Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 7bit's commentslogin

"known" is the wrong word. Laymen know a lot of things, like ingesting lead, radium, mercury and arsenic. Up until a couple of years ago, people "knew" that one glass of wine a day was healthy, when infact every drop is poisonous to the body.

In reverse, people thought (and too many still "know") that MSG and pasteurization is bad.

Don't use the word know, when in fact you mean "assume".


Is MSG not bad for you in the way aspartame is not bad for you? I totally get that MSG is naturally present in dashi but the chemistry of dashi (a very messy and complex mix of substances) vs purified msg is going to be different, and the concentrations the japanese consume food containing dashi are very different to the way UPFs and chinese restaurants gratuitously smother your food in it. MSG is to many cuisines what butter is to western cuisine (ie moar is always bettah)

There’s no evidence linking MSG specifically with any chronic health issues and little reason to suspect there would be in healthy people at the quantities generally consumed. Funnily enough many people who are wary of MSG and try to avoid it would be better off looking at their sodium intake, which we know for sure has long term health risks.

Well it seems pretty accepted that refined sugar is worse for you than consuming sugars locked up in fibrous fruits. From a similar intuition glutamates locked up in natural sources probably has a different bioavailability profile to refined MSG, incidental sodium intake notwithstanding.

In any case, everyone is different and catchall health advice lacks nuance. I have to very consciously consume more and more salt because I habitually cut it out to the point that I now suffer from hyponatremia especially as I exercise and sweat bucket loads.


I am someone who is sensitive to MSG and the new substitutes they put in food to replace it.

It is not "dangerous", and I think that is the problem with the messaging, but it does increase my anxiety, insomnia and fibromyalgia symptoms. And I also thing for most people it is fine, but it certainly does not work with my family's genetics. My mother had the same issue.

Many things in food now replace MSG. Any time you see a protein isolate, what they are isolating is the glutamate. Malted Barley Flour also contains high levels of glutamate and purines (like inosine) that work synergisticly with it to enhance flavor.

Glutamate is an excitatory neurotransmitter, and it makes your taste buds more "excited". My mouth tastes like metal whenever I have foods with glutamate. It is not pleasant for me at all.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9883458/

https://www.eurofins.com/media-centre/newsletters/food-newsl...


salt is bad again?

Salt's bad if you have sodium-responsive hypertension (maybe 30% of the population).

salt was always advised to be limited, especially for those with high blood pressure. This hasn't changed, there are just vocal diet ideologues (mostly carnivore/keto) that are trying to post-hoc rationalize otherwise.

From what I understand it's only really a problem for a specific set of high blood pressure folks. Something genetic I think.

I'm on blood pressure medication, and haven't received any advice about sodium intake.


Only ~50% of the population is hypertensive, and only about half of them are sodium sensitive.

Everybody is sodium sensitive, it’s a basic fact that your body retains additional fluids if you increase your sodium intake, just talk to some bodybuilders. Chronic long term exposure to a high sodium diet is a risk factor for all sorts of issues because of this basic fact of biology. Way more so than MSG or even artificial sweeteners. But people focus on the wrong thing.

My understanding is that most people's blood pressure does not increase in response to dietary sodium, which is the sensitivity described in this context.

And half of the half that are sensitive, it lowers blood pressure.

MSG is only bad for you because it makes things taste amazing so you are going to eat more than you actually should. Nothing wrong with butter btw.

As with most food stuffs if not consumed in moderation it can become a problem.


MSG is very safe in normal quantities with a similar safety profile to salt. You can drink MSG water to kill yourself but it’d be like drinking a gallon of seawater. It’s monosodium glutamate. Monosodium as in NaCl (table salt) and glutamate as in the amino acid and neurotransmitter. Once they disassociate in water, they’re both some of the most basic molecules used by all life, including for protein production.

A glass of wine a day is within epsilon of the most healthy possible option. You're making this out as if this is a big shift, but it isn't. There are just huge error bars on the measurements relative to the effect of the intervention.

Ah yes. American Prisons prioritizing punishment over resocialising is the reason why criminals so often continue to hurt society after they have been released.

Then we have people who demand to double down on the punishment and wonder why these people never stop breaking the law.

Americans are a marvelous bunch. Thanks Dog I live in a first world country.


I don't think you know what humble job means, and meant to say humiliating pay.

Obviously your co-worker was not able to do it in a few minutes with a free program, or he would just have done it this way.

I have three Ubuntu servers and the naming pisses me off so much. Why can't they just stick with their YY.MM. naming scheme everywhere. Instead, they mostly use code names and I never know what codename I am currently using and what is the latest code name. When I have to upgrade or find a specific Python ppa for whatever OS I am running, I need to research 30 minutes to correlate all these dumb codenames to the actual version numbers.

Same with Intel.

STOP USING CODENAMES. USE NUMBERS!


As an Apple user, the macOS code names stopped being cute once they ran out of felines, and now I can't remember which of Sonoma or Sequoia was first.

Android have done this right: when they used codenames they did them in alphabetical order, and at version 10 they just stopped being clever and went to numbers.


Ubuntu has alphabetical order too, but that's only useful if you want to know if "noble" is newer than "jammy", and useless if you know you have 24.04 but have no idea what its codename is and

Android also sucks for developers because they have the public facing numbers and then API versions which are different and not always scaling linearly (sometimes there is something like "Android 8.1" or "Android 12L" with a newer API), and as developers you always deal with the API numbers (you specify minimum API version, not the minimum "OS version" your code runs in your code), and have to map that back to version numbers the users and managers know to present it to them when you're upping the minimum requirements...


> Ubuntu has alphabetical order too, but that's only useful if you want to know if "noble" is newer than "jammy"

Well, it was until they looped.

Xenial Xerus is older than Questing Quokka. As someone out of the Ubuntu loop for a very long time, I wouldn't know what either of those mean anyway and would have guessed the age wrong.


Yes, I agree, codenames are stupid, they are not funny or clever.

I want a version number that I can compare to other versions, to be able to easily see which one is newer or older, to know what I can or should install.

I don't want to figure out and remember your product's clever nicknames.


They can't. They used to, until they tried to patent 586...

Trademark.

Protip, if you have access to the computer: `lsb_release -a` should list both release and codename. This command is not specific to Ubuntu.

Finding the latest release and codename is indeed a research task. I use Wikipedia[1] for that, but I feel like this should be more readily available from the system itself. Perhaps it is, and I just don't know how?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu#Releases


> Protip, if you have access to the computer: `lsb_release -a` should list both release and codename. This command is not specific to Ubuntu.

I typically prefer

  cat /etc/os-release
which seems to be a little more portable / likely to work out of the box on many distros.

That's only if the distro is recent enough; sooner or later, you'll encounter a box running a distro version from before /etc/os-release became the standard, and you'll have to look for the older distro-specific files like /etc/debian_version.

> you'll encounter a box running a distro version from before /etc/os-release became the standard

Do those boxes really still exist? Debian, which isn't really known to be the pinacle of bleeding edge, has had /etc/os-release since Debian 7, released in May 2013. RHEL 7, the oldest Red Hat still in extended support, also has it.


> the oldest Red Hat still in extended support, also has it.

You would be alarmed to know how long the long tail is. Are you going to run into many pre-RHEL 7 boxes? No. Depending on where you are in the industry, are you likely to run into some ancient RHEL boxes, perhaps even actual Red Hat (not Enterprise) Linux? Yeah, it happens.


> Do those boxes really still exist?

Yes, they do. You'll be surprised by how many places use out-of-support operating systems and software (which were well within their support windows when installed, they have just never been upgraded). After all, if it's working, why change it? (We have a saying here in Brazil "em time que está ganhando não se mexe", which can be loosely translated as "don't change a (soccer) team which is winning".)


Try cat /etc/os-release. The codenames are probably there. I know they are for Debian.

Thank you! I was just about to kvetch about how difficult it was to map (eg) "Trixie" == "13" because /etc/debian_version didn't have it... I always ended up having to search the internet for it which seemed especially dumb for Debian!

Same problem I have with Debian.

At least Fedora just uses a version number!


I like to think that Buster, Bullseye, and Bookworm was a ploy to make people more dependent on the version number.

I work with Debian daily and I still couldn't tell you what order those go in. but Debian 12, Debian 13, etc.. is perfectly easy to remember and search for.

Debian is trying hard to switch to numbers. It's the user base that is resisting the change.

Maybe they should stop synlinking the new versions after 14, because AFAIK, they already tried everything else.


Yeah if they just stopped using a release name that'd probably do it, although communities can be surprisingly stubborn on some things.

Exactly this. Every second update, there is something new that I typically disable or revert. The amount of stuff that is added and not opt-in in the last few years is just tiring.

I think you're wrong and people choose Firefox because they believe it's better.

You're both arguing the same thing.

It's not X is the same as it's better than X. Just because someone chooses something because it isn't the other thing isn't saying both suck.


I prefer Firefox over Chromium. But I much more prefer having a working ad blocker. Therefore I support that statement and when Firefox starts removing support for that, I'm out and there's enough alternatives I can go to, even tho they're Chromium based.

Not all Russian trolls live in Russia and not all of them are Russian.

> While the report offered general information, feedback showed that it didn't provide helpful next steps.

Translation: We don’t actually want to keep spending time, money, and resources on this.


No, not really. The way this worked is that if they detected personal information on a "dark web" (per their definition -- I have no idea what this actually meant) site, they would show you a report that told you which PII was listed, and it was usually things like your fname/lname, address, phone or location. The problem is that it wasn't actionable [because it was the dark web], unlike their current personal data privacy features and data removal tool.

This is one where I don't blame them for killing it because "it" wasn't really even a product -- it was just a very basic, not useful at all, report.


That's not how it reads to me. I think it's more that they feel they can't share enough information to make it useful without compromising their operating methods. Which is an eternal struggle with stuff like that: the bad guys are reading too.

That's my read. That it's not a revenue generator and taking server resources that could go to something that is making them money. They've at least added more things to Google One over the past year which softens the blow.

Doubtful. The issue is probably the service needs to be moved to some framework that isn't deprecated and being turned off, and no one can justify side projects these days that don't sell an AI product.

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

Search: