"It is the engineer (along with the architect) who is convinced that while God did a pretty good job in creating our world, it could stand a few improvements."
Omarchy is not a distro, but that's not worth nitpicking about.
I have no problem with Omarchy, save one: it seems to (ironically) create a walled-in Linux environment that requires giving up a fair amount of control for a (lengthy) bespoke list of stuff.
This is mainly apparent with updates; if you install Omarchy, you have to update via Omarchy or risk some mayhem, you use DHH's separate package repo, etc. I'm simplifying, but that's the gist.
This seems to go against most of the reasons I like Linux.
I think you are right, and maybe it just appeals to a different kind of user. I appreciate the way it's set up out of the box, and make pretty minimal changes that chezmoi and the /omarchy skill help me maintain easily across updates. I like that it's well-configured without me having to configure it, but I know that's not what a lot of linux users are looking for.
Minimed 780g user here, it is not perfect. For a true closed loop we need a system that can give glucagon as well.
The current closed loop only gives you insulin to lower your blood glucose. When it gives too much it wakes you up and asks you to treat it.
You also have to accurately count carbs of meals you eat, enter when you exercise.
The sensors are also not quite reliable so sometimes it freaks out and you calibrate and go manual.
For a closed loop we need insulin and glucagon in conjunction to keep the bg stable without user intervention.
All closed loop systems require human action--maintenance,filling reservoirs, changing sites, dealing with the inherent variation of CGMs, estimating carbs, etc. even if glucagon delivery were on board (it's being worked on). But most are generally providing insulin delivery in real time, based on CGM data.
Also, I agree--glucagon would be a useful thing onboard for T1d, but not really for T2d, because (as you know) the essential problem there is highs, not lows.
And I definitely agree about CGM accuracy: most people don't know that there's a significant margin of error in all CGMs. It's 'close', but not precise.
If the large studies are to be believed, you could save hundreds of thousands of lives and many billions in excess expenditure, because stable blood glucose shortens length of stay. People with diabetes alone account for 60% of hospital expenditure, so improving their care improves the system in a big way.
>People with diabetes alone account for 60% of hospital expenditure
That number seemed too large to be true, and I think you might be conflating some numbers...
The NIH study about Economic Costs of Diabetes in the US in 2022 [1] states:
>For cost categories analyzed, care for people diagnosed with diabetes accounts for 1 in 4 health care dollars in the U.S., 61% of which are attributable to diabetes.
So, 25% of health care (not hospital) dollars in the US are apportioned to people with diabetes, and in 61% of those cases, the cause is directly attributable to diabetes itself.
Similarly, an NHS study [2] revealed that 60% of overall diabetes spend goes towards diabetes-related complications.
Finally, this presentation [3] states that: "hospital stays involving patients with diabetes contributed almost $83 billion or 23% of the total hospitalization costs in the United States," and, of course, not all of those were directly diabetes-related.
Obviously that is still a staggering amount of money spent on diabetes every year, and represents a huge burden on our healthcare system. But 60% for all hospital expenditure just doesn't track from my cursory Google-ing here.
Why should hospitals be motivated to shorten stays and reduce expenditures when those stays and expenditures mean that their profits will increase? Why don't they want to maximize profits from the suffering of sick people?
Outside America, profit does not push every other motivation to the bottom of the pool to drown
Though for the more terminally American founders here: reception filling in intake forms and charging one-time admission and diagnostic fees for new patients may have better margin than doctors charging billable hours
Humans have always eaten carbs; it’s the body’s preferred energy source. But human bodies can get energy from three sources, in order of preference—carbs, fat, and muscle (when all else fails).
Our bodies evolved to store fat for this very reason—future energy needs. Ancient humans lived feast or famine, and our biology adapted. We’re built to fast for days, using body fat for energy. When carbs are available, they’re preferred because they are faster and easier to burn.
Sugar is carbs. But ancient fruit in no way resembles today’s cultivated monstrosities, in appearance or sugar content.
Our modern problem is—we gorge on carbs all day long. So our body helpfully stores the excess as body fat for future use—because it expects eventual ‘famine’ where we’ll be fasting with few carbs available and need it. But we never let our body get to burn that fat.
To nitpick: at rest, muscle cells use fat over carbs to produce ATP. It is only during effort that the cells start to use more carbs than fat. The rest of the post is, to my understanding, correct.
When exogenous carbs are available, they are used preferentially, also at rest. Carbs need to go somewhere, and they only end up in fat storage after all other options are exhausted.
As intensity increases during exercise, the body starts releasing muscle glycogen. If previously the muscles were mostly using fat (because no exogenous carbs were available), now that endogenous carbs are ready, the muscles will use them instead. You cannot, however, reduce muscle glycogen use by supplementing extra carbs.
A nitpick about the title: Not strictly abdominal fat, but visceral abdominal fat, which surrounds the organs. Not all abdominal fat is visceral; in fact, in many people the majority is not.
The article mentions visceral early on, which is the subject.
To put this another way skinny fat just means you are not overweight but you have a high body fat percentage (eg lacking lean mass). So while you might not look like the average American there will still be significant visible abdominal fat, likely love handles, etc
Seriously, you don't think there's a connection between visceral fat and abdominal fat even though there's plenty of evidence that there is along with just common sense?
It's just a particular type of abdominal fat so obviously the more abdominal fat that you can see it means you also have more of the type that can't see as well... It's not that complicated
The amount of body fat and ways the body stores fat are highly uncorrelated for people who are not severely obese, and severe obesity itself might be made worse over time by high levels of visceral fat.
“In this meta-analysis, BMI and WC, but not WHR, were very strongly correlated with imaging-derived total and subcutaneous abdominal fat. By comparison, all three measures were moderately or strongly correlated with imaging-based visceral abdominal fat, with WC showing the greatest correlation.” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10503139/
Hugh gets one thing right: his success was luck and timing. He self-published a modest story at an opportune time for cheap, and the easy accessibility of Kindle books for pennies made him enough success to quit his day job.
"Pulp" fiction has always been a very hard way to make a living, and nearly everyone has failed at doing so. Centuries before AI.
Now, if people leverage AI to write magnitudes more mediocre pulp fiction, what will happen? I have a guess:
1. millions of ebooks drive prices down to almost free (or just free).
2. quality eventually gets worse.
3. Consumers perceive it as lower and lower value. A commodity at best.
4. Distributors like Amazon eventually cut out the 'producer' and simply manufacture it themselves.
Spoiler: this is already happening.
And interestingly, most of these were predicted at the advent of the "self-publish to Amazon" era 10-15 years ago.
"Like DDAW systems, ADDW systems must function without the use of biometric information, including facial recognition, of any vehicle occupants. It must also operate within a closed-loop system, only recording and retaining data on the device that is necessary for the system to function."
but also:
"ADDW systems use cameras and sensors to track a driver’s head position, eye movements, and gaze direction"
and
"only recording and retaining data on the device that is necessary for the system to function"
Not sure why such stuff would need to be retained to function. Also if they need to track head position and gaze direction those definitely have to be higher resolution camera and/or pointing directly at your head - so at least capable to store biometric information and hacked remotely since more cars are having telemetry.
I assume volatile memory isn't considered retention under these laws. There are no regulations governing data destruction for RAM, except at the highest levels of secrecy, where they shred or melt the entire computer anyways.
I know this runs on Linux too. As a Linux user, I'm unclear on why I might use this instead of apt or dnf, for example. Any Linux users out there have experience with both Homebrew and one of these?
Homebrew provides access to a massive catalog of software, including many tools that are not packaged for Fedora, Debian, or Ubuntu. Homebrew relies on a high level of automation in GitHub actions, which ensures users get the latest versions of tools quickly, rather than waiting for distribution-specific repositories. The Homebrew approach also decouples the underlying system from what you choose to install in user-space.
Yes. I daily drive pop os now. Hate to use flatpak for anything. Only install core packages, google chrome and vscode using apt. Almost everything else is installed using homebrew. The idea is have a base stable system for UI and basic shell. Usually get the latest packages from brew. Earlier same base system but had distrobox with arch toolbox. Planning on using this scheme going forward, especially since while I love rolling release, they sometimes might have regressions which I don’t want to deal with right away. And these regressions can be both at system level or user packages level. Having a stable base helps significantly in daily driving linux in real world.
It's for predictability in upgrades. Homebrew allows you to separate system packages (from apt or dnf) from user packages (from homebrew) [1]. Running apt upgrade or dnf upgrade can render your system unbootable if you're unlucky (or unstable or degraded if you're less unlucky). Running brew upgrade can at worst break some of your own user's setup or tools.
Since everybody runs their own unique permutation of apt or dnf packages, adding as little as possible will keep you as close as possible to what distro maintainers test. There's even OSes like Fedora Silverblue or Bluefin or SteamOS that ship with a fully baked _image_ - where installing system level packages is strongly discouraged - which helps ensure predictability and stable upgradeability.
Homebrew packages also tend to be more recent (this depends on your distro of course) and don't require elevated permissions to install.
[1]: Other unprivileged package managers like Mise or Nix do the same of course
You can have multiple versions of tools installed. But overall, homebrew plays well with atomic distros. They are thing in itself, yet getting more popular lately. Im using them at home and on the server, and it feels calmer, because I can't fuck up whole system easily. Considering I'm using llms without sandbox often, this is pure gold.
Small note: You need admin privileges only once for the first install which creates a new user `linuxbrew` and everything is based around `/home/linuxbrew` prefix. The issue is on systems where getting an admin access is not possible, you cannot ‘reliably’ install to a different prefix. It is currently unsupported.
Honestly, I would settle for a custom prefix if it tells me exactly what packages will break and what won’t without having to read each and every formula recipe.
That’s one thing that bothered me for a while and I did not have the willpower to explore that direction without having community support.
Auto makers are always looking for ways to differentiate, upsell, and tap demand.
reply