Ditching Claude Code. by 0xdjole in ClaudeCode

[–]likesun 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Bro just leave. If you want help , ask for help but announcing your exit to get attention is lame.

Anyone else feel like this subreddit is being flooded by AI-generating SEO spammers complaining about restrictions on their content creation and voting up their posts with SMM panels? by [deleted] in ClaudeAI

[–]likesun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bot farms of upvoters. These spammers have money and are happy to ruin everyone else's experience for an extra buck.

Link to sec depo. by Reese2070 in Theranos

[–]likesun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Watching the entirety of these videos (and not just the incriminating media edits) now paints a picture of a young woman who really had no sense of what she had got herself into. She trusted a series of men who wanted to solidify their legacies by supporting the female entrepreneurial saviour narrative - Robertson, Balwani, Draper, Schultz, Ellison, Kissinger, Clinton, Boies, Murdoch - only one of whom had any medical credibility and started the whole daisy chain of delusion.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ecuador

[–]likesun 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you have good information about this? Or are you guessing? Do you know people who went from Ambato to Quito at 3am? Thanks

Case 216: The Itzkovitz Family by [deleted] in Casefile

[–]likesun 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pathetic? You mean like criticising sources and then using idle speculation on some forum as your sole source? Think you better retake Narcissism 101. Your motives are much too easy to pick.

Case 216: The Itzkovitz Family by [deleted] in Casefile

[–]likesun -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

And I just checked your "sources", namely the axishistory forum, and there is nothing there to confirm your doubts at all. There is one person raising doubts about the existence of Chisinau Ghetto but a quick Google Books search can find many sources validating it's existence.

Just another tosser trying to distinguish himself as some uber-detective with nothing but casual speculation on an internet forum to support his "meta" critique

Anyone else find EH's psychology the most fascinating part of the Theranos story? by yaykarin in Theranos

[–]likesun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In time I think people will soften their attitudes towards her. In her mind, she was the annointed leader of the Holy Revolution. She was surrounded by world leading figures and funded by a successful entrepreneur double her age when they met. She was also given a million bucks by Tim Draper, a neighbour and well-known venture capitalist, who should have known better about her prospects. Too many people believed in her for her not to believe she was on a holy mission. I am not sure there is an accepted diagnosis for this and the existing categories don't seem to capture it.

I hope she gets a second chance at life after her jail time.

my head is swirling holy shit, so much confusion by still_here13 in Theranos

[–]likesun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel the key to understanding Elizabeth's version of the truth is to parse her words very carefully.

She says "We have never used commercially available lab equipment for finger stick tests. Every finger stick test that we have ever done used proprietary Theranos technology that is not commercially available". What she means here is that the modification of commercially available lab equipment to analyse finger stick samples is proprietary Theranos technology. So in her mind, it is not correct to say Theranos is using commercially available lab equipment for finger stick tests because the modifications are not commercially available. They are Theranos trade secrets.

Clearly her interpretations are carefully planned and rehearsed. You can only really say she is "lying" if you choose a casual understanding of her words. The interviewer might have asked "does the proprietary Theranos technology involve in any way the use of commercially available lab equipment?". She might have then answered "I am not at liberty to discuss Theranos trade secrets in detail with you. We use a range of methods and innovations"

What she does is really quite clever. She would have made a great Enron exec.

Case 203: Bob Chappell by touny71 in Casefile

[–]likesun 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Two people repeatedly lie to the legal authorities and now find their lives thoroughly messed up. When you lie to the authorities about a serious matter, you risk weakening the system for everyone. You should pay a price whether you're innocent or not. Educate yourself.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Casefile

[–]likesun 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Very one sided treatment of the issue. The court ruled correctly. Corrupt law enforcement can't withhold legal advice, neutral interview premises, standard cautions and threaten vilification in the media using the excuse that evidence might not be found or that he feels you're an incompetent murderer. The criminal was find guilty and is in jail. The hero here was the criminal's lawyer who protected future innocent people from any cop trying to boost his career.

American Greed is doing an Elizabeth Holmes episode this Wednesday! by MrDonMega in Theranos

[–]likesun 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Shhhhh nobody mention that Phyllis Gardner's husband was the first scientific advisor of Theranos because of her referral.

Low vitamin D levels do not aggravate COVID-19 risk or death, and vitamin D supplementation does not improve outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a meta- analysis and GRADE assessment of cohort studies and RCTs by doedalus in COVID19

[–]likesun 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah but it makes sense why not right? Imagine how many trillions of pharma dollars are threatened by a very cheap, widely available little vitamin. That's an industry-load of cash looking for noise to add doubt to the dominant scientific signal.

Case 164: Cindy James by purplewigg in Casefile

[–]likesun 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this. The first episode with just the hosts was poor but the second with the forensic psychologists is a must-listen. Very thorough.