7 ms·
As noted elsewhere in this thread, which you seem not to have read, I discuss that matter in the article, which you also seem not to have read.
by DavidSJ 3mo ago
As noted elsewhere in this thread, which you seem not to have read, I discuss that matter in the article, which you also seem not to have read.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- kurthr 3mo agoNot only have I read it, I know people mentioned in it. There aren't very many.
- DavidSJ 3mo agoYou read the article in which I discuss the matter you say I was unfamiliar with?
- thechao 3mo agoI'm responding to a random comment: I was in molecular biology, but >20 years ago. Your article immediately presents as someone who's acquired reading expertise in a biological/medical subfield. Second, your initial survey presents as a "brittle x": AB is the proximal cause all by itself; but, it can also be the secondary cause from many vectors. Diseases like that are (essentially) impossible to explain to the public. Also, the biological principle function is a standard trope for "good for X in the short run, bad for the person in the long run".
- DavidSJ 3mo agoThanks for these comments! The multiple pathways into a common entrypoint is definitely a challenge to communicate.
- ncr100 3mo agoThis form of hostile challenge is discouraged in the HN rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- DavidSJ 3mo agoThat's fair. I responded to hostility with hostility. Perhaps I should have ignored the comment or just responded kindly despite the hostility.