risto1
The whole picture can and does look very different than any single study. Studies vary a lot in quality, and there are tricks that are done to fudge with the conclusions. See:
https://www.youtube.com/user/NutritionFactsOrg
He very clearly points out exactly how people screw with the data on a large number of studies. That's why I listed all those sources from credible organizations from conclusions drawn by actual dietitians, not me or you or joe 'nutritionist' randomly trying to come up with our own conclusions.
Also, any reasonably intelligent random person can attack any studies pretty easily and make it look credible. Example: The first one is a meta-analysis of observational studies, one of the weakest forms of evidence, and other meta-analyses came up with the exact opposite conclusion. The second one's conclusion is obviously flawed, since salt without a shadow of a doubt increases blood pressure, so salt intake definitely does matter for older populations which almost always have a compromised cardiovascular system, so it definitely matters to them. The third isn't really saying anything except that they aren't successful at reducing salt consumption.
I'd rather trust experts to do their work, but you can do what you want it's your health. I bought all this crap for a few years until I suffered health problems from eating tons of dietary cholesterol and saturated fat with theoretical benefits. I could literally see my intake of saturated fat and cholesterol turning my blood cholesterol (total and LDL) and triglycerides on and off like a light switch. I did this several times. It was SO cut and dry. I kept all other variables the same. And I've always eaten tons of really health foods, a ton of plants, I just bought into the hype that butter and eggs are suddenly 'healthy', according to magazines and 'nutritionists'. Even blood work doesn't stop some people -- I remember reading a HN post of someone who started eating tons of eggs and had absurdly high levels of blood cholesterol, but his conclusion was that it's 'not a concern' and he 'feels fine' -- The doubt that was introduced already got to him and he just doesn't care anymore.
Cigarette companies played this exact same game for years btw, introducing doubt as to whether cigarettes caused cancer and lung disease. All you have to do is introduce doubt. It doesn't even have to be a strong argument towards experts, as in experts don't think there is any doubt. It's targeted towards just the lay person who doesn't understand the science
If you look at actual recommendations from real organizations from real registered dietitians, the advice has largely not changed:
- Don't eat processed crap
- Eat mostly plants
- Eat lean meats and try to eat more beans and legumes as a protein source
- Keep your overall fat intake low
- Calcium from low-fat dairy, a milk substitute like almond milk, or plant sources of calcium
- Reduce added salt as much as possible
- Avoid saturated fat
- Avoid dietary cholesterol
- Avoid refined carbs
- Avoid added sugars and oils
And this advice is consistent across health organizations and across different countries. It's scary how much people get all their information from shitty sources and then spread the misinformation everywhere..
Sources:
https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/healthy-...
https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/executi...
https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/food-nutriti...
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&...
http://www.mangerbouger.fr/pro/sante/alimentation-19/determi...
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_national_nutrition_s...
http://www.fao.org/3/a-as686o.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelin...
https://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/dietetic-associations
My 2c to your response: there is some variation among individuals, I think it's intentionally exaggerated. Milk isn't a health product, but it's nutritious and useful for those that don't have much appetite to eat. Agree about fish oil unless you're deficient in omega 3. The amount of calories you can eat plays a huge preventative role in having any deficiencies. Most people have some kind of deficiency. Most people don't, or can't due to age or health issue, exercise so much that their metabolic rate is high enough (1.5-2x higher) to see those gains, which is why nutrition advice matters. If you ignore everything about nutrition, you can get the most benefit by avoiding added sugar and oils. It goes a very very long way
One example where this is wrong: It's been clearly established that enough long distance running, like marathons, is cardiotoxic
- callbag-html + callbag-store
or
- callbag-element + declaredom + callbag-store if you're planning on using web components
Benefits:
- It uses morphdom for fast diffing, which is as fast as virtual-dom
- It's lack of parochiality -it just uses plain HTMLElements. It makes using 3rd party libs seamless because you don't have to wrap them. It also means that you can batch things into animation frames to avoid unnecessary layout thrashing
- Callbag is used because it's a stupidly simple streaming library, easy to understand. Things like cold/hot observables, or what gets updated in a tick, can make streaming libs pretty complicated. Callbag fights that with it's extreme simplicity.
In general the entire toolset is easy to understand in terms of how it works, and that's important
The general dietary advice these days is:
- avoid added sugars and oils
- eat a (primarily or complete) plant-based whole foods diet
- people are also experiencing some benefits from fasting, which can be divided into 3 categories:
1. intermittent fasting
2. a water fasting session, usually 1-3 days long
3. going into ketosis for prolonged period of timeIf you're stuck or blocked on something, you should talk to whoever you need to immediately. If you need to talk to someone, that's what the chat's for. If it's supposed to be a way for the team to bond, then it shouldn't have anything to do with status updates, talk about the weather instead.
It's so obviously a micromanagement tool, but sometimes you can piss on someone and they'll believe you when you say it's raining
I'm definitely not a haskell beginner, and I know others who are definitely not beginners and they feel the same way.
I'm talking about the language as a whole. With all of the extensions available, there's plenty there for even seasoned haskellers to learn. Sure you can get used to anything, but I've found the more advanced type features, and higher kinded polymorphism, to make code and type errors harder to reason about. Sometimes type inference screws up in ways that makes it hard to figure out whats going on.
- Reduce programmer cognitive overload
I don't know how he could honestly say that. Haskell is much more cognitively demanding than other languages from my experience
A lot of the benefits he talks about he could get from F# or Ocaml, which are much simpler to learn and use for a team
That being said, I think haskell does have unique niche in industry: if the company does something very complex and cognitively demanding and requires the best and the brightest, using haskell can be a way of luring the best and brightest to work there
The pros of functional CSS as a replacement for CSS/SASS variables:
- You define your 'palette' up front: which margins, font sizes, colors are acceptable, etc. You could do something similar with CSS/SASS variables, but you'd give up the capability to rapidly prototype on any machine with any browser and you'd need HMR set up everywhere. Also since it's a class you can (de)compose it with other classes and build up 'abstractions'. So I'm really using functional CSS as a better replacement for SASS variables.
- It's easiest to start hacking away at designing widgets without worrying about things looking inconsistent eventually, because you're working with a limited palette
And then what I take out of atomic CSS is splitting up the code into different levels. Instead of atoms, molecules, organisms, I have: palette, abstractions, components. Abstractions are composed of other abstractions and/or things from the palette. Ie: an abstracted class might be like: .center-vertical, .center-horizontal, and then composing those would give the .center class. Components are concrete widgets like buttons, popovers, modals, tables, lists, etc.
And I use the submodule idea from BEM. So if I need to create custom themes, it would be the like .button .button-(theme name) and writing the theme works just like inheritance would here but I'd be using composition instead
Though I'd say it might be a good idea to avoid making your favorite thing your job. Because all of that stuff could suck the fun out of your favorite thing, and then you've associated a lot of negative emotions to what used to be something that could get you out of bed in the morning
Agreed, some of those could be dropped. But some of those are internships or short contracts, I don't see a reason to remove all of those necessarily
- Blog/Hobbies
It's on his personal website, I don't see anything wrong with it. It shows that he's passionate about tech, he wouldn't just be some random work monkey if he got hired. Most of his posts are about tinkering with things. Looks like a standard blog to me. I saw your blog, and it definitely reads way more like a journal than his, which is good because it conveys your personality and that you have opinions (confidence)
- "• Entrepreneurship: Buying, refurbishing and reselling a class set of iBooks in 2005; iPod repair at ", " Took online training courses in big data processing with ElasticSearch and Tensorfow machine learning. ",...etc → it shows you think a bit too highly of yourself, ego might be an issue
I'd say this falls more into the 'irrelevant' category. His website or resume doesn't give me the impression of ego, if anything it gives the opposite impression: that he's a little shy, maybe desperate, and maybe thinks too little of himself
--------
There are really two key issues I see standing out by looking at his profile:
1. Non-comittal, he's moved to a lot of different places. While his portfolio shows that he's intellectually curious, it also shows that he isn't taking career as seriously as he should. All of those internships and none of them progressed into a job? That's a red flag for sure. Maybe this is what you're sensing. Get rid of this. Showing that you've travelled a lot and only worked short periods does not send out a good signal
Also this coupled with the hobbyist impression on the website might be even more of a red flag. You have intrinsic interest in a lot of tech but you're professional side doesn't reflect that. Do you hate business? it kind of implies that you aren't very business-oriented. If so, maybe think about grad school and going into academia, just my 2c
2. He might be a little too introverted and shy, and should probably take more initiative to network and meet people. Jobs are a seller's market, companies get tons of spammed applications that barely get read. Networking helps a lot
It's not meritocratic. People should be judged based on their skill, not based on their gender, race, or ethnicity. We should be striving for a fair society, not equality of outcome
It's insulting to those minorities, it implies that they can't be smart enough to make it without this kind of leg up, and they will never know the extent to which this played a role in their success even if they're absolutely solid at what they do. And I think there's definitely a negative psychological effect to minorities by doing these kinds of things
If a student gets into a school which is above their skill level or general academic interest, they could burn out and loose interest in a profession that otherwise would've been a good fit for them. A similar lack of motivation can also happen for someone who can only get into a school that's below their true skill level because they don't feel that their being valued fairly
It isn't all encompassing -- it's not just gender and race, there are ethnicities that are widely discriminated against and they don't get a similar leg up. I don't think AA should be applied at all, just pointing this out
There are problems in some minority communities struggle with for sure, but this isn't the right way to solve it at all
One of big reasons why asian and jewish communities do better here is just culture -- their cultures highly value intellectual pursuits. I knew an asian guy that went to Harvard and they were so poor they lived in the ghetto, which should've messed up his chances because the public school sucked, but he was raised to highly value academic pursuits. And an asian girl I knew that went to Columbia, her mother told her that if she doesn't achieve academically she won't love her anymore. While harsh, they punish their kids for an A- the way other cultures would view an F. But it's a big reason for their academic success
I also knew a girl that was very rich, but she basically didn't have to pay tuition because of her minority. I'm sorry but that's really annoying for someone that had to take out insane amounts of student debt. There were times when I thought I had to drop out because I couldn't even get approved for a loan, and the interest rates were insanely high
The better solution is to find out why some minorities aren't doing well academically in proportion to others in the first place and change that. If it's financial or cultural or whatever else, the underlying cause should be addressed, not this BS
I've heard 'Professor Frisbee's Mostly Adequate Guide to Functional Programming' is ok, but I'm looking at the section on monads and the monad laws aren't even mentioned. Which is a huge red flag for me, because without the laws it isn't a monad and you can get really strange behavior if you use it like that. I would avoid reading that book
People write these tutorials because they want to improve their portfolio to further their career, but they often don't even understand it yet -- a perfect example of a perverse incentive.
An example is the guy who wrote "You Don't Know Js" [1]. All of these are completely wrong statements:
- "But what I will say is that a monad is basically a value type."
- "A monad is a data structure. It's a type."
- "Actually, a monad isn't a single data type, it's really more like a related collection of data types. It's kind of an interface that's implemented differently depending on the needs of different values. Each implementation is a different type of monad."
- Says "methods" a bunch of times, there are no methods involved with monads in any way, it's FP
- His example in "Just a Monad" isn't a monad
- "Actually, the Maybe monad is a particular pairing of two other simpler monads: Just and Nothing"
- "Many implementations of a JavaScript Maybe monad include a check (usually in map(..)) to see if the value is null/undefined, and skipping the behavior if so" - that makes it not a monad, it violates the laws. Java's Optional type isn't a monad for similar reasons
- "But... that approach to Maybe is not a pure monad." - there's no pure/impure monads, it's either a monad or it isn't
- "The core spirit of a Monad says that it must be valid for all values and cannot do any inspection of the value, at all -- not even a null check. So those other implementations are cutting corners for the sake of convenience. It's not a huge deal," - It is a huge deal, a whole lot of abstractions are built on top of monads, if it doesn't satisfy the laws exactly then you'll be entering a world of pain you really wish you didn't
I stopped reading the rest but you get the point. You don't want to end up in a situation where you have to unlearn a bunch of this stuff. Btw the guy who wrote the Professor Frisbee book wrote the foreword in this book, so you can see why a lot of this stuff raises red flags for experienced FPers. My suggestion is to read fantasy land and ask questions on an FP channel
[1] https://github.com/getify/Functional-Light-JS/blob/master/ma...
The evidence is overwhelming, considering how many people want to learn and write Haskell and how many people struggle with it. If people could ignore all of this stuff they would've figured that out by now, but they can't ignore it to really be productive. I like Haskell a lot btw, just don't think it's very practical, and it's most important contributions to FP are already being adopted in other languages without the additional complexity
- Laziness can be hard to reason about for newcomers who have really only had experience with strictness
- You have to learn a lot of concepts from category theory right off the bat, because it uses IO and monads. You need to know what a monad is, and almost all monad tutorials are notoriously bad at explaining what a monad is. You also don't know when to stop, when you've learned 'enough' category theory
- The community is full of clever tricks and idioms that aren't really necessary to write haskell code, but a beginner might think they need to know it. Examples: monad transformers, free monads, comonads, lenses, coroutines
- The type system is substantially more complex. Haskell has higher kinded polymorphism, rank-n-types, and a neverending set of extensions that a lot of haskellers use that'll keep you busy learning the rest of your life. Haskell code can also be very polymoprhic, and the type errors can be really confusing sometimes. Ocaml doesn't have these, but you can simulate the most important features: higher kinded polymorphism with functors, and rank-n-types with records
That's why Ocaml is easier to learn and use
I'm ok with imperative code as long as the mutable state doesn't 'leak out' into the rest of the code. Quicksort is an example of that -- it's impure in it's implementation but essentially pure to the end user, because you can call it any number of times with the same input and it'll always return the same output
Or if it's some looping construct, recursion might be ok but if it isn't readable or you don't get tail-call optimization, then a for or while loop makes more sense. I do prefer map/filter/reduce/forEach or recursion, I think it's more readable and it avoids the indexing class of errors
> The ultimate goal of software is to build something useful. The "functional programming tutorial:real world uses" and "claims of superiority:adoption" ratios are suspiciously high.
Yes and no, what they're really getting at is declarative vs imperative programming and how declarative programming makes managing state and reasoning about code much simpler. In imperative code you often have to step through mentally or through a debugger to really understand what's going on. It also really simplifies concurrent programming (ie map-reduce).
You can have it both ways -- declarative OO programming exists with Ocaml's module system. You can even write declarative OO programming in Java, using 'static' classes (or non-static but only used to configure so it's essentially immutable), 'final' everything, and immutable data structures
Ocaml has declarative OO programming via it's module system. Typeclasses and Ocaml modules have equivalent expressive power, so you'd achieve that with typeclasses in Haskell. But Ocaml's type system is much simpler and more explicit, which makes it much easier to learn and use
- You said it's a 1 hour interview. It's really more like a 30 minute interview, because the interviewee will likely spend at least half of that time (probably more) thinking about how you're judging their behavior rather than focusing on the tasks. A good interviewer can prevent this sort of thing from spiraling out of control, but it's never eliminated completely.
- #2-#4 are redundant. If the interviewee can create a red circle, they can create more than one of them with a different color. Interviewees will underestimate their time management, so they'll take longer on these trivial tasks. They might even overanalyze what you're trying to do here, thinking that there's more to what you're looking for and spend longer on something trivial
- Questions like #3, #5, #9 are the kinds of questions interviewees will overanalyze. They might wonder what you mean, or whether there's more to what you're looking for. They can ask questions, sure, but you expect X and you won't tell them that you expect X, and they'll spend stupid amounts of time wondering what your X is. It's not an exaggeration either. Sometimes interviewers implicitly expect certain things without making them explicit. And you might only find out later (maybe even never), when they tell you that they wanted something that you definitely could've provided but the interviewer never specified. Or worse, you might spend additional time doing X and then they actually wanted Y. Interviewees will try to think about and tease out these things, which takes away substantial time from solving the actual problem
- Get rid of delay of 1 second for #8, this just slows down interviewees and doesn't give you as an interviewer any special knowledge about the interviewee
- #9 and #10 are basically the same question, get rid of one of them
- Use common sense. You probably expected that most of those 20 people should breeze through that interview. If they get something wrong or get confused about something, don't necessarily filter them out -- Think about the weaknesses in your own evaluation before doing that. Interviews are guidelines not hard rules, don't make the process kafkaesque
- I'm glad you're asking this sort of thing, because people should absolutely care a lot about false negatives. The 4 that made it might be the best ones, they might be mediocre candidates that were just good at your particular brand of interviewing. You want the best people on the team, not the people that are best at passing some weird interview that has little to do with their job
It's mostly split between the population -- half (probably most) of us don't really seem to care about this issue, the other half feels pretty upset about it. It's really important to note that not a single Macedonian I've ever talked to has ever claimed that Ancient Macedonia isn't part of Greek history, I really don't know where Greeks are getting that from. Almost everyone here goes to vacation in Greece every year, and concedes when some Greeks say "Skopje?" to suggest that we're not Macedonians. We just nod and shrug it off, and say "Yeah, Skopje". Most people really don't care about this, if we did we wouldn't be going to Greece on vacation or buy Greek products, both of which we do a fair amount of. Some of us even wonder why we're celebrating a serial killer at all (Alexander the Great). In order to understand what's going on, I think you need to separate yourself from what politicians are thinking and doing compared to what the people are thinking and doing. Also let's face it, governments love to manipulate group identities to serve their interests.
What Macedonians are upset about is that they feel like Macedonia has a shared history and Greece doesn't want to acknowledge it, and it's leveraging it's strong international influence to set us back and/or make us look bad. We're a small, formerly communist, landlocked country in the Balkans, we barely have any international influence at all. It's a no-brainer that most countries will side with Greece, and why there's EU pressure for us to change the name. We definitely wouldn't be able to dispute Greece's territory, especially since 1952 when Greece became part of NATO. We're seriously no threat to them even without NATO. I don't think this is about the name or territorial ambitions, or if it was it was like that a long time ago and is no longer relevant. It's deeper than that.
People on the thread and the previous one have talked about the Balkan Wars being relevant to understanding this, and that the then conservative Greek govt in the mid-20th century suppressed a lot of North Macedonian speaking peoples living in Greek Macedonia to force them to say that they're Greek and that they can't speak slavic, much like how Bulgarians forced us to say that we're Bulgarian and speak Bulgarian when we were occupied by them, or how some people think we should be part of Greater Albania, or how some Serbians view us as South Serbians, and that Greece wants to cover this up. There's probably something there to look into, the Balkans is full of territorial grabs like that. I don't really know anything about this part of history.
A lot of us just feel like we're being bullied to an extent, and that Greece is basically being a d*ck about it. Ancient Macedonia has mostly been part of Greece, but Paeonia (North Macedonia) has for a large part of it's existence, either been a dependent territory of Ancient Macedonia or has been fully a part of Ancient Macedonia when it was at the height of it's power. We didn't just pull the name out of nowhere, we've been called Macedonians since forever. Some of us that are upset about this think that we shouldn't be giving in to powerful external forces and that we should just make a stand. And that by giving in we're showing ourselves as weak and easy to manipulate, and would affect future negotiations. Some of us others think we're being stubborn, and that we should be the bigger person and just concede, because it's a pretty stupid dispute and I agree. A lot of us just don't care, or if we used to care we're jaded now after all this time and don't care anymore.
We have a lot of shared history, we're neighbors after all. We don't have the same language, sure, but our traditional dress and textiles looks similar, our dance is similar, we both say "Opa!", we have similar traditional food. We used to be the same country several times in history, during the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires. I don't think this is really about the name, it's more about that North Macedonia is mostly made up of slavic people with a large Albanian-Macedonian population and from a formerly communist country, and Greeks just don't want to be associated with former communists or slavic people.
It really sucks because I like a lot about Greek history and culture, one of my favorite college professors taught Greek Philosophy to me. Greeks gave us democracy and the best philosophers along with India and China, all of which is still extremely relevant today. I'm glad we've come to a consensus about the name. We've both wasted a lot of energy over something pretty stupid, and we really should be getting along a lot better. We've wasted our time with what could've been quality time with our families or more richer life experiences, or improving the human condition. Nationalism, tribalism and groupthink are all diseases that I hope the 21st century will rid itself of.