Couldn't this be trivially confounded by differing patterns of diet soda consumption between groups with differing likelihoods of autism-diagnosed children?
There's that. There's a cultural fear of aspartame that could cause people who don't like their child's diagnose to over report aspartame consumption* because they want something to blame. There's self selection in the study group (235 kids with autism vs 120 without is not a random population sample). I made the quip in another comment this is self reported consumption from memory.
*That 200+ vs 100+ ratio in the groups kinda implies they went looking for this specific connection rather than it just popping up as they did various regressions, and if you're looking for a specific connection it's easy to accidently-on-purpose pull in people who already believe in that connection which can color their recollection.
I'm curious what the split was in Mapbox union organizing interest between Engineering/Product/Design/Data and Sales/Marketing/other go-to-market roles.
Browsing the old union website (https://www.mapboxworkersunion.org/) almost all of the supporters of unionization were on the engineering side of the house, much more than I'd expect if you randomly sampled the org for job titles.
This is true, but the workaround proposed in the article is not a change to the query at all. It's adding another index, which is a pretty classic case of "proper" usage of query analysis (as opposed to confusing/hacky mutations of the query itself).
Unless I'm misreading they didn't add another index. They actually just reduced the original index by removing an indexed expression and excluding rows that didn't match that expression instead.
I suspect this is just a rough edge. Many types of functions may not be consistent, and therefore would need to be re-executed on the original data. Perhaps some of the planner functionality here predates function notation like `IMMUTABLE`.
Interesting to see this data released, but I'm a little dubious.
According to the spreadsheet, Aetna is always paying 100% of list, and SEIU 1199 is always paying exactly 50%.
Most of the other private providers are listed with almost-flat discounts (85% for CHP, 71% for Empire, 60% for Healthfirst) with a handful of operations at other price points. Cigna has a little more variety but is mostly listed at 51%.
Only Emblem shows real variety across the board, with prices listed from 21.9% to 174%. It also has the lowest mean/median, at 45% and 34% respectively.
I know from personal experience that Aetna does have negotiated rates with NYP, and the flat discounts for all providers other than Emblem are also suspicious.
It might have to do with the amount of RAM on the computer? On a computer with 4GB of RAM, I've found FF crawls up to around 2GB; on a computer with 8, I've found it crawls up to around 4GB. Similar script blocking and host blocking setups on both, most recent versions of FF (though different versions of MacOS).
Similar horrendous effect on the performance of everything else on the computer til I restart the damn browser.
I have Windows PCs with anything from 2GB to 8GB, and I'm just about to upgrade one to 12GB, so I'll have a look when I get some free time. However, the browser putting a cap on RAM usage would seem a sensible approach....
