Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | franktankbank's comments login

Last place I worked I was direct AND kind towards my team about a data leak related to PHI and they chose to sweep it under the rug and never addressed it while I was there. I think I should have been a bigger asshole. Some ORGs just can't deal with negative outcomes in a positive way.

If they don't care about a PHI leak it wouldn't matter how you presented it

Were you laid off? If so, the results suit them well, you didn't even need to be an asshole for their benefit.

Edit: sorry, my intention was to "diss" them, not you.


Not sure if you are dissing me or what. But, no I left for this reason and quite a few others. Healthcare IT is a cesspool of incompetence and grift.

Raw milk is delicious, my ancestors have been drinking it for millennia.

Isn't this literally survivorship bias? Those who died early wouldn't have had offspring.

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias


Not saying its a good choice for those whose ancestors didn't go through the selection process.

Your ancestors didn’t face bird flu.

That said, I’m for people being idiots. I’m just done paying for it. If you’re chugging raw milk during a bird flu epidemic and your family gets sick because of it, basic insurance and the public should only pick up the cost after you’ve declared bankruptcy.


Similarly I wish I could enact carveouts so I wasn't supporting peoples health problems related to commenting way too much on the internet, hackernews in particular.

Milk is my main drink. I don't drink beer or wine, it's mostly just plain milk for me. And while there is a substantial taste difference based on the % of fat, I have never seen a difference in taste between pasteurised and non-pasteurised. I actually bought a bottle of raw milk from a farmer just to try it. No negative effects, but it just tasted insipid compared to 5.4% fat milk I can get at the supermarket.

People who claim a taste difference between raw and pasteurised, I'd very much like to see someone taste the difference on the same cow's milk blind, before and after pasteurisation. I just don't think it affects the taste much, and certainly not as much as fat %.

And for people who claim health benefits, I would like to see a double blind study demonstrating those benefits.


I think the main difference is fresh. When I was in high school I stayed with a dairy farmer who brought in a jug of milk from the tank for breakfast after milking the cows. After that I can't drink regular milk.

Pasteurization does affect taste though. Around me there are two different dairies, one does regular pasteurization and one does vat pasteurization and I can tell the difference. There is ultra pasteurization which is just gross. I've never put unpasteurized head to head against equally fresh pasteurized though, and given what I now know I'm not going to.


  There is ultra pasteurization which is just gross.
Are you referring to 120C 3-second ultra high temperature pasteurization? I don't see what would be so gross about it.

I don't know the details about ultra pasteurization. I just know anything labeled ultra pasteurized states gross.

Of course the above is subjective. Others have stated they prefer it. To each their own, but I will continue to maintain it makes milk taste gross.


I love ultra pasteurization. I'm lactose intolerant so I have to drink "lactose free"[1] milk and in Canada such milk is often UHT pasteurized since it has to stay on the store shelf longer (lower inventory turnover). It's amazing that we can, non-chemically, disinfect a dairy product in such a way that it will stay good for months even without refrigeration.

In Mexico I suspect that almost all milk is ultra pasteurized since it's not refrigerated in stores and has wicked-long expiration dates. It's also some of the best-tasting milk I've had so I think that flavour has more to do with some of the other milk processes (like skimming) and the livelihood of the cows rather than with how it's pasteurized.

[1] In practice this is just milk with the lactase enzyme added at some point during production.


I have no doubt that milk that is 15 minutes old tastes great. My question is if that jug of milk was divided in two and one half was pasteurised, would people be able to tell the difference? You're saying yes, I'm saying I'd like to see blind tests of people tasting both.

IF you read close you will see that I didn't say yes. I said that I don't know and am not willing to be part of such a blind test. I will state clearly that all the unpasteurized milk I had was less than an hour old and tasted great, while all the pasteurized milk was unknown age but likely at least a day old and tasted worse. Is it fresh or pasteurization that makes a difference is not something I know.


What the cows eat matters for how milk tastes too. Cows can get sick. Udders can get infections. Milking processes (machinery) and its ease of cleaning can vary. Bacteria is everywhere. Pasteurization is a cheap, effective and has no real drawbacks. This whole raw milk thing is just silly and has become political for some silly reason.

You may be onto something about the different cows. This was while I lived in France temporarily. I had no idea that I was drinking raw milk. I was commenting how delicious it was and a coworker said "oh is that the stuff you have to boil". Me "wut". It was much better than the supermarket milk I could get.

The confounding factor is milk fat. In my experience higher fat milk just tastes better regardless of any other factor and milk straight from the cow will have up to 5% milk fat compared to 3.25% for "whole" milk. Try drinking a shot glass of 10% cream sometime, it's amazing.

It isn’t raw if it’s been boiled.

That’s pasteurized. At a higher temp than the supermarket stuff, even.


Might not have been clear. I wasn't boiling it because I couldn't read the french instructions.

I'd consider drinking raw milk only if I was on a first name basis with the cow that produced it.

Otherwise I would at least demand it be fermented into kefir so the food microbes can muscle out the bad.


That won't make a difference. Bacteria is something you cannot see and so you have no idea what is on/in the cow.

It sure can make a difference.

Sickness caused by bacteria doesn't happen as soon as one bad bacteria (bacterium?) enters your body, a certain critical mass is usually required. This is very similar to the concept of "viral load" where a certain amount of viral genetic material needs to be exchanged before the viral infection can take hold.

The "beneficial bacteria" on your skin and in your gut make it harder for bad bacteria to take root in many different ways, one of them simply being they provide competition, "crowding out the bad guys".

Another way is that many, many, many types of antibiotics were originally discovered as metabolites produced by bacteria and fungi (examples include penicillin, streptomycin, chloramphenicol, and tetracycline).

And for completeness sake, milk kefir contains many Lactobacillus species that are also a natural part of the mammal microbiome (which makes sense when you think about it; Lactobacillus are named for consuming lactose, an ingredient of mammal milk).


> Raw milk is delicious, my ancestors have been drinking it for millennia.

Before refrigeration most milk was made into butter, cheese and other products. Unless your ancestors actually herded the animals themselves they probably didn’t drink much raw milk.


And we enjoyed our milkborne tuberculosis, typhoid, scarlet fever, diphtheria, and septic sore throat thoroughly, too. The risks actually doubled the joys. Why does a supposedly enlightened society step all over my right to choose which eliminated diseases to bring back?

Oooh, ooh, oh, don't forget the brucellosis either.

But hey, I only get to enjoy this if the measles here in Texas don't get me first.


And many of them died from doing so.

not everyone's ancestors

Only about 1/3rd of the world. However by coincidence fluency in English correlates high with ability to drink milk as an adult.

I really doubt he's got those being made just for him without any concern with number of pieces. He's getting something off the shelf in that case or just lying. I've seen similar things being made and sold in America for less but they build thousands in a year. A metal box like that requires significant setup and probably some amount of new tooling. I wonder how well this guy is doing actually if he can't provide those kinds of numbers to his potential suppliers.

I thought I’d comment but I guess you’ve sort of proved the videos point yourself.

What do you mean?

You appear to be expressing the same pushback and disbelief that this guy says all American companies have.. while this guy is claiming "Chinese companies just do it"

I suspect this guy isn't lying. I suspect China is an order of magnitude ahead of us in these kinds of manufacturing spaces. Hence, these tariffs aren't going to work.


The cost of manufacturing your stuff is not labor dependent only because you are probably putting together low cost components made with cheap labor. What if you had to make the spring or the resistor or the little painted metal box? Could you do that without labor being the big cost?

I actually make pretty high cost products with relatively expensive labor (welders, electricians).

Even then, materials & parts dominate.


What? How much labor do you think goes into making a spring or a resistor? These are parts which cost fractions of a cent and are cranked out by the tens of millions.

St. Paul drinking water has suffered under 3m mismanagement.

Subsidize the essentials let the free market sort the rest. I think we still want competitive markets within our borders for the stuff we subsidize so we don't get stagnation of the industry. Maybe there are clues how it could be structured like we subsidize farming.

Canada and the US are long time allies and should be able to benefit from eachother without much hesitation. China is an adversary, big difference in posture.

Security allies? Sure. Economic allies? I don't think that has been the case for a long time. Even before Trump's second term.

Canada and the US have been to court multiple times over NAFTA violations (sometimes Canada is at fault admittedly).

https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-com...


Canada and the US are no longer allies.

Unfortunately it's impossible to tell if they are de facto allies, because on the one hand they very much still are de jure still allies, and on the other all the stuff Trump is saying and doing.

I've been thinking lately that we don't properly account for things like security. I've also been thinking lately that a lot of people have terrible ethics and are more than happy to engage in nepotism and or fraud. Don't know what to do about it personally, I just try to keep my needs small and be happy with what I've got while trying to prepare my own children to have some level of a good life.

More like common man does not think long term (and I'd say rightfully so). While democratic regime embraces populist hedonistic solutions.

Who cares about defense capabilities 10 or 50 years down the line? Lots of people in West had a good run outsourcing everything. But once there's nothing else to outsource and IP to sell... It's not gonna be pretty.

Next generations in West will have to work very hard to recover from this mess.


Hate to agree.

DRY is also about coherence not just refactorability. If you have multiple different behaviors for the "same" thing then your customers are going to think you suck.

Unless its too expensive or just doesn't work well. Although in entrenched fields like healthcare that act with impunity I guess an LLM would make a slightly cheaper firewall between the industry and the customers you "serve".

Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: