER4> It's not free or simple if the sun doesn't shine where you live.

<comment><USER5> And even when it does shine the critical UVB spectrum may not pierce the athmosphere at a strong enough intensity for the body to produce vitamin D.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Study linked was not the biggest cardiovascular health news of today--

This was: [https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1812792](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1812792)

A single purified component of fish oil - EPA, did lead to a 25% relative risk reduction on top of statin treatment. This is a huge result with off the charts p values.

<comment><USER7> Importantly the results were only positive for those:

> Among patients with elevated triglyceride levels

Much like low dose aspirin its possible this is a bad idea for the average person unless you are already showing signs of heart disease.

<comment><USER8> How is low dose aspirin bad for the average person? It is an anti- inflammatory, and inflammation is a leading theory of potential disease causation for a number of diseases. Daily low dose aspirin is associated with a significantly lower all-cause mortality in average people.

<comment><USER9> > How is low dose aspirin bad for the average person?

There's a small dollar cost, and there's this whole section: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Adverse_effects](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Adverse_effects)

<comment><USER8> Nothing there suggests it is bad for the average person. The average person will lower their chances of dying by taking daily low dose aspirin. The average person does not have a sensitivity to aspirin, and the side effects of high dose aspirin don't apply.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Dark-skinned office-working New Yorker here. Neglected blood tests for years. Took a significant other to realise that, every winter, I'd start eating tinned sardines by the caseload. Once I began supplementing, on doctor's orders after a blood test, the cravings stopped. Guess what's super-rich in Vitamin D?

<comment><USER11> Yeah I came here to say this. I'm sure people do take vitamin D to stave off heart disease and cancer but that was never my intention.

I live in scandinavia so every autumn I start taking one vitamin D pill a day to keep my spirits up during the long darkness.

I believe it helps and I have no illusions of preventing any diseases with it, except winter depression.

<comment><USER12> Came to say this. I've lived in London for 3.5 years and first winter got really depressed - originally from NZ and we have more light. Tried meditation and exercise and it kind of worked, but still not great. Next one and all since just took vit D everyday and the change in mood through winter has been remarkable.

<comment><USER13> What dosage did you take?

<comment><USER14> I take for example a 5000mg poll every two days. But in winter I take it every day.

<comment><USER15> You probably mean 5000 IU, which is equivalent to 125 micrograms (of vitamin D).

<comment><USER16> I don't remember where I read this but I heard 2000 IU is the minimum to be effective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> [https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1809944](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1809944)

Abstract: 'It is unclear whether supplementation with vitamin D reduces the risk of cancer or cardiovascular disease, and data from randomized trials are limited. Methods

We conducted a nationwide, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, with a two- by-two factorial design, of vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) at a dose of 2000 IU per day and marine n−3 (also called omega-3) fatty acids at a dose of 1 g per day for the prevention of cancer and cardiovascular disease among men 50 years of age or older and women 55 years of age or older in the United States. Primary end points were invasive cancer of any type and major cardiovascular events (a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes). Secondary end points included site-specific cancers, death from cancer, and additional cardiovascular events. This article reports the results of the comparison of vitamin D with placebo. Results

A total of 25,871 participants, including 5106 black participants, underwent randomization. Supplementation with vitamin D was not associated with a lower risk of either of the primary end points. During a median follow-up of 5.3 years, cancer was diagnosed in 1617 participants (793 in the vitamin D group and 824 in the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88 to 1.06; P=0.47). A major cardiovascular event occurred in 805 participants (396 in the vitamin D group and 409 in the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.12; P=0.69). In the analyses of secondary end points, the hazard ratios were as follows: for death from cancer (341 deaths), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.02); for breast cancer, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.79 to 1.31); for prostate cancer, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.07); for colorectal cancer, 1.09 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.62); for the expanded composite end point of major cardiovascular events plus coronary revascularization, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.08); for myocardial infarction, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.78 to 1.19); for stroke, 0.95 (95% CI, 0.76 to 1.20); and for death from cardiovascular causes, 1.11 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.40). In the analysis of death from any cause (978 deaths), the hazard ratio was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.12). No excess risks of hypercalcemia or other adverse events were identified. Conclusions

Supplementation with vitamin D did not result in a lower incidence of invasive cancer or cardiovascular events than placebo. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; VITAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01169259.)'

<comment><USER17> I'm curious as to whether 2000 IU per day is considered a large dose by the HN community. I've a bottle of 5,000 IU.

<comment><USER18> This was in otherwise generally healthy people, so the dosage is going to be less than you'd give to a person with a deficiency.

A person with a moderate deficiency would probably get 5,000 IU. Doses up to 10,000 IU are fairly well tolerated.

So, no it's not a large dose. It's a modest dose.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> In my opinion, the best benefit of fish oil and Omega threes and vitamin D are in combating depression. This article did not touch on that. There is pretty good evidence that fish oil is one of the best supplements for combating depression because it is used directly in construction of neurotransmitter pathways.

I highly recommend reading Dr Mark Hyman's book the Ultramind Solution. It's loaded with great info regarding nutrition and how it affects your brain. It is truly life changing information. He also had a podcast called Broken Brain that is worth checking out.

Julia Ross' the Mood Cure is good too, the not as detailed (tho that can be good if you are feeling overwhelmed).

<comment><USER18> Fairly recent Cochrane review concludes:

> ... we do not have sufficient high quality evidence to determine the effects > of [omega-3] as a treatment for [major depression]. Our primary analyses > suggest a small-to-modest, non-clinically beneficial effect ... compared to > placebo; however the estimate is imprecise, and we judged the quality of the > evidence on which this result is based to be low/very low.

[https://www.cochrane.org/CD004692/DEPRESSN_omega-3-fatty- aci...](https://www.cochrane.org/CD004692/DEPRESSN_omega-3-fatty-acids- depression-adults)

Also, I'd be careful with Mark Hyman. He's controversial at best and associated with some fairly quacky organisations. I'm also automatically wary because his bibliography is wonder-fix followed by magic-cure - and medicine is never that simple.

I'm a student doctor. If the answer was easy we'd have found it, and we'd tell you about it.

<comment><USER20> Can you recommend any books similar to Ultramind Solution but with more helpful info, in your opinion?

<comment><USER21> From the amazon page about ultramind: "Three-time New York Timesbestselling author Dr. Mark Hyman unveils his groundbreaking program that shows how we can fix our broken brains by healing our bodies first. Based on the emerging field of Functional Medicine, Dr. Hyman presents a simple six-week plan to restore health and gain an UltraMind, one that's highly focused, able to pay attention at will, has a strong memory, and leaves us feeling calm, confident, in control, and in good spirits."

That sounds like a bookful of BS and pseudo science.

<comment><USER22> without knowing anything about the book, i believe it is possible based on many videos by dr. gregor of NutritionFacts.org. Many nutritional changes, such as eating berries and other antioxidants and cutting saturated fat and cholesterol, and adding whole grains and beans have measurable improvements om the hourly and day scale increasing serotonin and decreasing anxiety. Add a few forms of exercise, fasting and supplements and your mind can be very clear and powerful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> 2000 iu per day is well under the recommended dose per this 2014 study published in the journal Nutrients:

[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu6104472](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu6104472)

<comment><USER24> Indeed. If supplementing D3, at least respect the threshold value.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Except as fish oil supplements relate to heart attacks (headline is misleading IMHO):

> While the overall results were disappointing, there appeared to be a > beneficial effect when it came to one aspect of heart disease and fish oil: > heart attacks.

> Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent, which > is a "statistically significant" finding, says Dr. JoAnn Manson, who is > chief of the division of preventive medicine at the Brigham and Women's > Hospital in Boston. She led the research.

> Those who appeared to benefit the most were people who didn't ordinarily eat > much fish in their day-to-day diet, as well as African Americans, Manson > says.

> African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart > attack when compared to placebo, which is a "dramatic reduction," Manson > says. Further research is needed to confirm these findings, she adds, but, > "in the meantime it would be reasonable for African Americans to talk with > their health care providers about whether they may be candidates for taking > fish oil supplements."

<comment><USER26> Likewise a Vitamin-D deficiency can make your tongue swell a bit. Is it a long term health issue? No. But, is it annoying af to bite your tongue and mess words up, yes it is.

Edit: LOL downvotes for a straight up medical fact :D

<comment><USER27> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D_deficiency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D_deficiency)

Osteoporosis among other symptoms. Swelling tongue is not on the list.

<comment><USER26> Because Wikipedia is a medical reference.

<comment><USER27> Because Wikipedia is more reliable than a random guy from the internet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> So wait, what is disappointing about this:

"Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent, which is a "statistically significant" finding, says Dr. JoAnn Manson, who is chief of the division of preventive medicine at the Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. She led the research."

and

"African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart attack when compared to placebo, which is a "dramatic reduction,"

<comment><USER7> The fact fish oil and vitamin d have been touted for couple decades as helping prevent cancer?

I remember both my parents taking both regularly growing up in the 90s and they both separately mentioned cancer prevention as the big reasons.

<comment><USER29> I'm a big believer in fish oil. In my late 30s I experienced a consistent feeling of unwell ness and what I describe as "brain fog" so badly and consistently I went to the dr about it. Turned I had high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Dr wanted me to modify my diet and if it didn't improve he wanted to put me on statins(!)

Fish has never been part of my diet. Started using fish oil, eating Cheerios, vitamins and some excercise. Started makeung a point to include seafood 2 times a week. Long story short, 6 months later all my numbers were in line.

The most striking thing I recalled from this was the fish oil, brain fog went away, I felt a great deal more mental acuity.

Fast forward to today; that was all 8 years ago, in the interim I stopped all that and the brain fog and unwell ness are back. I started fish oil again, and the effect was immediate. I even remarked to my wife how much better I felt.

That's all anecdotal, and probably placebo effect anyway, ymmv.

<comment><USER30> As for the statins... Doc said we had to treat my high cholesterol and triglycerides. I was very reluctant to take statins so she said "OK try red yeast rice for 3 months but if it doesn't improve you're gonna have to take statins". OK. My cholesterol 320->220\. My triglycerides 300+ -> 115\. It turns out that lovastatin was identified as _one of_ the key molecules in the ancient Chinese remedy.

So that's my one data point, and the only one relevant _to me_ regarding statins.

<comment><USER31> It's not at all surprising that red yeast rice would be as effective as a prescription drug in lowering triglycerides. In fact, "Some red yeast rice products contain large amounts of monacolin K, which is chemically identical to the active ingredient in the cholesterol-lowering drug lovastatin." (from [https://nccih.nih.gov/health/redyeastrice](https://nccih.nih.gov/health/redyeastrice))

It seems statins have serious side effects such as nerve damage, so perhaps you should go with the exact dosage prescribed by a doctor instead of taking an unknown quantity of the same drug from natural sources.

<comment><USER30> I got the muscle aches that can come from statins. Lowered my dose and they went away. Thing is, the doc never saw anyone achieve the results I did with the prescription stuff. No need to support a broken patent system and get a doctor and pharma company involved.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Sooooooo... I did a little bit of digging here.

3 studies:

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>-

1st study about Vitamin D [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01169259](https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01169259)

2nd study about fish oil with a low dose, 1 gram [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01169259](https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01169259)

3rd study about a PROPRIETARY PRESCRIPTION variation of fish oil with a HIGH DOSE [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT01492361](https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT01492361)

Results:

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>---

1st study - no effect.

2nd study - no effect.

3rd study - "REMARKABLE degree of risk reduction".

The researchers are different but the HOSPITAL that conducted them is the same.

The HOSPITAL posted about BOTH studies at the same time (today): [https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press- re...](https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press-releases- detail?id=3189) [https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press- re...](https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press-releases- detail?id=3190)

IMHO, something smells a little bit ... FISHY in here LOL.

Amarin is a one-product medical "startup" trying to show that their fish oil variation works. Oh, they are also publicly traded. Their stock went up after this announcement. It has also 10x-ed this year. They are also trying to convince the FDA that it "works".

My opinion? Total fraudsters.

<comment><USER33> It is unclear what your suspicions are. You capitalized a bunch of words and concluded with "Total fraudsters". Can you tell us your specific issues with the studies?

<comment><USER32> See my other comments in the thread, the Forbes article quoting a few other cardiologists from other major universities.

Google around about the company and their drug Vascepa. Many people are skeptical about it and IMHO they have a point. Vascepa an extract from fish oil but is... prescription? Why? So they can extract hundreds of dollars from programs like Medicare when your doctor writes you a prescription about it. Vascepa does not seem to be any better than regular over-the-counter fish oil.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Why came up with this title?

""We are reporting a remarkable degree of risk reduction," says Dr. Deepak Bhatt, who headed the study and is a cardiologist at Brigham and Women's Hospital."

"Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent, which is a "statistically significant" finding".

"African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart attack when compared to placebo, which is a "dramatic reduction," Manson says".

"Overall, that study found there was a 25 percent risk reduction for patients taking the extract. These patients were less likely to die from heart disease, have a heart attack or stroke, be hospitalized for chest pain or need procedures such as angioplasty, stenting or bypass surgery, researchers reported."

<comment><USER2> Yeah, it's very stupid. "Fish oil slashes heart attack risk by a huge percentage--but it's not a Wonder Drug that cures all ailments. Disappointing!"

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I can't say I noticed a change in mood when taking D3.

However fish oil undeniably reduces dryness in the EYES, with and without contact lenses.

They do sell in pharmacy supplements for eye health, I think targeted at older people, and the dosage of EPA /DHA is very low. I didn't try those so I can't say how much is needed.

I took eg. Life Extension 700/500 epa/dha and for me the effect was 100% reproducible. On a day I took it, my eyes supported the contacts much better in the evening. Without supplements I could feel the difference.

I wish I could say as much about D3. I keep hearing how it's good for winter etc, but even though I am healing TRAUMA and have suffered anxiety for 20+ years before starting therapy.. i never noticed any obvious changes in mood when supplementing with D3 (which was averaging 3000-ish IU per day). I wish! (edit: and, I spend a ton of time indoors, and working on a PC.. so if they did anything I should have noticed?)

<comment><USER36> Hello,

I didn't noticed a lot of changes with 2000 IU but at 5000 IU the effect on mood is dramatic and quite noticeable. Being liposoluble the effect has quite a latency over several days.

It's basically the "summer vacation" feeling.

(Be carefult to take pure D3 not something mixed with calcium though: effective dosage of vit D. would bring into calcium overdosage.)

<comment><USER37> I've noticed my mood improves at higher Vitamin D dosages as well. I've currently been taking Solaray brand Vitamin D3+K2, which is 5000IU D-3, 50mcg K-2, 110mg Calcium, 84mg Phosphorus.

Since this contains calcium, is it harmful to take everyday? Should I try to find a different supplement?

<comment><USER36> No comment was about supplements that are 500IU + 110mg Calcium. If you 10x this does you will have too much calcium.

Vitamin D supplements can sometimes be underdosed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Man I am so confused. How is 28% reduction in heart attacks and 77% for african american men "negative" for both cancer and heart disease??? Am I missing something? Those results seem _HUGE_. Right?

</comment><comment><USER39> "At this point, if one is thinking about supplementation, either omega-3s or vitamin D, talking to your physician or healthcare provider is the next step" Does anyone actually talk to their doctor before taking a vitamin? What information could they possibly provide

<comment><USER40> I have a terrific new naturopathic doctor who actually cares about my health and will run blood panels frequently and let me know what lifestyle changes and supplements would help me. I never knew before that I was deficient in zinc. Before her though, most of my doctors were of the bland "if you aren't in extreme pain then it's not a problem" camp.

<comment><USER41> I would much rather have a "if you aren't in extreme pain then it's not a problem" doctor, than one who would over diagnose every minor issue.

<comment><USER42> I'd rather have a competent doctor than either of those.

<comment><USER43> And them listening to their patient is a necessary condition! A doctor who doesn't listen to his/her patient is a red flag.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> We should also note that the studies were only done on people _over 50 years old_ :

"... among men 50 years of age or older and women 55 years of age or older in the United States"

Maybe by then it's too late?

</comment><comment><USER44> I admit to some confusion: my wife and I take omega-3 supplements, eat fatty fish, and take vitamins D supplements because of the purported increase in brain health.

Still, a 25% decrease in heart decease for African Americans and people who don't eat fatty fish is a good result.

Also, re: "That includes eating fatty fish like sardines, tuna and salmon, and vitamin-D fortified cereals, milk, and orange juice." I don't like breakfast cereals, to many carbs, I prefer my morning carbs from steamed cauliflower, broccoli, etc. I decided to cut out dairy partly for health reasons and partly because of animal cruelty. I hate drinking commercially packaged orange juice, tastes like sugar. A fresh orange is tasty but does does not have artificially added vitamin D - so take vitamin D pills.

I am in my mid 60s and felt tired and low energy earlier this year. My doctor tested vitamin D levels, put me on vitamin D pills, and I literally felt good again within a week.

</comment><comment><USER45> In my opinion the biggest issue with meds, supplements, and health studies in general is that it's an n+1 issue. All humans are unique individual cases.

What works great for one person might not work for the majority. This doesn't mean a particular remedy or supplement should be cast aside.

Here is an example of where I wish the "health industry" would move:

[https://leapsmag.com/how-bacteria-killing-viruses-may- save-u...](https://leapsmag.com/how-bacteria-killing-viruses-may-save-us-from- antibiotic-resistance/)

[https://phagesdb.org/](https://phagesdb.org/)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy)

</comment><comment><USER46> Isn't fish oil also good for your joints?

EDIT: here's some information - [https://arthritisaustralia.com.au/managing- arthritis/living-...](https://arthritisaustralia.com.au/managing- arthritis/living-with-arthritis/complementary-treatments-and-therapies/fish- oils/) \- and without doing much research I've been taking it to prevent joint strains from running - not sure if that's worthwhile or not

</comment><comment><USER47> Been taking 10k IU of D3 for a few months now, managed to get my measurement from the teens or 20s into the 90s of whatever unit that's in. I believe 100 is the max of the healthy range. Can't tell the difference, but allegedly you're going to feel "worse" if you're low on this stuff.

It would be amusing to find out that it actually makes no difference at all and it's all placebo.

<comment><USER48> Yeah, I've tried the same (my theory was it would help mitigate the effects of SAD through the long, dark winter).

I've noticed no difference (though to be fair, it was hardly an empirical approach). I have a pretty well-rounded diet, so I assume I'm not deficient.

I do think that fish oil makes a difference, at least in terms of exercise.

<comment><USER49> Do you also take magnesium? Have you verified serum levels via blood work?

<comment><USER48> As I said, I have to admit it wasn't empirical, so no blood work.

I wasn't aware of magnesium supplements - what's the science behind it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> If anyone is wondering why the study results are being framed as "disappointing" to major media outlets, take a look at the disclosed financial conflicts of interest document. Lots of mysterious "consultant" fees paid out by major pharmaceutical companies who have an obvious incentive to bash any natural alternative to their drugs.

Also, the "placebo" used here was mineral oil, which has many known health benefits. Why not use some type of sugar pill? Talk about tipping the scale in favor of big pharma's desired results from the beginning. Past similar studies on fish oil (funded by big pharma) have even used an olive oil "placebo", which skews p-values even further. Imagine a weight loss study that told the placebo group to start running a mile everyday and eating healthier food....

</comment><comment><USER49> Exposing the scrotum/testicles to direct sunlight for 20 minutes/day increases testosterone significantly. I wonder if a sun/S.A.D. lamp would have a similar effect?

<comment><USER51> Citation needed

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Fellow Europeans under the GDPR, FTFY: [https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=666545527](https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=666545527)

<comment><USER53> That's a forced consent design if I ever saw one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Interesting. In the UK, the NHS suggests most people should routinely take vitaminD between November and March, but I wasn't aware that heart attacks were the main issue with vitamin D deficiency.

Also, though the studies are dubbed 'disappointing' in the second paragraph

> African-Americans in the study experienced a 77 percent lower risk of heart > attack when compared to placebo,

Isn't exactly chicken feed.

</comment><comment><USER55> Given these studies. I will stop taking fish oil. However, in light of further evidence by gwern as presented below, I will continue to take Vitamin D, even though my confidence in it is lessened.

[https://www.gwern.net/Longevity](https://www.gwern.net/Longevity)

<comment><USER56> I have my doubts on omega-3 supplementation as the amounts typically are not enough to change the omega-3:omega-6 ratios, which has been shown to have a big effect on hazard ratios for CVD. It looks like this study was for 1g of fish oil and there were no controls on dietary intake, so IMO the results aren't surprising.

I'd recommend that anyone interested in the health benefits of eating healthier... look into eating healthier. I really dig Marty Kendall's work on [https://nutrientoptimiser.com/](https://nutrientoptimiser.com/)

<comment><USER57> Algae and Fish oil bypass the preferential omega-6 metabolism - EPA & DHA are downstream metabolites, so there is no barrier.

Flax seed oil is still healthy but only for the lignans - only marine oils can effectively provide DHA and EPA. Though most commercially available products are DHA heavy, which no longer seems to be the beneficial conjugate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> I'm a little surprised by the combination of a study on low dose (1 g) of fish oil coupled with the recommendation to get fish oil from diet. When I eat a tin of sardines, I'm certainly getting more than a gram of fish oil. Am I missing something?

</comment><comment><USER59> Well, first, the study looked at cancers and heart disease. The conclusion is:

> there appeared to be a beneficial effect when it came to one aspect of heart > disease and fish oil: heart attacks.

> Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent,

</comment><comment><USER42> This reminds me of the study showing that a component of coconut oil can delay alzheimer's onset by years. There need to be more studies done with traditional remedies.

</comment><comment><USER60> It's been known for a while that supplemental omega 3s are probably best avoided until there's more data out there.

[https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/fish-oil-friend-or- foe-2...](https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/fish-oil-friend-or- foe-201307126467)

Vitamin C, E, and many other supplements have similarly questionable benefits with possible harsh side effects.

I wouldn't reach for almost any supplement unless a doctor + blood tests + my own research suggested I should. And even then I believe diet and lifestyle modifications could be attempted beforehand.

<comment><USER61> Just to highlight one of the points in the linked page: There was a recent study that correlated high levels of serum DHA with aggressive prostate cancer. It is not known whether the elevation in DHA from the subjects was due to fish oil supplementation or some other biochemical process.

Everything has side effects.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> > "statistically significant"

Why the quotes?! If the author doesn't understand what that means why report on science at all?

<comment><USER8> Because those two words were a quote.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> Glad to see this thread about scientific research didn't immediately devolve into speculation about nutritionology.

</comment><comment><USER64> It always seemed unlikely to me that any single substance that can be ingested as a supplement would have any significant effect on general malignancies. There are probably thousands of paths by which these can occur, one magic pill that would address them all is improbable to say the least.

</comment><comment><USER65> text.npr.org [https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=666545527&rid=1001](https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=666545527&rid=1001)

</comment><comment><USER66> TLDR; Overall, they showed that neither fish oil nor vitamin D actually lowered the incidence of heart disease or cancer. However aspect of heard disease that benefits is heart attack. Taking fish oil lowered the risk of heart attack by about 28 percent.

It is important to remember though D3 has other proven benefits.

<comment><USER67> I hadn't even heard of it being potentially beneficial to prevent heart disease and cancer.

I take vitamin D because it makes a massive difference to my mood during the gloomy months in Seattle.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> The broader significance is that fish oil was considered one of the most well supported supplements out there. Others like turmeric are less evidenced but maybe promising, and there's stuff like colloidal silver which is homeopathy nonsense. If fish oil does nothing for large swaths of the population, what do we really know about the efficacy of any supplements?

</comment><comment><USER69> Quite a large population in the the world lives at place where fishes aren't available.

So is it possible some people don't really need fish oil for well-being? Evolution might have rendered eating fish useless for these people.

<comment><USER70> Yes, absolutely. Fish oil is not needed at all. The EPA and DHA in fish was initially produced by algae anyway.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_fatty_acid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_fatty_acid)

The 2 essential fatty acids are:

\- alpha-linolenic acid (ALA, an omega-3 fatty acid). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha- Linolenic_acid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha-Linolenic_acid)

\- linoleic acid (LA, an omega-6 fatty acid). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linoleic_acid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linoleic_acid)

Linseed oil (flaxseed oil) is a good provider of essential fatty acids. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linseed_oil](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linseed_oil)

EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) or DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) are conditionally essential fatty acids.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_fatty_acid#Condition...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_fatty_acid#Conditionally_essential)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eicosapentaenoic_acid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eicosapentaenoic_acid)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docosahexaenoic_acid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docosahexaenoic_acid)

Experts recommend a vegan diet against heart disease and cancer.

E.g.

[http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red- meat/en/](http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19562864/?i=2&from=/27...](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19562864/?i=2&from=/27886704/related)

[https://www.eatright.org/food/nutrition/vegetarian-and- speci...](https://www.eatright.org/food/nutrition/vegetarian-and-special- diets/feeding-vegetarian-and-vegan-infants-and-toddlers)

[https://lustysociety.org/diet.html](https://lustysociety.org/diet.html)

<comment><USER8> >Fish oil is not needed at all. The EPA and DHA in fish was initially produced by algae anyway

People who lived in areas without fish also lived in areas without algae.

>The 2 essential fatty acids are

It is worth noting that there is basically no evidence that those 2 fatty acids are actually essential. A single study done in the 1930s is the basis for that belief. A study in which rats fed no fat got symptoms we now would consider indicative of vitamin B6 deficiency. This study was done prior to the discovery of vitamin B6. Although adding "essential" omega 6 fatty acids alleviated the rat's symptoms, later studies were able to alleviate the symptoms using vitamin B6 while the rats continued to receive absolutely no fats.

>Linseed oil (flaxseed oil) is a good provider of essential fatty acids

And linseed oil consumption is correlated with an increase in all cause mortality.

>Experts recommend a vegan diet against heart disease and cancer.

Experts recommend all sorts of things that contradict evidence. Like taking statins even though they increase mortality. Or switching from perfectly safe saturated fats to "heart healthy" trans fats even though it increases mortality. Or once trans fats were too obviously bad they simply changed their recommendation to "polyunsaturated fats" which are also correlated with increased mortality.

<comment><USER70> > People who lived in areas without fish also lived in areas without algae.

The point is that EPA and DHA is not made by fish. EPA and DHA can be bought in vegan form. EPA and DHA are not even considered as essential fatty acids. Unlike ALA and LA.

I have not seen any study what shows that ALA and LA are not essential. If you have one, please link it. I would like to know.

> And linseed oil consumption is correlated with an increase in all cause > mortality.

Link please.

> Or switching from perfectly safe saturated fats to "heart healthy" trans > fats even though it increases mortality.

What are you talking about ? Are yout talking about margerine and butter ?

But I agree that many so called experts are not experts.

Many organizations and in particular government organizations (e.g. EPA and FDA in the USA) affected by politicians are very prone to corruption and pleasing corrupting lobby groups like the food industry and the military industry and the fossil fuel industry.

But some truth is known in 2018.

[https://livinontheveg.com/omnivore-or- herbivore/](https://livinontheveg.com/omnivore-or-herbivore/)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl8zNztsoGg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl8zNztsoGg)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCMWctmCCqU&t=432](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCMWctmCCqU&t=432)

[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLrSGiXTX6Im72KTZRDln...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLrSGiXTX6Im72KTZRDlnwypJFfMYH8Vm)

<comment><USER8> >The point is that EPA and DHA is not made by fish

But that point is not relevant to the post you replied to, which was wondering aloud about human adaptation to the availability of fish. The availability of algae is the same as the availability of fish.

>I have not seen any study what shows that ALA and LA are not essential.

Have you seen one that shows it is? Because there are none.

>Link please.

I can't find the original study, just people talking about it. They gave up on the original premise as the linseed oil was killing people instead of making them healthy, so they ended up reporting on smoking and blood pressure.

[https://tidsskriftet.no/en/2012/01/life-expectancy-and- cause...](https://tidsskriftet.no/en/2012/01/life-expectancy-and-cause-death- men-examined-medical-check-ups-1964#reference-6)

>But some truth is known in 2018.

But people with agendas lying on their blogs or youtube isn't truth. Pretending carnivores are omnivores and then saying "look we're not like omnivores" is just deliberate dishonesty. We are not like carnivores. We are, 100% without any question, omnivores. Read literally any text on mammology, there is no debate, no controversy, no ambiguity. Poor studies like the adventist study vegan advocates like to cite may show benefits when they don't control for anything else. But properly defined and conducted trials show veganism is not associated with lower mortality: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4691673/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4691673/)

<comment><USER70> > But that point is not relevant to the post you replied to

Yes it is. Remember:

>>> So is it possible some people don't really need fish oil for well-being? Evolution might have rendered eating fish useless for these people.

> But people with agendas lying on their blogs or youtube isn't truth. > Pretending carnivores are omnivores and then saying "look we're not like > omnivores" is just deliberate dishonesty.

Yes we can it fresh meat and digest it. Even cows can digest milk and meat to some degree; remember the mad cow disease.

The human body works best with vegan food as main food or only vegan food in 2018 with modern vitamin supplements. This is a fact.

Regarding vitamin B12: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cavI_FnIrh4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cavI_FnIrh4) and [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5TLzNi5fYd- Tyz9vI6Q2...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5TLzNi5fYd- Tyz9vI6Q2QLxyFtMUjltf)

I am sure you have not watched the videos because otherwise your would reply differently.

Again, human physiology that you can not deny or call a lie:

[https://livinontheveg.com/omnivore-or- herbivore/](https://livinontheveg.com/omnivore-or-herbivore/)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXj76A9hI-o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXj76A9hI-o)

By far most humans do not like and do not eat raw meat.

Most humans do not even like predigested meat in the form of cooked meat or grilled meat without further additions like salt and spices and other plant based food for the taste.

<comment><USER8> >Yes it is.

No it is not, read the context you intentionally cut out: "Quite a large population in the the world lives at place where fishes aren't available".

>The human body works best with vegan food as main food or only vegan food in 2018 with modern vitamin supplements

There is no evidence to support your assertion. The fact that vitamin supplements are required in order to avoid dying is incontrovertible evidence that humans are not herbivores. Our digestive tract, dentition, and enzyme production are those of an omnivore. We have absolutely no characteristics of herbivores.

>Even cows can digest milk and meat to some degree

All mammals can digest milk, that is why all mammals produce milk. That has nothing to do with your claim. Meat fed to cattle is pre-digested in order to allow them to get some energy value from it. They can not digest it normally.

>Again, human physiology that you can not deny or call a lie:

It is a bunch of lies and deliberate nonsense. Claws do not define diet, that is a completely irrelevant characteristic to focus on. Dogs are not omnivores they are carnivores. Our closest primate relatives are omnivores just like us, not herbivores. Notice how you keep referencing vegan activists spouting nonsense on blogs and videos? That is not evidence. There is a reason every biologist in the US has read this book rather than watch vegan youtube videos: [https://www.amazon.ca/Mammalogy-Adaptation-Diversity- George-...](https://www.amazon.ca/Mammalogy-Adaptation-Diversity-George- Feldhamer/dp/0801886953)

>Most humans do not even like predigested meat in the form of cooked meat or grilled meat without further additions like salt and spices and other plant based food for the taste.

And your basis for this claim is that the vast majority of the population of earth consumes meat all the time? If lots of people choose to add additional flavorings to something they eat, then that means it isn't part of their natural diet? By that definition, the natural diet of humans is absolutely nothing, not even water.

<comment><USER70> I will not further defend the points that I have made and still make. You just call it lies and link a book that I will not buy. Probably because you can not find valid information against my standpoint on the internet.

Wolves are presented as typical carnivores in the linked video.

The web page puts dogs in the category of omnivores like many experts do or did.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_food](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_food)

[http://www.vetstreet.com/our-pet-experts/are-dogs- carnivores...](http://www.vetstreet.com/our-pet-experts/are-dogs-carnivores- heres-what-new-research-says)

I link these "vegan activists" because they were active to create the good videos that I can link.

I live in West-Europe and from primary school to university, the recommendation for food has always been less meat and less cheese and less fat and less candy and more vegetables including fruits and more fiber.

The benefits of a plant based or vegan diet have become only more scientifically validated and more accepted in the population. Also because of a growing acceptance that actions against climate warming and pollution and unsustainable and horrible animal farming are needed.

[https://xkcd.com/1338/](https://xkcd.com/1338/)

[http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red- meat/en/](http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19562864/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19562864/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27886704/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27886704/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21139125/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21139125/)

[https://www.eatright.org/food/nutrition/vegetarian-and- speci...](https://www.eatright.org/food/nutrition/vegetarian-and-special- diets/feeding-vegetarian-and-vegan-infants-and-toddlers)

<comment><USER8> >You just call it lies

You are literally linking to youtube videos by an infamous crank.

>link a book that I will not buy

You don't need to buy it. The point is, biology text books contradict your advocate fraud. Which is more credible?

>The web page puts dogs in the category of omnivores like many experts do or did.

Dogs are the same species as wolves.

>I live in West-Europe and from primary school to university, the recommendation for food has always been less meat and less cheese and less fat and less candy and more vegetables including fruits and more fiber.

And health problems have gotten worse. Funny how that works huh? Myocardial infarctions literally did not exist prior to the 1900s when "vegetable oil" was introduced to our diets. We consume far less animal fat than Victorians did, yet have far worse health. Hmmm.

>The benefits of a plant based or vegan diet have become only more scientifically validated and more accepted in the population.

There is no evidence to support that belief.

>Also because of a growing acceptance that actions against climate warming and pollution and unsustainable and horrible animal farming are needed.

That has nothing to do with veganism, it is a red herring vegans use to push their agenda on the back of environmentalism which people are more receptive to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> This headline is quite misleading (and arguably very biased toward white readers). It describes a marked improvement in outcomes for African American study participants.

So perhaps NPR views this as "disappointing" but the headline suggests broadly that everyone should stop taking those supplements, when in fact the results are far more nuanced.

HN's absurd title policy is using a clickbait (and misleading) title chosen by NPR and amplifying it.

<comment><USER72> HN's policy is just the opposite. It would be good to know what the guidelines are before calling them absurd!

" _Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait_."

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

<comment><USER2> This is absolutely a clickbait title.

A better one would be something like "Landmark Study On Fish Oil and Vitamin D Shows Fish Oil Reduces Heart Attacks, But Few Other Benefits"

<comment><USER73> Orig title was: "Vitamin D And Fish Oil Supplements Disappoint In Long-Awaited Study Results"

Current title is: "Long-Awaited Study Results on Vitamin D and Fish Oil Supplements"

The current title doesn't contain the conclusion which is much more neutral and invites for more reading. The current title is not clickbait.

<comment><USER71> It was fixed after my comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.

<comment><USER55> Show me a randomized control study of healthy people with lower all cause mortality from either diet or exercise, and I'll gladly change my ways.

<comment><USER56> One of the largest observational studies done, the PURE study (large, epidemiological cohort study of individuals aged 35-70 years (enrolled between Jan 1, 2003, and March 31, 2013) in 18 countries with a median follow-up of 7·4 years (IQR 5·3-9·3). Dietary intake of 135 335 individuals was recorded using validated food frequency questionnaires) includes statistically significant all-cause mortality data and is the best controlled for study yet.

Here are the abstract results: Higher carbohydrate intake was associated with an increased risk of total mortality (highest [quintile 5] vs lowest quintile [quintile 1] category, HR 1·28 [95% CI 1·12-1·46], ptrend=0·0001) but not with the risk of cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular disease mortality. Intake of total fat and each type of fat was associated with lower risk of total mortality (quintile 5 vs quintile 1, total fat: HR 0·77 [95% CI 0·67-0·87], ptrend<0·0001; saturated fat, HR 0·86 [0·76-0·99], ptrend=0·0088; monounsaturated fat: HR 0·81 [0·71-0·92], ptrend<0·0001; and polyunsaturated fat: HR 0·80 [0·71-0·89], ptrend<0·0001). Higher saturated fat intake was associated with lower risk of stroke (quintile 5 vs quintile 1, HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·64-0·98], ptrend=0·0498). Total fat and saturated and unsaturated fats were not significantly associated with risk of myocardial infarction or cardiovascular disease mortality. INTERPRETATION: High carbohydrate intake was associated with higher risk of total mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to lower total mortality. Total fat and types of fat were not associated with cardiovascular disease, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular disease mortality, whereas saturated fat had an inverse association with stroke. Global dietary guidelines should be reconsidered in light of these findings.

doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32252-3

See also: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31812-9

If your primary interest is in longevity, IMO your best bet is to eat less often:

10.1016/j.cmet.2014.02.006

10.1111/j.1474-9726.2012.00798.x

10.1126/science.1172539

10.1016/j.cell.2015.02.020

10.1111/acel.12338

10.1097/MCO.0000000000000239

10.1016/j.arr.2006.04.002

Also, exercise isn't bad either:

10.1371/journal.pone.0000465</comment></comment></comment>


Disney's Plan to Fly X-Wings over Park Speaks to Perception Manipulation Tactics - valiant-comma https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31249/disneys-plan-to-fly-x-wings-over-star-wars-park-speaks-to-perception-manipulation-tactics <comment><AUTHOR> Is this a submarine[1] article? Honestly reads like CIA agitprop regarding UFOs and the like. I mean, he quite literally says in the subtitle:

> should remind us that seeing shouldn't mean believing.

It's clear to anyone who has done research into UFOs that the whole phenomena was a US military psyop (I can provide sources if anybody asks). _However_ , the new stuff coming out from the community may finally reveal the truth: [2][3]

[1] [http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html](http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html) [2] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEWz4SXfyCQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEWz4SXfyCQ) [3] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ)

<comment><USER2> Paul's got a point there. Remember for a while they kept telling us that boy skirts were becoming the norm. Other than the occasional and very rare Utilikilt that I saw in one season and never again since, nope, there was no "norm" attributed to boy skirts.

But they kept hammering at it for a few years, and even had a few male runway models wearing boy-skirts. You still never see them out in the wild. A lot has to change before you will.

This is the other use of the term "social engineering." It doesn't always work. But it is always obvious in hindsight.</comment></comment>


"Hand-Drawn" Vector Graphics Editor in Javascript - <AUTHOR> http://stevehanov.ca/blog/index.php?id=93

<comment><USER2> A good idea might be to put a "styles" principle into other vector graphics tools that alter the line style to conform to certain principles. (maybe they do this already, I don't use much vector graphics software myself).

</comment><comment><USER3> Looks very cool. Worked well in a quick session. Reminds me of Raphael and others.

Shame the license doesn't seem to be clear in what it allows and doesn't. It just has a generic copyright statement, which strictly speaking means you can't do much with it.

</comment><comment><USER4> Doesn't work in FF2.0 (unsurprisingly).

BTW: a nice thing about xkcd's drawing is that the heads are slightly off- circular, to imply direction, tilt of head, and some cases even expression.

</comment><comment><USER5> I like it, but something is very wrong in Chrome (Dev track, Win7/64)...keyboard commands don't work, shapes stick in the corner, no way to stop drawing lines.

<comment><USER6> Double-click.

<comment><USER7> godDLL indeed, thank you

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Doesn't work in Chrome 188.8.131.52 ..... :)

</comment><comment><USER9> Works nicely on Webkit nightly.</comment>


Focusing on Problem vs. Focusing on Solution - <AUTHOR> http://www.knowledgebase-script.com/demo/article-400.html <comment><USER2> well i get the point but the example #1 is a urban myth - [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fact-or- fic...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fact-or-fiction-nasa- spen)

</comment><comment><USER3> Really good examples. It also matches with recent discoveries in quantum physics where they proved that reality is shaped by observer. Whatever we are focusing on it will make it grow. So if our focus is on the problem it will make it bigger, if our focus is on solution it will grow too.

That's why we say that we are in control of our own destiny, it just depends how we observe reality.

<comment><USER4> "It also matches with recent discoveries in quantum physics where they proved that reality is shaped by observer."

That's not what QM says, nor is it "recent". QM says the observer must _affect_ the system, but it need not be in any particular manner and it _certainly_ doesn't mean that the observer has a "special power" over the observed. What it means is (to a first approximation without getting mathematical) simply that if you want to detect a particle, you must interact with it in order to detect it; no interaction, no detection. It is not a special power of interaction that you are exercising or a mystical connection to the target system, it's just interaction.

All of the other apparent cases where observing the system in some manner has some effect on it are actually the effect of not interacting with the system until "later", again, not a "mystic" connection to the power of observation.

<comment><USER3> I suggests to watch these documentaries, The Secret and What The Bleep Do We Know.

Observer IS the creator. He shapes the reality on his own image and beliefs. It's not easy to grasp the whole concept, specially considering that everybody is projecting different realities and they have to be combined together, but to me this just confirms that the world is based on contradictions and if we are able to accept those contradictions we will understand more, but we will never understand everything. There is no single answer on any question, there is only an answer for that particular person and that's most far we can go.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This focus translates into the questions we ask to begin with.

What are we asking ourselves when we solve something? What questions are asking when defining the problem? If the problem definition is askew than ...</comment>


Moonforth - <AUTHOR> https://moonforth.github.io/ <comment><USER2> See also the X86 forth tutorial this is based off of, it's very good: [https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AlexandreAbreu/jonesforth/...](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AlexandreAbreu/jonesforth/master/jonesforth.S)

</comment><comment><USER3> Cool, but for some reason in seems to eat SPACE to page down.</comment>


Ask HN: What Is Snowflake's Software? - <AUTHOR> Snowflake was just in the news for their big IPO - raising $3.4B and garnering a $70B valuation: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2020/09/16/Snowflake-sets-new-software-IPO-record/7451600286729/
But after reading a few articles and browsing snowflake.com a bit, I still don't really get what Snowflake is.  Some articles mention AI, some cloud, there's talk of data lakes and data warehouses, a data marketplace, etc.
But what actually is it?  Is is Hadoop/HDFS with nice tools and consulting expertise on top?  Is it a data center in a box?
What the heck is this thing? <comment><USER2> It's a data warehouse engine, for running SQL queries, hosted on cloud EC2 instances and s3 storage (and Azure, etc. equivalents).

It's like Vertica or Redshift, or older examples like Teradata. It runs on a cluster of machines which process queries and data loading, etc. in parallel, for a read-heavy workload.

It offers some ability to scale up and down, and to throttle CPU independently from storage.

But it's not cheaper or faster than other products, which makes the scaling somewhat moot.</comment>


Historically huge Internet outage darkens much of the Midwest and Southeast - <AUTHOR> http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2015/08/04/major-att-outage-affects-much-tennessee-kentucky/31123019/

<comment><AUTHOR> I was in Owensboro KY today for a funeral and the experience was bizarre. Beforehand, I was WiFi tethering into my office, trying to commit some code. All of a sudden, it went down. I'm a cheapass on Straight talk, so that was my first suspect. Then I went to the funeral and asked to borrow a phone. Also dead. (Wordplay!) So was everyone else on all carriers. The only internet service was TWC through WiFi.

In my entire life, I've never experienced such a wide-ranging, universal outage for such a long time. 5 full hours in the middle of the day. Totally surreal.</comment>


Wisdom from Psychopaths? - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=wisdom-from-psychopaths <comment><USER3> I was expecting to read an article about understanding human nature without morality and respect clouding your judgment. Instead I read that psychopaths are clever at thinking up nefarious schemes to get what they want. I don't buy it as "wisdom." Anyone can think of evil ways to get what they want, as long as the situation is hypothetical. Just yesterday I posted a comment describing how if I ran a dating site I would screw over my customers by giving them the exact opposite of what was good for them because it would be more profitable for me [1]. Most people have fantasized about violence from time to time, and half the internet seems to advocate being a psychopath as the best way to get laid. It's the reality of a situation that stops people from being as "wise" as a psychopath, and, I would argue, there's no loss, because in a practical situation there's no point in seeing solutions that you won't execute in real life. Did the author's friends use the asbestos solution? I think not. It would be awkward to explain to friends, they would have moral scruples, and it might very well be illegal. If a non-psychopath and a psychopath both limit their imaginations to plausible options, the psychopath isn't any more wise for seeing options the non-psychopath doesn't.

[1] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5015068>

<comment><USER4> This was the problem I had with the article as well. It fails to point out, in conclusion, that these people are committed for life because they are extremely dangerous - and not just in theory, but because they have taken actions to achieve goals that have had damaging and terrifying outcomes in the real world. Despite being 5 pages long, the article feels unfinished - <USER2> that is the author's idea of a teaser for a book, but for me as a reader it felt like a waste of time.

<comment><USER5> Well it states what Broadmoor is and says that it contains some of the most dangerous people in the country (and mentions the casual references to physical violence a couple of times). Does that not adequately describe how dangerous these people can be? It seemed fairly obvious to me at least.

It also points out that there's such a thing as going too far and that merely learning/using some of the techniques that psychopaths tend to exhibit (in a mild form) is potentially useful. It doesn't seem (to me at least) that he's directly advocating pretending to be a council inspector/whatever to kick people out of their home.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> barry-cotter The following review article by gwern gives a _much_ better overview of psychopathy.

<http://lesswrong.com/lw/fzy/notes_on_psychopathy/>

If the Scientific American article is representative of the book the world would probably have been better off had it never been written. For psychopaths other people are means, not ends. If wrecking your life will get them a more pleasant afternoon with no/small chance of danger to themselves they'll do it.

Psychopaths are indeed charming, ruthless and focused. They are charming because they got more practice at lying, cheating and stealing before they were fifteen than most get by the time they turn thirty. Vastly diminished anxiety helps too.

They are ruthless because to them other people are objects. You relate emotionally more like a dog than like a psychopath.

And mostly they are not focused on any long term goal. Their focus is very much on the now. They rarely have any long term goals or projects and if they do, remember, people are things. White collar or professional psychopaths may not go to prison for assault but they will lie, cheat and steal their way to any goals they may have.

For further reading on psychopathy read anything by Rober D. Hare, the dean of the field. I can recommend _Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths go to Work_

<comment><USER6> _You relate emotionally more like a dog than like a psychopath._

I don't think I understand what you mean here. What do you mean by this?

<comment> barry-cotter Have you ever felt guilt, love or anxiety? Dogs do, psychopaths don't.

<comment><USER6> Ah, makes sense. I see what you mean now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I find psychopaths incredibly interesting. Probably because I recognize that I am about the furthest thing from one. I incessantly worry about the future and the consequences of what I'm currently doing. I always wonder what people are thinking, what they are thinking about others, and what they are thinking about me. It takes me 50 minutes to type a short email because I'm constantly playing out the scenarios of how it comes across to others in my mind. In fact, I'd say I edit almost all the posts I make on HN multiple times after I've posted them. And finally, I have a tendency to become really sad upon hearing sad news. I avoid the news for this reason. And although I love reading about startups, I could never imagine myself leaving a secure, stable job unless I had very high confidence that my startup would succeed.

This sort of thinking has obvious negative drawbacks. Social interaction becomes a chore because you think you're never going to come across positively, so why interact at all?

I've always wished that for just a day, I could have a psychopathic personality -- just to see how things work out differently. (Realize that psychopathy is not the same thing as evil or immoral by the way).

<comment><USER8> is there a term for the opposite of psychopaths? why is intense concern for what others think of you and how you react considered normal?

<comment><USER9> It's hard to talk about opposite.

Some people with borderline personality disorder have a hyperactive amygdala - this means they're hyper aware of perceived risk and what people think about them, and what they think about themselves.

BPD has a high correlation with various eating disorders and with attachment problems.

Sometimes people with BPD can be involved in horrific deliberate self mutilation, but without wanting to die at that point.

I guess that comes quite close?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> As I understand it, psychopathic traits are very good for getting what you want _in the short term_. If this author's interview subjects had appreciated the _long-term_ consequences of their antisocial behavior, they wouldn't be behind bars.

<comment><USER11> Effective psychopaths never end up behind bars. They climb the corporate ladder. I've seen them in action and, as bad as they are for the companies they work in, you can't come away from seeing one in action without thinking, "Damn, he's good".

The violent ones are the lower class of psychopaths, and most prisoners aren't psychopaths. The smarter, high-class psychopaths are the corporate back- stabbers. They learn how to "manage up" because the ROI is so high.

<comment><USER12> >>most prisoners aren't psychopaths

" _In a typical prison population, about 20 percent of the inmates satisfy the Hare definition of a psychopath, but they are responsible for over half of all violent crime._ "

<http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html>

Your claim is true but it is an oversimplification. There is at least a factor of ten over representation, since 1-2% of the total population are psychopaths.

Edit: Considering the large incarceration rates in the USA (more than 1% of the adult population), 10-20% of the total number of psychopaths should be in prison there... Oh my!

Edit 2: Consider 50% of all violent crime committed by 1-2% of the population... Everything else pales.

<comment><USER11> _Your claim is true but it is an oversimplification. There is at least a factor of ten over representation, since 1-2% of the total population are psychopaths._

Many HN posters (including myself) have a genetic trait that makes them about 10 times as likely to commit a violent crime: the Y chromosome.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> We already idolize psychopaths. Ruthless CEO types and people who generate "success" by whatever means. This article goes one step further. Its author suggests that actually more of _that_ is needed in today's society and sets out to interview psychopaths on how they solve problems. Turns out, they do it by employing deception and (sometimes non-physical) violence.

Even forgetting for a moment that we're actually soliciting murderers and rapists for advice on social situations, am I really the only one who has a problem with this? Is _more_ callousness, more dishonesty, and more manipulation really what's missing from our society?

</comment><comment><USER14> How would the _psychopath's lack of empathy_ differ from the _autistic / asperger's lack of emapthy_?

It reminded me of the axis of hypo-mentalist <\--> hyper-mentalism from here <http://edge.org/conversation/the-imprinted-brain-theory> (second figure, ignoring the genetics parts for this discussion) ...but I don't know where would autism and psychopathy would relate and differ. They are certainly very very different things, but I can't think of a simple conceptaul framework that would show their similarities and differences.

<comment><USER15> This is a very naive generalisation, but, as far as I understand, psychopaths can be very good at assessing other people's mental state, but do not /feel/ it like most people do. People on the autistic spectrum find it very difficult to recognise what other people are feeling.

<comment><USER6> That's a good and correct way of explaining it in a few words. Of course, there is nuance, but it gets the point across.

Psychopaths _observe_ but don't _feel_ or _care_.

Autistics are handicapped in their observations, although they may feel and/or care.

<comment><USER16> Very true as autisim which aspergers is part of spectrum wise are classified as learning disabilities and with that mean that the capacity to empathise is there, just not as quick at learning those aspects. A psycopath on the other hand can clearly see those connections and empathise, its just that they don't care too and do not see why they should. Think of it as comparing somebody with a broken leg who finds it hard to walk in contrast to somebody who has fully working legs but sees no point in walking.

<comment><USER14> the broken leg and walking analogy is quite cool!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> There was a recent NPR interview with the author of this book.

<http://m.ttbook.org/book/kevin-dutton-wisdom-psychopaths>

</comment><comment><USER18> This is an excellent and compelling book about psychopaths: [http://www.amazon.com/Without-Conscience-Disturbing-World- Ps...](http://www.amazon.com/Without-Conscience-Disturbing-World- Psychopaths/dp/1572304510)

</comment><comment><USER19> This raise the question if the best entrepreneurs should be psychopaths. Investors seam to favor the psychopath personality characteristics (taking risks, focus, bent rules to reach goal = hack the system, etc.).

It also seam that people with moderated psychopathy might be socially and professionally advantaged and might thus, in the long term, become the dominant humans and the future product or our on going evolution process.

<comment><USER20> New YCombinator Question: Tell us about a time you have tortured a pet/started a fire?

:-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> My parents used to have a saying: "He was so charming he could tell you to go to hell so you were looking forward to the trip."

</comment><comment><USER16> A very nice read and if anything too short, want to read more.

The ability to abstract oneself from the problem in a way that enables you to think about the problem is certainly something many would wish to be able to do better in at least one area in there lives. I find it easy to handle most things but anything personal, well I just end up like most and think about every negative permuation more than resolving the issue.

Though in a sence it is the ability to regret things that too me is the seperation that divides most.

I often say if 51% of the population were psycopaths then they would not be psycopaths but normals and the other 49% would be the exceptions and outcasts in many ways.

Ironicly in todays society that is against drugs and can't cope with somebody saying I've had a good life, can it end now we seem too impose the majority will upon them. Indeed if you said I want to die to a doctor and even explained why, many would probably push you to drugs that remove the emotional negatives and or section you in a mental hospital until you towed the line if I want to live even if the World is utterly insane.

Many a wise word is said by what people lable as `mental` patients and with that it is good to see the lable removed and the flash laid upon the bones so to speak with regards to psycopathic traits. When you break it down and look at various jobs and roles in society then you can certainly see that it is a set of skills most would envy. Then only negative is the big gotcha of impossing your will upon others to the detrement of there quality of life. That all said many bankers and financers happily ruin peoples lives in a more agonising way than any mental of phsical torture as we know it and with that have defined legaly allowed means to do what is in effect psycopathic traits. When a bank reposses a house do they send in councelors and break the news over a hot beverage, no they do it in a letter and with that are about as cold as any psycopath could ever come up with.

But we are talking about psycopaths who have crossed a legal moral line like murdering somebody and getting caught. Yet the same actions can be done in far more legal and less liable ways and means if you take the right approach. I'm sure there are psycopaths who have done such things and others who just maybe work in jobs like banks or important positions which enable them a more fine control upon there enviroment too effect others in more subtle indirect ways. After all for those of us who think about what can go wrong and waste that 90% of the time worrying about the unhappened, maybe that in itself is used to out own detrement if leveridged by somebody mindful of such weakness's.

After all not all psycopaths are criminals, we as society have just labeled them by default and with that there exist alot of predispositions that society places as a collective upon others and in many ways when you apply labels and blanket definitions and sterotyping then isn't that how racisism started.

So society could learn and should learn from them, after all everybody has something unique about them and with that you can learn something from every single person on this planet a impossible task but certainly one that should not be dismissed in a way that you ignore by default whole area's/groups/types/variations. That is probably the first leason you can learn and with that the most important one in my book.

<comment><USER22> > When a bank reposses a house do they send in councelors and break the news > over a hot beverage, no they do it in a letter and with that are about as > cold as any psycopath could ever come up with.

interesting that you mention this, because a "bank", or in general, a corporation can be considered a psychopath. If you watch the documentary "The Corporation" (freely available on thepiratebay), it shows you the criterias that they used to measure a corporation that leads to this conclusion. But number 1 cause is the requirement of a corporation to make as much money for its shareholder as possible, and the CEO/chair/president/etc is legally bound to do this.

<comment><USER23> The myth that a company only has a goal to make money for its shareholders is wrong. Or to do only what they desire for that matter.

[http://hbr.org/2010/04/the-myth-of-shareholder- capitalism/ar...](http://hbr.org/2010/04/the-myth-of-shareholder- capitalism/ar/1)

I'll extract the money quote:

Oddly, no previous management research has looked at what the legal literature says about the topic, so we conducted a systematic analysis of a century's worth of legal theory and precedent. It turns out that the law provides a surprisingly clear answer: Shareholders do not own the corporation, which is an autonomous legal person. What's more, when directors go against shareholder wishes—even when a loss in value is documented—courts side with directors the vast majority of the time. Shareholders seem to get this. They've tried to unseat directors through lawsuits just 24 times in large corporations over the past 20 years; they've succeeded only eight times. In short, directors are to a great extent autonomous.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Seems like one of the psychopaths figured out strategies from Neil Strauss' the game all by himself.

<comment><USER25> Or you're missing a connection between the two.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Is it from Cosmopolitan or Maxim? GQ?

</comment><comment><USER27> It almost sounds as if she wants to be killed (stuff like that has happened before, prisoners taking their therapists hostage, for example). What a silly idea, sorry.</comment>


Xenotransfusion as a way to skip testing? - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenotransfusion <comment><AUTHOR> Ethical implications aside, you guys think think this might work?</comment>


Emacs vs. WebStorm for Node.js Development - <AUTHOR> https://spin.atomicobject.com/2016/01/26/webstorm-nodejs-development/#.Vqd9ca3DCqg.hackernews <comment><USER4> The new Webstorm version coming up is several times faster, its amazing. On a Mac its so fast its literally like using Sublime.

This is due among other things due to their upgrade to Java 8.

This is the link to the early access program [https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/WI/WebStorm+EAP](https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/WI/WebStorm+EAP)

<comment><USER5> Are the VIm mode issues he mentioned improved? I keep moving back to VIm because while all of these tools make excellent IDEs none of them are great editors.

The other thing that drive me a bit nuts is the multiple versions. Webstorm vs Rubymine. I build on Rails, but do most of my UI work with Angular+JS+Webpack. So which should I use Rubymine or Webstorm?

It's all too confusing.

<comment><USER6> I really don't know what issues the author is referring to. I have used IdeaVim for PyCharm and was very satisfied with it. It has its own vimrc file which allows you to not only copy paste your existing bindings, but also keeps them separate form your default bindings in a clean way.

If you compare this level of support for Vim with MonoDevelop, you'd realize just how good it actually is.

<comment><USER7> I have the same issues w/ the vim plugin as the author(especially re: the weird "middle" state)

<comment><USER6> Are you using the mouse when this is happening?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Symbol and definition lookup is another great feature of WebStorm. While Emacs can find symbols and definitions in a single file via Tern, ..."

Actually, tern has _tern-find-definition_ which works not only in a single file. You can jump in to other modules in your project or to node_modules. And there is _tern-pop-find-definition_ to return back. For methods of native js objects tern even opens browser with related MDN page. But WebStorm way better in debugging, that's true.

<comment><USER9> >Actually, tern has tern-find-definition which works not only in a single file.

I haven't been able to make this work outside my current file. Perhaps I'm just configuring tern wrong :(

<comment><USER8> This .tern-project config works for me:

      {
        "libs": [
          "browser"
        ],
        "plugins": {
          "node": {},
          "es_modules": {}
        }
      }

Your project files must have "correct" format, e.g. _require( 'relative_path')_ for imports and _module.exports_ / _exports_ for exports (or es6 _import_ and _export_ ). Example for AMD format (requireJS) can be found here - [http://ternjs.net/doc/manual.html#configuration](http://ternjs.net/doc/manual.html#configuration)

<comment><USER10> I can't get it to search outside the standard node files using the above config. I can't get it to be aware of my code in the project.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I personally moved to visual studio code (from WebStorm ) which has a good debugger for Nodejs and a few features that are really handy ( support for .d.ts definitions for node modules ... ). I usually don't use MS products but they did an impressive job with that IDE, no question.

<comment><USER12> VS Code has become the editor I find myself using most often because it usually does things that I do with a little more elegance and ease than other editors. One thing I see people complain about, as I used to, is that it doesn't have a file tab interface and it only puts files you have changed in the "working files" area, meaning if you open a file to view it you can lose track of it. However, I discovered clicking on the file name of the open file reveals a drop down of most recent files. After using it for awhile, I no longer miss having multiple files open in tabs.

<comment><USER13> You should consider using keyboard navigate files CTRL+P - shows list of recently opened files and it's a fuzzy search dialog - no mouse involved.

My gripe with VisualStudio code file tree is that it doesn't have icons - <USER2> is actually pretty huge for me - I use the file tree when I'm reorganizing code structure and need a good overview of things - for all it's failings as a text editor Atom file tree is really nice with the icons addon - <USER3> something like that shows up for VSCode.

That and YouCompleteMe for C++ and I'd switch all the way to VSCode, and I have no doubt that is going to happen so I'm just waiting now (too little time to work on it ATM otherwise I would start it)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I do node.js dev w/ emacs, and my setup is pretty similar to the author's: magit, j2mode, tern + auto-complete-mode, etc.. It's pretty good. I haven't used WebStorm, but I've had stellar experiences w/ IntelliJ that lead me to believe its probably pretty good.

>While Emacs can find symbols and definitions in a single file via Tern

Tern supports node.js module loading so this should work across modules.

Does WebStorm have it's own proprietary debugger?

<comment><USER9> >Tern supports node.js module loading so this should work across modules.

This hasn't been my experience. I've tried various term commands and configuring tern to do things like eagerly loading project files, but it still only works for me in a single file. Do you have any links to docs on how to do this?

<comment><USER15> I literally just installed tern in atom a few minutes ago and it works. This is the .tern-project file I generated, but I have no idea if it's optimal.

{ "ecmaVersion": 6, "libs": [], "loadEagerly": [ "node_modules/lodash" ] }

I'm definitely getting lodash method lookups and they work well.

I hear it's not a good idea to throw all of node_modules at tern -- but the same applies for WebStorm.

<comment><USER9> Cool! I'll try tweaking my config tonight to see if i can have more success.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> What would take Node integration in Emacs to the next level would be to do something like the various Lisp implementations and their Emacs modes (SLIME, Geiser, etc.) do: Talk to a running program to get information.

When I develop Scheme with Geiser, it knows which module I'm working in currently and it knows how to jump to the definition of any symbol by inspecting the source information attached to any Scheme object. I can quickly jump to the REPL or evaluate arbitrary expressions. No ctags/etags or other static analysis tools, just a REPL. It's a really productive way to write and debug code.

<comment><USER17> That's how I write Ruby in Emacs. I have pry running in one pane, where I can write code with full context, then pull it across into the implementation.

<comment><USER16> This doesn't sound like the same thing. Do you use an Emacs mode that is able to talk to the Pry REPL and retrieve information about the code you are working with?

In addition to the other stuff I mentioned, Geiser also gives me symbol autocompletion, automatically shows me the printed representation of the value under the point, shows me the signature for the current procedure I'm working with, and shows docstrings if I press a special key combo. Maybe I didn't make this clear in my previous post, but Geiser does all of these things _in the source buffers_ themselves, not just in the REPL buffer. If there's anything resembling this for Ruby or JavaScript I would love to know about because those are the two languages I am paid to work with.

<comment><USER17> For me, coding in a debugger is a superior experience to coding with static type info - because I have data too, not just types. Ie completion isn't the big win - seeing live results of processing data is.

<comment><USER16> I can't tell if you are agreeing with me or if we are miscommunicating. Seeing live results of processing data is exactly the type of thing I do with Geiser in Emacs. No static analysis.

<comment><USER17> If the information includes local variables and parameters, then we are agreeing; if not, then we are disagreeing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Here are some helper commands I use to resolve JavaScript modules within emacs.

The basic idea is to extract the string inside the require or import call, then ask a node subprocess to locate that file (using require.resolve), and use emacs to open that file.

I'm sure someone more experienced with elisp can take it to the next level.

See the interactive commands section towards the end of the file.

[https://github.com/ustun/emacs-helpers-for- js/blob/master/uo...](https://github.com/ustun/emacs-helpers-for- js/blob/master/uojs.el)

</comment><comment><USER19> I tried Emacs many times, but I still can't understand its appeal. Yes, everything can be changed, but there are layers and layers and layers of legacy code, cryptic keystrokes and shortcuts from 30 years ago, conflicting packages, elisp (I don't have anything against Lisp in general, but this particular dialect is quite quirky), etc etc.

<comment><USER20> try spacemacs!

[http://spacemacs.org/](http://spacemacs.org/)

<comment><USER19> This is what I see after I install Spacemacs on my Macbook:

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/e6vhweatnrb98ow/spacemacs.png?dl=0](https://www.dropbox.com/s/e6vhweatnrb98ow/spacemacs.png?dl=0)

Are you _sure_ it is something usable? :)

<comment><USER20> Strange... Reach out to the maintainers, they act pretty quickly on issues.

On my MBP and the ones of my colleagues, plus my windows machines, spacemacs works great and without issues the last couple of months.

It even convinced 10y+ vim and IDE users to jump ship after testing it for a week.

From my own experience: developing in go, elixir, javascript + react ... It feels exceptionally great with the correct "layers" installed. And being a top notch crosslanguage IDE is just the tip of the iceberg of what spacemacs/emacs actually is capable of...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> One of the things mentioned in this article was magit ([https://github.com/magit/magit](https://github.com/magit/magit)). It's a tool I also use a crazy amount when developing with emacs.

Just wanted to remind everyone not to forget to donate when you find a tool that really saves you time/brings you joy while you dev.

Magit takes donations @ [http://magit.vc/donations.html](http://magit.vc/donations.html)

I'm not at all affiliated with magit -- just donated and thought other people might feel the same if reminded.

</comment><comment><USER22> I'm a recent convert to WebStorm from VIM. It's quite amazing. Atom doesn't come close in any way.

</comment><comment><USER23> Those seeking a Node.js debugger may be interested in "devtool" which uses Electron to make Node.js apps run inside a Chrome DevTools instance.

[https://github.com/Jam3/devtool](https://github.com/Jam3/devtool)

</comment><comment><USER24> I'm persistently impressed (and happy) at the reslience of Emacs.

(Nice article too :)

</comment><comment><USER25> tl;dr: (everybody already know this) webstorm is better at debugging

<comment><USER26> Actually for me, this is much more important: "Symbol and definition lookup is another great feature of WebStorm. While Emacs can find symbols and definitions in a single file via Tern, WebStorm can actually inspect your whole project and find a definition, or at least give you a very pruned list of candidates to choose from."

not being able to Ctrl-click a variable or function really reduces my efficency (especially with code that I did not write entirely on my own).

<comment><USER27> I'm not sure how other emacs users do this, but I use `projectile-grep` to grep for symbols in a project all the time. In the spacemacs this is bound to `SPC g s p`.

<comment><USER9> I use helm-ag for the same purpose, but it still generally isn't as fast as CMD-b in webstorm. I should hook up something to do helm-ag for the symbol under point...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Is someone using WebStorm debugger successfully with Babel? I've never been able to make it work correctly (breakpoints in ES6 code, ES6 code in debugger, etc.) and it's infuriating. Any tips or guides?

<comment><USER29> Hi, I'm from the WebStorm team. Node.js debug with Babel should work in the latest WebStorm with Node.js v4, but to fix the issues with debugging with babel-node and Node.js v5, we're waiting for this pull request ([https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/4231](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/4231)) to be merged into Node.js, hope that will happen very soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> "Symbol and definition lookup is another great feature of WebStorm. "

Webstorm does a great job here. But unfortunately like any "intelligent" tool, when there is a bug in the system you end up with a very frustrating tool. Right now there is a bug that causes properties defined on objects to be available in the global scope. I filed this bug some time ago, wish it would get some attention:

[https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/WEB-19183](https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/WEB-19183)

</comment><comment><USER31> Webstorm is my defacto for both Node.js and Scala. Expensive but worth it for me (especially since I usually get it reimbursed by work).

<comment><USER32> Scala? In WebStorm?

<comment><USER19> For Scala, there is IntelliJ IDEA CE, which is free and open-source.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Summary of the article:

[https://www.cluelet.com/user/cluelet/emacs-vs-webstorm- for-n...](https://www.cluelet.com/user/cluelet/emacs-vs-webstorm-for-nodejs- development/)

Disclaimer : Wrote the above app for comparisons like these.

</comment><comment><USER34> I find it strange that you tried Webstorm and not Atom - considering Atom and all of it's packages are written in JavaScript (or transpiled to it), you can give it any functionality using the language you're already using - JS. I find Atom to be great for working with Node.js, and there's already an existing package for pretty much any functionality you could need, such as a Node.js debugger: [https://atom.io/packages/node- debugger](https://atom.io/packages/node-debugger)

</comment><comment><USER35> Wow. So many comments and no mention of Atom in a talk about JS IDEs/editors?

<comment><USER36> Using Atom is just pure pain, though the pain goes away _fast_ once you stop using it.

<comment><USER37> What pain are you experiencing? Im using it often and dont have any problems.

<comment><USER36> Well, it is just slow: bigger the code base / longer it runs, the more clearer this becomes. I used Atom for ~6 months, until I had enough and switched to sublimetext about 4 months ago.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I moved from WebStorm to Spacemacs. Mostly because although it's great, yet IdeaVim plugin for WebStorm is still lacking many things - any seasoned Vim user would need. Navigating in Emacs is WAY more better than in WebStorm. Another annoying thing is indexing. Searching and finding things in Emacs way faster. Also because WebStorm's code proprietary it takes them months to fix bugs. And they wouldn't even move a finger to fix something or implement new features if they don't see value proposition to sell more licenses.

</comment><comment><USER39> I tried Webstorm when embarking on a React Native project. What turned me back to emacs was that neither worked well with jmx in my experience. I tried Atom which did manage jmx excellently but it crashed and or locked occasionally which was a deal breaker.

I do love jetbrains products so I will probably try again with Webstorm at some point, but for now emacs will do. I use emacs for org-mode project planning as well as for its scriptable editing

</comment><comment><USER40> I had never heard of WebStorm. Apparently, it's "The smartest JavaScript IDE".

I started my career writing Perl CGI's, and have used, at various times, PHP, Python, Tcl, Ruby, Erlang, Java, Javascript and of course a lot of other stuff. Emacs has always done a good job, even if perhaps there was some editor/IDE that was a bit better for that specific langauge.

<comment><USER7> > "The smartest JavaScript IDE"

Lives up to that, IMO. I switched to WebStorm a couple months ago after using a combination of vim/Sublime and would never go back.

I do have the same issues the author has re: the Vim plugin though, could be much better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Partially offtopic. The author is doing

> "complex edits [in Emacs] using Vim macros"

This is a big surprise. I left vi for emacs in the early '90s when vi's macros were crippled, to say the least. I'm using vim for quick edits, mainly on servers or configuration files (sudo vi /etc/something). Did vim macros really become better than Emacs' ones?

<comment><USER42> Vim's macros are super easy to record and play back, repeatedly. It's the one thing I'll still use evil mode for.

Emacs isn't that much worse, vim is just faster and easier.

<comment><USER9> Exactly this. I have the muscle memory built so I can just bang out the macro really fast, and evil lets it contain a mix of vim or emacs commands.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Visual Studio Code! (drops mic)

</comment><comment><USER44> Last time I tested WebStorm it was exceptionally slow, so I used Sublime.

</comment><comment><USER45> My biggest gripe with the previous versions was the amount of memory it consumed (v 10). Hopefully they've resolved it.

</comment><comment><USER46> My workflow.. edit in whatever, with webpack dev server watching in another terminal window.

</comment><comment><USER20> somewhat related: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10973077](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10973077)

</comment><comment><USER47> > Another thing Emacs is much better at is Vim emulation.

At this point, I can't take the review seriously.

<comment><USER38> He's right though. it's very difficult to turn Vim itself into full-fledged IDE. Most of known modern editors and IDEs offer some sort of Vim emulation. And I've tried many of them. Visual Studio, Sublime, Atom, LightTable, IntelliJ, you name it - none of even close to what you can get in Emacs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Visual Studio with Node.js tools is better than WebStorm.

It has everything WebStorm does plus better "dumb autocomplete" like Emacs and it's free.</comment>


Thigh Bone Suggests Ancient and Modern Humans Overlapped - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/22/science/thigh-bone-suggests-ancient-and-modern-humans-overlapped.html?hpw&rref=science&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&_r=0 <comment><USER2> Was there previously a theory that there was a gap in time after ancient humans, whereafter modern humans just popped up one epoch?

</comment><comment><USER3> So it's possible that we killed them?

<comment><USER4> I think it's generally accepted that the Neanderthals went extinct because we out-competed them, at the very least. We're an astonishingly bloodthirsty batch of apes.

<comment><USER5> They weren't too inferior for us to breed with them though.</comment></comment></comment>


'MythBusters' co-host backpedals on RFID kerfuffle - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10031601-52.html <comment><USER2> This was bound to happen. The guy wants to keep his show, right? _I_ certainly want him to keep his show.

And now for something completely different. Apropos of nothing at all, I was thinking the other day about how pretending to be senile and apologizing for it is a timeless legal strategy. It can also work well in family conflicts. I've known a few crazy-like-a-fox elderly geniuses who do a great senility impression. In a _real_ emergency, they might even try drooling a little.

<comment><USER3> Is our society now particularly corrupt, or has it always been this way?

<comment><USER2> I think you're failing to look on the bright side. This little exchange represents a lot of progress.

If you want a good idea of what powerful rulers _used_ to do to people who said things they didn't like, google "Giordano Bruno". Or, for an international perspective, ask a 60-year-old Russian, or a 40-year-old Cambodian, or a contemporary Tibetan.

Note, though, that I'm not saying our society couldn't use a lot of improvement on the corruption front.

<comment><USER3> So our society isn't less corrupt than it used to be. It's just that the overlords have realized that they can be a little subtler and not have to hack/burn/behead/hang/shoot people to subjugate and control them.

Yes, there's progress, but I think we can still complain.

<comment><USER4> Unfortunately, in human society, the source of corruption is _humans_.

<comment><USER3> I've always said those things should be _outlawed_!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> That is one hell of a long (10 minute speech) brain fart there.

And my how eager to help all those corporations were, why they sound sad that the segment won't air!

Good news everyone, all the bad publicity has jogged Adam's memory and he now remembers things _correctly_.

<comment><USER6> Adam does seem like the kind of person that would make things up to make a story more interesting. Maybe he didn't realize it would end up on YouTube?

Too bad nobody interviewed Tory, the primary source, before the shit hit the fan.

<comment><USER7> Except the article was intimating that the primary source was Grant, and not Tory.

<comment><USER5> I'm sure there are embellishments and inaccuracies in Adams speech.

But the point is that he got the gist of story 100% wrong, not just wrong but exactly opposite of what happened. The corporations were trying to help them, not stop them. No one can be _that_ confused.

In addition to that, we all know that in general (yes I am generalizing) security through obscurity and legal threats tends to be the norm.

<comment><USER7> That's my point exactly - his story was so wrong that he couldn't even get who told him the story right. Doesn't that set off some BS filters?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> So he pretends to back off, we pretend to believe him, lawyers pretend to be satisfied. RFIDs are still a can of worms.

Everything is back to normal then?</comment>


The Slide Rule - <AUTHOR> https://tryretool.com/blog/the-slide-rule/?1 <comment><USER2> Not only a good read, but it has cool ancient advertisements related to engineering, calculating and slide rules.</comment>


Annoyed- Google's Neural Matching to Degenerate Search Results - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/googles-search-insanity-ernest-semerda/ <comment><USER2> The Bert based model handles misspellings synonyms really well by association BUT is does over compensate a lot. In an age where domain squatters have taken all the properly spelled names startups have to rely on synonyms. Then google penalizes them. Yet few months ago Google declared it would penalize squatters. This approach is hurting many companies (so I hear in my circles) and Google isn't listening :(

</comment><comment><USER3> Google should rethink the way to support other tech companies and just penalize squatters instead of good companies

</comment><comment> ariel-faigon If you quote "Veryfi" in the search box, it is not considered a misspelling by google, and top results seems to work as expected :)</comment>