Thanks for clarifying. I think I am just misremembering how terms were used because of the cohort of people I was amongst and our focus on business models, perhaps.
The latest Macbook Pro has 24 hours of battery life and is a powerful laptop. It's not the thinnest laptop, but it's not bad, how thin do you really need it to be? To me the overhead of replacing one machine with two wouldn't be worth it for development on the go, but if you enjoy building desktops that's different and may be worth it to you.
CI plays a huge part in supporting test automation so I can see why this is a pain point. This also impacts deployments in general.
Speaking specifically to test automation I find that most companies simply prefer to make the calculation that they'll take the risk of an issue occurring over investing in test automation (and testing in general) until the problems become so large and financially catastrophic, or a regulatory issue, that it gets embarrassing for a VP/Exec and then the decision is made to properly invest. That's not an ideal approach because building this out as you go is more efficient.
The typical other problems are how best to shape the testing pyramid. Having large number of unit tests > medium number of integration tests and a small number of end-to-end tests is always proposed but I find in most cases the pyramid becomes inverted due to the natural issues associated with problems really being only of concern if they actually impact an end user and the end-to-end issues cast a wide net even though they are very challenging to maintain and do require appropriate investment in resources.
I want to mention Tesults (https://www.tesults.com) with which I am involved to tackle another issue. Clarity around test results and what is actually being tested due to bad reporting and trouble accessing relevant results data. Understanding testing across the systems for a team is essential to knowing what's actually running, how often and what the output is. This helps understand what additional testing may be needed and identifying what's failing.
Overall, most of the issues related to test automation stem from the calculation made too often mentioned above.
My dad died from a heart attack in 1992. His arteries were blocked. He had very high cholesterol and statins were unavailable until the mid 90s. I was found to have the same issue and it was so high I was told it had be familial. A couple of doctors told me eating healthy and exercising could help keep it down but others said, no not really, it's not a little high, it's massively high, I need intervention, so I have been on statins for several years and they have kept my cholesterol levels in the normal range. I am grateful and I do hope that if the second set of doctors are right that the first set learn about this.
I couldn’t take statins because of the side effects. I went on a fish only, no plant oil diet, and my LDL is now 200 and my HDL for the first time my life rose above 35 to 52. To me, the key was getting the omega-3 level way higher than the omega six level and totally eliminating short chain poly unsaturated fatty acids.
Note that I went on this diet, because I actually know my genetics. I don’t recommend anyone do the same thing without knowing what I know.
Diet works and it’s sad people can’t commit to it. And I’m afraid for a lot of people it won’t be the vegetarian diet that is normally prescribed.
Remember as well cholesterol is not the only contributors her heart disease. Oxidative stress plays a large role in damaging, or oxidizing, the LDL to cause the plaques.
Oxidative stress can be caused by external forces, but also by the lack in proper nutrients, like zinc and B6 and riboflavin, deficiency in those supplements are all linked to greater incidence of heart disease.
Your family history and extremely elevated LDLs are scary. Diet and exercise are not enough to prevent poor outcomes in familial hypercholesterolemia. The rough estimate we quote patients is that the risk of a heart attack in males with FH is ~50% by age ~50 without medical treatment. This is 20 times (not 20%, but 20 TIMES) the normal risk at that age.
I will not give medical advice over the internet, but if I were you, I would not want to be messing around with anything short of the standards of care given those odds. Statin therapy is a core part of that standard.
Statin adverse effects do exist, but they are found to be quite rare (1-2% prevalence) when assessed for through well designed placebo-controlled trials. Additionally, there are newer statins with fewer adverse effects you could consider. Assuming you truly have FH and truly are statin intolerant (or remain at elevated LDLs despite maximally tolerated statin therapy), PCSK9 inhibitors can be considered. In the US, you would likely qualify for one if these through a good insurance plan, assuming the above criteria are met.
If you want to see my charts, feel free to email me. I’ve corrected my cholesterol in a more functional way than a Staten could have. And when I tried to statin and not only lower my cholesterol, but it lowered my HDL as well, which is bad. It also gave me myopathy add myopathy.
I’m not screwing around, I know my genetics, and I know how reverse cholesterol transport works. I also know keeping oxidative stress at a minimum is probably more important than the level of cholesterol. I actually moved to a location with extremely low air pollution for that very factor. You can’t look at LDL only to understand the risk of heart disease.
I had very good doctors and if they thought I was at risk, they would be telling me what to do because that’s what they always do. But now they say there’s no need for statins and they’re not concerned about my heart disease risk anymore.
Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an inherited defect in how the body recycles LDL (bad) cholesterol. As a result, LDL levels in the blood remain very high – in severe cases, levels can reach above 190 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) of blood.
It sounds like 200 is still trouble. Was it even higher before?
If I could advise my younger self, I would say: “Learn how to cook” (for real). It turns out olive oil is all you need, and even not much of that. I discovered that most of my use of oil was simply covering for my lack of ability.
It’s instructive to remember that two hundred years ago, palm oil/vegetable oil/canola oil/avocado oil/almond oil/etc didn’t exist, nonstick pans didn’t exist, and somehow people could still cook amazing food.
Canola is made from rapeseed, which is toxic before processing. (And mostly not toxic after processing. ) The oil it produces used to be used only for greasing engine parts.
It is not that they lead to obesity on their own, but over consumption of them might and the effect they have on the body (inflammation) might have other secondary effects (insulin resistance, higher cholesterol, fatigue).
To say it is "just a fitness fad" is dismissing a ton of good research:
Meta comment: parent and GP are an interesting contrast between the "settled science" drum-beat dismissiveness narrative and the science/study-based curiosity counter-narrative.
Here's to hoping that with the death of the dollar, the "settled science" practitioners lose their bullhorns.
Sorry to hear about your dad. How old was he? I assume he was Indian given your username. South Asian ancestry is a risk enhancer for heart disease, unfortunately. Being Indian myself, I have so many stories of relatives (esp male) dying of MIs and sudden cardiac deaths at ages 40-50s. I didn’t even consider this unusual till after growing up and esp after caring for ppl of other backgrounds.
There’s no clear/satisfactory answer as to why South Asian patients have so much more heart disease, but the evidence does suggest we should be adopting more aggressive targets of risk parameters for them (A1c, LDL, BP, weight, etc.), and the clinical guidelines likely will reflect this in the future.
It just seems like an old convention that has stuck, seem'm much simpler to anyone not familiar with ships to say 'ships left' or 'ships right' than to have new words. We don't do this with cars. You have a left rear door, not a port rear door.
> We don't do this with cars. You have a left rear door, not a port rear door.
“Driver side rear door” or “passenger side rear door” are pretty common, at least in the US and UK, where they mean the opposite.
“Nearside“ (passenger side nearest curb in a right-hand drive vehicle driving on the left) and “offside” (driver side furthest from curb) are also used in the UK.
If you ever went 4x4 driving, you use driver / passenger to indicate the direction someone has to go to. This is because the navigation often is done from someone standing outside the car, where using left/right can be rather confusing.
In UK a [experienced, older?] driver gives another driver instructions with "right hand down" and "left hand down". That is, you give directions to move the steering wheel.
I've the vaguest recollection that sailing/steam boats used to say which side to move the wheel towards to steer; that begging opposite of the way the boat will go??
For repair instructions this actually causes a lot of confusion for someone in a right hand drive market. Half the time the repair instruction gets it wrong and would have been better saying left or right. Occasionally it is correct though if dealing with a part that's different in each market.
I don’t know how widespread this is but I don’t do this for the very reason you bring up with differences between countries, I drive in both the UK and Canada most years.
Cars are small and for the most part everyone in the car faces the same direction as the car itself. When you have a ship, you have 3 frames of references to contend with (self, ship, cardinal)
Four, actually. You also have the wind frame of reference, which is actually the most important (for sail boats). You don't turn left or right, you turn upwind or downwind.
I'm not familiar with sail vocabulary in English, but in Portuguese there is only downwind (sotavento) and upwind (barlavento). Functionally you don't need the other two, so I imagine it's similar in English.
I guess some could argue that we do have some special vocabulary for cars too.
E.g. you don't call it the front/back door, you call it the bonnet/boot (or maybe hood/trunk depending where you're from) though that probably is stretching the definition of a door a little bit... but then you also have nearside and offside for passengers/drivers side, though that's probably a bit more of a technical term.
> though that probably is stretching the definition of a door a little bit...
It is, but then so is the stupid "3-door" / "5-door" / etc. car classification, which is really 2-door / 4-door / etc. with the trunk being counted as additional door for some reason.
Violent criminals do not suddenly appear on the streets from out of a portal from another dimension. They start out as babies, then toddlers then children. Something goes very wrong, neglect and lack of guidance, developing a delusional reality of the world , and by the time they are adults are unable model how the world actually works and cope to sustain themselves. Desperation and short-term thinking sets in, and violent crime follows.
Social values really matter. Countries with low crime rates don't have them because the police are educated about deescalation. That is important too and I support that, but the police are largely irrelevant to the underlying issue. This is coming from someone who grew up thinking social conservative types and people going on about social values needed to relax. I was wrong and realized that when I had children. Children absolutely need stability, reassurance, love and guidance from their mother and father, it's absolutely critical.
Great read. Interesting parallels to software engineering failures. Time, pressure, quality control, operator error, documentation, training... a human challenge.
We originally used it at Tesults.com (the test automation reporting dashboard) because it's got a great API, documentation and to some degree due to the reputation of the company. Overtime, we've had no issues with it and so currently see no reason to change. It's possible we don't run into problems because Tesults is a b2b service and customers don't typically do things like charge backs and we deal with any requests for cancelations/refunds etc. promptly but that's just speculation.
