But your eyeball, retina, all of it, would be producing the same light.
Maybe if you had a special eye scrotum of low light producing tissue that hung away from the body.
If we all work on this, I think we can seed the chemtrails-verse with the belief that ancient hunter gatherer men saw nocturnal prey with their testicles, and that you can learn to do it now with a combo of ice baths and bow hunting naked
Please don't comment like this on Hacker News. It's fine to disagree with someone else's comment and offer an alternative point of view, but please don't be mocking and mean like this.
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
I apologise if my comment comes across as mean and snarky, and I can see how it does so I'm sorry. I wasn't my inention to mock the poster.
I have always been interested that we cannot see infrared, but some reptiles can, we cannot because our eyeballs are flooded with warm blood, there is no way for our bodies to distinguish signal from noise.
This made me think of the scrotums purpose to maintain the testes slightly below body temperature, which then amused me with the idea that it might therefore be able to function as a kind of infra red, body light retina.
so I was mocking some primal hunter ideas, but certainly no one posting on this page
@mentions don't work on Hacker News and I only saw them because someone else flagged them. Please email hn@ycombinator.com to draw the moderators' attention to things.
I have long deep close experience with people who create similar situations, who have no criminal intent, just a remorseless indefatigable belief that this time it's going to work, and I have witnessed many times that the vaster the vision, the more laws of physics violated, the more absurd the suspension of belief required to hold a narrative in your head, the more passionatley it will inspire certain people who are looking for a quest, a purpose so grand it will rewrite the story of their life in one bold move.
I remember from a few few years back that the lipid coating may have caused problems for the liver, when treating people for diseases that needed to target a lot of tissue, such as muscle disorders. Is that still the case?
You remember correctly. Moderna had a lot of problems with their drug trials due to the lipid nanoparticles they were using to transport mRNA. They were toxic to the liver upon repeat dosings. Unfortunately, it appears they never found a fix for the problem. Instead they gave up and found a "business solution" by pivoting from drugs to the (at the time) less profitable vaccines, on the grounds that vaccines are something you only need to take once so the toxicity issue could be dodged. Doh. That was in 2017.
By the time COVID vaccines came around a few years later there was no evidence they had fixed the problems with lipid nanoparticle delivery. I looked for such evidence extensively at the time, for example, announcements by Moderna of breakthroughs or trials of new drugs. Today the situation seems not much different. Note that Moderna's wikipedia article has a section on "rare disease therapeutics" but it's literally empty:
Because of their failure to progress beyond COVID vaccines Moderna's share price got slaughtered, falling from a peak of ~$450 to ~$25 today.
I don't know if other companies were able to find breakthroughs here, after COVID I stopped following the topic. Unfortunately, although mRNA tech has great potential, when normal safety standards were reimposed it appears that Moderna went back to being unable to make anything safe enough to launch.
What was the success of other means, such as sugars and proteins? Something like glycocalyx or polysaccharide capsules? Or HIV like deployment gp41/gp120?
It sure would be nice to see the data on length of time between doses to prevent toxicity. The fact they deleted all of that data sure is suspicious and incredibly worrying.
Toxicity depends on dose. COVID vaccines just need micrograms of material to induce an immune response, I imagine it takes more than that to edit the genes of a large organ.
There have sadly been cases where the vaccines did perform unintended gene editing. It shows up as people whose bodies are still producing spike protein months or years after vaccination.
The Yale LISTEN study found such people for example. Studies on post vaccination heart damage also found free spike protein in the blood of those affected, i.e. the body had turned off the immune response to the spike due to persistent internal production. The most likely way this happened is understood if you dig into it.
Do you have a citation for this? The only relevant study I saw on the LISTEN website was a preprint of a study showing data on self-reported post-vaccine symptoms, but didn’t really talk about causes or gene edits (Krumholz et al. 2023).
It did discuss causes to some surface level: continuous spike protein production, T-cell exhaustion and Epstein-Barr reactivation. And they're investigating post-vaccine syndrome so the root cause there would be clear, as the study authors discussed in the LISTEN press release.
It's easy to find papers discussing the problem, just search Google Scholar. Example:
"Of the S1 positive post-vaccination patients, we demonstrated by liquid chromatography/ mass spectrometry that these CD16+ cells from post-vaccination patients from all 4 vaccine manufacturers contained S1, S1 mutant and S2 peptide sequences"
They can tell the difference between vaccine spike and virus spike as the vaccine spike was modified for stability. The exact pathway is speculated to have been DNA contamination due to manufacturing process defects. Sequencing of vaccine vials has shown far higher levels of DNA contamination than is considered safe, and the lipids would bring DNA into the cells just as well as they do mRNA making the safe levels much lower still.
> A significant limitation of this study was the lack of approved testing to 100% rule out previous
infection and it is possible the persistent S1 protein detected in the CD16+ monocytes of some of
the patients in this study is from SARS-CoV-2 and not from the vaccine. There also exists the
possibility that some of these new-onset symptoms post-COVID vaccination are unrelated to the
vaccines. The data from this study also cannot make any inferences on epidemiology and
prevalence for persistent post-vaccine symptoms. Thus, further studies and research need to be
done to understand the risk factors, likelihood and prevalence of these symptoms.
If it’s all a swirling spinning turbulent mess is there enough difference in relative velocity that we’ve had more or less time since the Big Bang than other places?
I disagree with this negative take.
I can use Claude to quickly explore libraries, I’m not familiar with, and have developed a development process where I describe the purpose of each class and method in a markdown file , and have Claude, Gemini, deep seek and Chat all pitch descriptions of how to implement it in shared markdown files. I correct their misconceptions and inefficiencies before any code is written,
I can write this code myself, but I’m finding I can work faster like this.
Importantly this is how I work on my own personal fun projects, so it really doesn't matter if is productive, I find it enjoyable so I'm going to keep exploring it, there will be pros and cons, don't have the final ficture on that yet
claude can't manage the big picture of what I'm trying to achieve, and claude and the others hallucinate all the time.
I have them all write simple tests for the code, so if they introduce me to a new library, I have tests to prove their assumptions.
And I review everything and tweak everything.
In my day job I work as a lead dev / arch, this isn't must different, working with Claude is like working with a large team of very inconsistent devs, with deep knowledge, but a tenous grasp on reality that struggle with attention. So not that much different from real people?
My dad wrote code generators, back in the 70's and 80's that I did some work on early in my career, those code generators which took a high level description of a program and output mainframe code, made most of the money that paid for raising my siblings and I. From that perspective I've been roboting myself my entire professional life.
I had this same experience, but I have not continued to take the medication after a short experiment.
I found I could get a similar outcome (subjective experience) through my food selection
Today I’ve eaten around 2kg of vegetables today (zucchini, capsicum, eggplant, cauliflower, spinach) all of which was under 500 calories,
and I’ve eaten fish.
If I eat a massive amount of vegetables and get ~200g protein, I don’t feel I’m depriving myself and am satiated on under 2000 calories, previously I would typically eat over 3000 on a normal day.
As for people lacking willpower, the genetics of hunger mean all of us experience vastly different levels of hunger. You might be interested to read about the family in Pakistan who could not produce a relevant hormone leptin, and the toddlers driven to fighting by insatiable hunger to steal food from each other, and the dramatic change in their lives after medical intervention with leptin injections
My brother's family has done something similar although in a different direction. They have been strictly carnivore for several years now. Able to eat large amounts of food while keeping calories low and feeling satiated. It's worked well for them.
There is more information about the family involved out there, but I can't remember where I read about it.
A thing I found interesting about the genetics of hunger, is the concept of mongenetic, v polygenetic traits
Monogenetic traits - a variation in a single gene is has an observed often severe impact. Polygenetic traits - variations in a large number of genes and environmental are contributing
In reality these traits exist on a spectrum of severity. The more sublte the impact of a gene the more people you need to study to tease out the influence of the gene, so monogenetic traits tend to be discovered first.
I'm reminded of the comment by a republican adviser, during the second bush presidency, critiquing an interviewer by saying ~ "you're too reality based, we're making reality".
The odd thing about this claim that autism is rising, diagnoses sure, but don't any of the adults old enough to remember, remember all the people who we just labelled as strange.
I've got a feeling we've got rising numbers of people diagnosed with autism and a corresponding reduction in people labelled and ostracised as non-specific 'strange'
A few years ago, I remember hearing reactionary podcasters panicking about trans identity propagating by "social contagion" {their phrase}.
The word "contagion" sets up an awful frame around this. I think instead you could come at this from an angle that recognises that there is a kind of social and internalised Overton window, a set of ideas that people are willing to express, or even allow themselves to think. As we increasingly see people living good full lives expressing and owning aspects of themselves that had once been heavily stigmatised - there may be a dynamic beyond just better diagnosis - there may be an uptick of people willing to be more honest about an aspect of themselves that they may otherwise have sought to hide or suppress, others might have been able to avoid even self-awareness.
If that is the case - just as there will never be a person who matches the reference human genome - there may be no upper limit to the fraction of people who find some aspect of themselves that extends outside the venn diagram circle of neurotypical.
Quite - it's not as though sexual identity has always been a strict binary between male and female. Other cultures have explicitly recognised different gender identities for ages which makes me think that it's part of the Western Christian cultural identity to only recognise two genders. e.g. Thai culture has a number of different recognised sexual identities and of course, India has the Hijra.
To my mind, people who are anti-trans identities are simply trying to exert control over others rather than having a generous nature and accepting that different people are different.
Because wit is good proxy for intelligence and an ability to take alternate perspectives. (Not all commedians are actually using wit, some lean on other kinds of humor, practised learned jokes and rebuttals, rousing a crowd against scapegoats)
I can’t say this is true, but it seems to me that Peter Theil views René Girard’s ideas on scapegoats and mimetic theory as correct, but views them not as an identification of the flaws we must outgrow as a species, but as a feature to be used to control and rule.
Descriptions cannot directly lead to prescriptions. Values come from you (the subject).
'Junk food is bad for your health' is a description, but who is it that decides that health is more important than pleasure? The prescription 'Don't eat junk food' is rooted in a value (e.g. that health is more important than pleasure), but you have the freedom to simply reject that value. How much moderation we should have is subjective.
If we all work on this, I think we can seed the chemtrails-verse with the belief that ancient hunter gatherer men saw nocturnal prey with their testicles, and that you can learn to do it now with a combo of ice baths and bow hunting naked