Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | HNJohnC's commentslogin

Jasmine is hopeless for serious node apps, that's why. It lacks critical features that are long standing and bitterly complained about by node developers due to the hostile and half-assed responses from the maintainers to those issues.


> It lacks critical features

Like?


You have...unusual taste for someone who loves apples and "eats a lot of them". May I humbly suggest you try a few varieties further afield.


I'm no fan of Harper but you are incorrect. He's a huge history buff and has been interested in this exact expedition since well before he became PM. It just happens to help with the sovereignty issue.


Another solution in search of a problem. How about posts about truly interesting things like beneficial microbial populations etc. The days of "sanitizing" are rapidly coming to a close in the face of modern science.


This is a baffling post.

Sanitizing is more important because modern science is losing anti-biotics.

Hospital acquired infections kill a reasonable number of people and make quite a few others miserable (vomiting bugs are not fun).


Look a UFO, take a picture quick...damn all I have is this Layer cam. :(


No, definitely not. This UI is about as simple as it gets and it should stay that way quirks and all.


I thought it was something that literally projects a material physically onto a surface. It's much more disappointingly mundane than that.

Bottom of idea barrel===scraped.


"We tested two adult samples using two different sequence learning tasks."

Two? Nothing to see here.


This attitude is not helpful and actively damaging. Small sample sizes in science do serve a purpose: to get larger studies funded.

It's as if the top comment to every ShowHN post was: "Not at $200mm in funding. Nothing to see here."


Actively damaging? A little dramatic perhaps? I didn't say it doesn't serve a purpose, I said there is nothing to see here. Quite literally. Until they do a larger study why is it news?


It is actively damaging to the community for you to take snipes at studies when the reason you are criticizing the study is not only unnecessary criticism that any layman could provide, it is actually a misinterpretation of the study. You didn't add anything to the discussion.

As for why it is news, a lot of hackers are interested in mental health and mindfulness+meditation specifically and would be interested in more cutting edge news about it, rather than what ends up in the NYTimes 8 months later.


Two samples, not two subjects. Still not definitive, but definitely "something to see" if their methodology holds up (I don't have access).


I just got a copy of the paper from the researcher. They used 16 study participants. Still not a huge sample size, but big enough for consideration.


I think they mean two different studies, not two subjects.


Welcome to the internet of 2014. Seems like every second article I open fits that description lately.


That's a common misconception, childbirth deaths brought down the average.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: