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

Refutes is a strong word. This is an ongoing debate and it’s not clear to me Haidt is on the right side of it. The Studies Show did a great episode on this, but unfortunately it’s paywalled. However, the show notes are public and link to the relevant back and forth if folks want to make up their own minds. https://www.thestudiesshowpod.com/p/paid-only-episode-12-jon...

Edit: And here’s a link to their earlier free episode recorded before this new meta analysis: https://www.thestudiesshowpod.com/p/episode-25-is-it-the-pho...


By refute I mean the paper cited. The meta-analysis methodology used in the Ferguson paper is flawed, one of After Babel's contributors goes into more detail here, https://shoresofacademia.substack.com/p/perils-of-flawed-met....

Informally: it would seem that of course social media exacerbates the spread of any social contagion such as bulimia, anorexia, 'alpha'-ness, etc...

Maybe it also helps to immunize people to those same contagions as well: that seems less obvious that would happen, to me at least...


I'm not sure if anyone is ever going to "refute" much in this tussle or that this can really be called a "debate", But there's an ugliness to it and the casualty is science.

I'm not old enough to remember doctors appearing in TV adverts claiming the health benefits of smoking. But I do remember those 1980s green-washing campaigns from Shell and Esso (Exxon) showing animals frolicking through the wonderful planet oil and gas were creating. I also remember all the plastic recycling campaigns that turned out to be rotten hoax.

Let's face it science gets used and tossed aside these days. Seeing research papers that flat-out contradict each other every week is tiring. All I want to say is that this utterly devalues science to see such disingenuous conflict, and to know that at least one side is making stuff up. It's going the same way as political debate and is an embarrassment to everyone who participates and believes in science.

Obviously there is emotion on all sides. And there is surely a humongous pot of money on one side. But I think where this is heading... it's classic Sirkov style full-spectrum disinformation, funding both sides and designed to undermine the very belief in scientific research itself.

It benefits the anti-rationalists and nihilists who can say, "you know what.. fuck science, I'm just going to assert what I like based on my emotion alone!" That tends to favour the might-is-right crowd and the shrill angry mob.



You made my job a whole lot easier. Thank you!

It looks like the stuff in the middle of the page ("Stripe Integrations", "Devise authentication set up", etc) should be centered. It doesn't look great on my wide monitor.

Trade is a technology that turns concrete sand into aquarium sand.

Yup also happened to me in 2018. I never received a download link for my archive. My support email was never answered and my archive expired and was deleted.


I was turned off by this too, but the fact that it's compatible with all VSCode extensions makes migrating a non-event. fwiw, here's their explanation [1]:

> Why Not an Extension?

> As a standalone application, Cursor has more control over the UI of the editor, enabling greater AI integration. Some of our features, like Cursor Tab and CMD-K, are not possible as plugins to existing coding environments.

[1]: https://docs.cursor.com/get-started/migrate-from-vscode


It was an event for me as Microsoft decided to brick .NET debugging in forks.


Thankfully, it wasn't CrowdStrike bricking things this time around.


Here's how it looks on safari mobile for me. The lowercase l and 1 are exactly the same. https://imgur.com/a/I2r2ZQ6


The StripeCustomer table has the same issue. There's both an `id` column and a unique `customerId` column. Presumably the `id` column is useless and could be removed.

Also, is there a way to set up foreign key constraints on `userId` with this ORM? That seems like another oversight.


In that blog they say they have now added very robust unit and integration tests, so I don't think this is an issue.


The conclusion of the blog are not great either.

Sure you should have tests, sure you shouldn't copy paste code you don't understand and you shouldn't push directly to production.

But, regardless of all that, the main issue of all this incident is not the rookie mistake itself, is how they didn't have logs or alerts and it took them 5 days of customer complaining to find out they had "duplication errors" in the db.

That's the thing that should have been fixed first and extensivly mentioned in the post-mortem


I'd be concerned said "robust" tests were also lifted from ChatGPT.


Heads up Bear [1] is just the blogging platform, not the company this post is about.

[1] https://bearblog.dev


lol, whoops :) Thank you.


I had the same question. Everyone is talking about how this is bad for the company's reputation... but it wasn't immediately clear to me what the company is.

I also eventually landed on reworkd.ai after some googling. The blog is called "asim" and the OP's username is "asim-shrestha". That lead me to this: https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/reworkd They are S23, which is mention in the blog.


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

Search: