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

WHile this is cool, I can't imagine that this provides a universal fit. It seems like they did a lot to tailor it to their dog.

Hi there, Great question! In short - yes, it does provide a pretty universal fit.

I originally measured only Billie because she's my dog and had a problem. But after helping about 50 other dogs, I discovered that the measurements work for most dogs with this condition. So far, I've only needed 2 sizes to cover all cases.

Of course, no two noses are exactly the same, and there will always be minor adjustments that could make an even more perfect fit - just like with any human clothing item. But the core design works well across different dogs.

I'd love to eventually offer truly custom fits for every dog, but for now, this approach has been effective for everyone I've worked with.


I feel like tailored treatments are a desired path anyway. Instead of having a one-size-fits-all I'd rather have a process made to fit everyone. While the "nose" would not fit other dogs; "make nose that fits other dog" seems like a valid process, no?

Maybe because poor diet has been linked to alzheimers?


More complicated than when? You used to have kids because you needed more hands to work the farm and a good number of them died young.


Yes that model has been inverted.

The family used to tax the grown or mostly-grown children in the form of farm labor. The government in many prior centuries taxed like 2-5% total and the rest was intrafamilial support.

Now it is flipped on its head. Everyone else's families tax your child for their social security, socializing the benefits while still you retain most the costs privately.

Thus tragedy of the commons situation. Why make that investment when you can just tax everyone else's kids and rest assured of your own social security, if they don't pay it you can just have them tossed in a cage or their assets seized, no need to have children yourself.


What you write is the mathematical fact of societies with flattened and upside down population pyramids and wealth transfers from young to old, not sure why you are downvoted.


I don’t know about that. My great grandmas and grandmas didn’t have lots of kids for the labor, they had them because they didn’t have a way to not have them. The grandpas might have though.

Coincidentally, my aunts did not have to have more than 2, and almost every single one had 2 kids.


Exactly, so that made having children a financial benefit. I'm confused that you said it but don't get it.


It feels more like people [used to] have kids because they fucked and hadn't made the connection between that and having children. Them working at whatever you worked at was just necessary so you can help them grow, keep an eye on them, and pay for their upbringing.


> It feels more like people [used to] have kids because they fucked and hadn't made the connection between that and having children.

Why on earth would you believe that? People have bred animals for millennia. You think they didn’t understand that sex was a required step?

I imagine people have understood that sex led to pregnancy since before Homo sapiens.


I think you underestimate human intelligence. People have made that connection for a very long time.

People didn't have options besides "not having sex" that worked very well.


It’s amazing that the need for more hands on the farm declined at precisely the same time birth control became widely available.


Why are you asking them to cite something for that statement? Are you questioning whether it's the foundation for intelligence or whether LLMS understand goals and consequences?


Yes, I'm questioning if that's the foundation of intelligence. Says who?


Richard Sutton. He won a Turing Award. Why ask your question above when you can just watch the YouTube link I posted?


That's not relevant to the comment you replied to.


Ah - I misread:

Recall 91.5, F1 93.3


What strategy is that?


I presume they mean that distribution is king and they make all the devices.


Seriously. Can I copyright 34 * 712 * 9.2 * pi? I didn't think you could.


They're abolished as long as you can afford the lawyers to fight an underfunded government agency indefinitely.


If they can perform well without reviewing the material, that's a problem with either the performance measure or the material.

And not watching lectures is not the same as not reviewing the material. I generally prefer textbooks and working through proofs or practice problems by hand. If I listen to someone describe something technical I zone out too quickly. The only exception seems to be if I'm able to work ahead enough that the lecture feels like review. Then I'm able to engage.


Can you rebrand a species? Drinking vomitoria sounds less than appetizing.


Oilseed rape / rapeseed became canola. Anything is possible.


Yes you can. See Patagonian Toothfish -> Chilean Seabass.


Or Chinese Gooseberry -> Kiwi Fruit.


To be fair, a lot of Asian ingredients have picked up such weird English translations that they could use a rebrand. Case in point: "Prickly pear ash" is an amazingly unappetizing translation of the spice's proper name, sanshō or sancho.


"Prickly ash" is an ingredient in Chinese cuisine, particularly Szechuan cooking. We buy it in quantity at Asian groceries where it's pretty inexpensive.

In the US it's known as "Szechuan peppercorn". Preparing it for use requires carefully inspecting a handful for stems and thorns (which can be quite big), pan toasting and crushing/grinding to a coarse powder.

As pointed out in the sister comment, the spice has a mild numbing effect which counters the heat of chilis. Adding a little to hot dishes makes the flavor more complex and enjoyable.

For people who like to cook it's an ingredient worth experimenting with across culinary boundaries.


Part of the problem with the English translations is this ambiguity. Sansho comes from a different species (Zanthoxylum piperitum) of the same genus, native to Japan and Korea. The flavor is different, but reminiscent. I keep both sansho and red Sichuan peppercorns for use in different dishes.


Is that prickly ash? Like a toothache tree with all the sharp spikes on the trunk?

It looks like sancho is the berry produced by the tree. The leaves look similar to our toothache tree or Hercules Club as some call it. I know that the bark here in NAmerica has been used as a local anesthetic for a long time. It produces a tingly, numbing sensation when it becomes wet. I have used the bark to numb gums or throat pain. I never tried the berries.

My tree here died in the last drought. It was a birdshit variety since it was growing along the fence. The seed was dropped by a bird as it rested on the fence and I got a tree as a result! Gotta wait for the next one I guess.


Different tree, same genus. I'm not sure if all species (of 250+) in the genus have edible fruit, but the berries of several Asian species are harvested for spices, including Sichuan Peppercorns, which are made from the dried berries.

I would bet that the flavor (citrusy, with a numbing effect) is similar among all the species, but varies in strength and pungency. I'm not sure if I would bet that any species is safe to eat, however.


I'll need to look into the ways the tree was used by Native Americans and early settlers. I have known about the use of the bark for decades but don't recall anything about other parts of the tree. Thanks for the information.


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

Search: