on a meta-note what on earth is going with twitter’s mobile video player (on safari). literally no way to just watch the video without it being half obscured with the tweet it’s attached to

Holy crap, not a single line of sketchwork! Amazing.

Yeah it's unreal. And the result is so well-proportioned and 3-dimensional as well. I wonder how much of it was in his mind before he started, and how much was about figuring out what would fit along the way.

I can't remember the source, but I remember learning that his specialty was 5-point perspective and he could keep most of the drawing visualized in his mind before he even started. But he also improvised a lot and made decisions on the fly.

Unreal is definitely the right word, similar to watching Michael Jordan at his best.

He died of heart issue based on some replies to that tweet?

Unfortunately your other reply got flagged but I was able to read it in time. I was thinking the same thing. Sudden chest pain suggests some manner of myocarditis/pericarditis. Makes you wonder for sure; these are troubling times and sad way to lose a genius.

My uncle died of heart attack at age 40...40years ago.

"Makes you wonder for sure"

What are we talking about here?

The safe and effective thing.

Lookup, not on Google or other highly manipulated search engines, the Bangkok Thailand study on 12-18 year old boys looking for pre- and post- signs of myocarditis and pericarditis; heart damage. The rate of heart damage was 1:43 - and that was only from a single mRNA shot.

Even my mentioning this gets downvoted and flagged, hidden/suppressed.

It's on Google

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Bangkok%20Thailand%20s...

Not with honest articles at the top, see my reply here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33108401

Right, i was going to suggest pfizeritis? 1st post ;)

I googled it (plenty of results...) and this was the basic analysis I found:

"The study of teenagers in Thailand following a second COVID-19 vaccination found that 18% -- not one third -- experienced any detectable cardiac effect, and that 1 in 301, not 1 in 43, had confirmed myocarditis. A large proportion of purported abnormalities detected by testing were without symptoms, and 100% of the teens in the study fully recovered after 14 days, the authors reported."

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-heart-teens-vaccin...

I'm not knowledgeable enough about anything regarding this subject to make any determinations about if that is being downplayed or misleading. I don't want to pretend like I understand it.

This Reuters article is disingenuous at best.

They're downplaying the harm by changing the context.

Re: "found that 18% -- not one third -- experienced any detectable cardiac effect"

This research found 1:43 harm - because that harm included detection of damage to the heart via blood:

"Troponin blood test - troponin is a protein which is released into the blood stream when the heart muscle is damaged. The troponin level provides a quick and accurate measure of any heart muscle damage. It's used to help in the assessment following suspected heart attack."

Troponin was part of the research - and in 1:43 trooponin was detected post-shot vs. pre-shot.

And 1:301 is still extremely bad, no? Certainly you can make a judgement on that? It is actually harming 1:43 but even harming a heart - which is permanent damage as the heart doesn't heal - 1:301 of harming a young person's heart is completely unacceptable - especially when they're at very little risk of any significant harm, nowhere near 1:301 from COVID itself.

Also, 100% of the teens didn't recover after 14 days: there is permanent heart damage in 1:43.

They also focus on only including myocarditis numbers to make their numbers seem less worse (1:301 is still horrific) - by excluding the case(s) of pericarditis from their numbers.

Notice how Reuters is at the top of Google, and Reuters has routinely misled people to train them of these shallow-narrow talking points - to give them enough narrative to make them think the alarming research was less true than it actually is.

I guess that would be a big concern if 301 wasn't literally the number of participants in the study. What kind of confidence interval can you extrapolate from that?

And elevated troponin is not definitive of permanent heart damage.

In the context of Kim Jung Gi's death, studies suggest an excess of <5 cases of myocarditis per 100,000 vaccine doses for men aged 40-50: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31401-5/figures/3

I suspect this is considerably less of a risk to that age bracket than COVID.

"And elevated troponin is not definitive of permanent heart damage."

What else causes heart damage and troponin to release?

We're going on suspicions now rather than thoroughly reviewed science and data?

They are making overtures about the vaccine.

That guy has a really good sense of proportion.