|
axeil posted:stop_hes_already_dead.avi At this point anyone who still owns Uber stock is either a dumbass who can't see the imminent trainwreck or so detached from their finances they deserve to lose them. e: Page snipe 
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:48 |
|
|
axeil posted:What was the rationale before for denying them? Is this a good thing or bad thing for everyone? Do we finally have those clinics from GATTACA where we can take our SO's DNA to be tested? Here's an article about the reversal. If I understand it, the FDA had concerns about the accuracy of their tests, and they didn't want people to be misled by a risk assessment into "self-diagnosing" in a certain sense. They're limited to tests for 10 diseases, and maybe their tech has improved in the past few years. I think the fear is that consumers won't properly interpret the results of these tests and try to prevent the diseases on their own in ways that may be more harmful than helpful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
super sweet best pal posted:At this point anyone who still owns Uber stock is either a dumbass who can't see the imminent trainwreck or so detached from their finances they deserve to lose them. You know that Uber is a private company, right? Most of the investors are likely enjoined from selling to a secondary market.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
aware of dog posted:Here's an article about the reversal. If I understand it, the FDA had concerns about the accuracy of their tests, and they didn't want people to be misled by a risk assessment into "self-diagnosing" in a certain sense. They're limited to tests for 10 diseases, and maybe their tech has improved in the past few years. I think the fear is that consumers won't properly interpret the results of these tests and try to prevent the diseases on their own in ways that may be more harmful than helpful. Huh. Presumably doing the test and then if the percent chance is high enough you should talk with a doctor to see if there's anything you can do to decrease the risk would be the medically prudent advice, no? Although now that I look at the list I'm not sure there's much to be done about the genetic diseases they test for. edit: I think the big part of the article is buried at the end. 23andMe worked with the FDA to get their tests up to the caliber needed for approval and eventually got the approval, with potential new tests getting future approval. Compare that to Uber who constantly pisses on everyone. It's almost like...regulators aren't assholes who want to arbitrarily block stuff but have legitimate concerns that, if addressed will pave the way to approval! axeil fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Buy it with the explicit purpose of banning Trump  Twitter alleges Trump administration tried to unmask critical account quote:Twitter filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Thursday alleging that U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials had tried to get the company to reveal the identity of an anonymous account that has been critical of the agency. quote:Twitter said that the attempt to unmask the account would be a violation of its First Amendment rights. https://twitter.com/ALT_uscis/status/850085693766414337
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
aware of dog posted:E: also, the FDA just reversed course and gave 23andMe approval to sell disease-predisposition tests poo poo. That's going to be a nightmare. 23andMe have been overpromising on their test marketing material pretty much forever. They're a source of a huge quantity of public misconceptions of genetics, genetic testing, and abuse thereof. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 10:21 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 09:55
|
|
|
super sweet best pal posted:At this point anyone who still owns Uber stock is either a dumbass who can't see the imminent trainwreck or so detached from their finances they deserve to lose them. They are private, and illiquid, shares. Lots of people who invested in uber are real dumb, don't get me wrong, but you can't magically divest yourself of a vc stake in a lot of cases. If you want to see really dumb, look at the cadre of investment banks who lent them money over the summer. It was nearly $2 billion at like L+600 (6.5%- 7.5%) with is a set of really friendly terms for them. The whole thing was entirely based on these banks wanting to lead the very lucrative IPO when/if it happens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
call to action posted:Isn't Uber's/Otto's tech the only real competitor to Google/Waymo? Uber isn´t even one of the better ones.  Source
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 12:03
|
|
|
the heat goes wrong posted:Uber isn´t even one of the better ones. quote:These players are rated on 10 criteria: vision; go-to market strategy; partners; production strategy; technology; sales, marketing, and distribution; product capability; product quality and reliability; product portfolio; and staying power.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:poo poo. That's going to be a nightmare. 23andMe have been overpromising on their test marketing material pretty much forever. They're a source of a huge quantity of public misconceptions of genetics, genetic testing, and abuse thereof.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
Yeah, it seems strictly less troubling than advertising drugs on TV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
pangstrom posted:My opinion is that it's fine. Some of the public won't learn but the doctors will hold the line like they always do against much more numerous and worse misconceptions than those. 23andme is direct-to-consumer. In the past they've had a fun time conflating racial categories and risk categories.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Maybe you could spell out a scenario you're afraid of. I'm sure a lot of people signing up aren't great at probabilities/uncertainty because most people aren't and that causes problems for humans in every domain, but in general we don't use that as a reason to shield people from information that also can be useful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
pangstrom posted:Maybe you could spell out a scenario you're afraid of. I'm sure a lot of people signing up aren't great at probabilities/uncertainty because most people aren't and that causes problems for humans in every domain, but in general we don't use that as a reason to shield people from information that also can be useful. "Do I have the gene for Huntington's, which I watched kill my father and grandfather?" "Yes". [kills self]
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:"Do I have the gene for Huntington's, which I watched kill my father and grandfather?" I'm more afraid of the opposite scenario, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:"Do I have the gene for Huntington's, which I watched kill my father and grandfather?" edit: or not "the gene" but excessive CAG repeats in the HD gene exon or whatever pangstrom fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Note that some of the criteria for this are kind of handwavey/subjective: Depending on the report type, it can be based on off-the-record interviews, analysis of publicly-available materials, government data or even just the result of a broad survey of executives and professionals in the field. It's usually a mix of stuff and they're always a little cagey about their sources, at least publicly. Many times for analyst reports like this the companies in question actually pay for it, if you can believe that. Once you land the first one, you can go to all their competitors and be like, look, you can not be in the magic quadrant at all and look really small time to the C suite people who read these, or you can fill out this survey and pay me $15,000 and we'll stick you in there somewhere based on our analyst's judgment of how you stack up. It's one of the reasons you should take them with a grain of salt, particularly if it's not from a big-name analyst firm like Gartner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
pangstrom posted:That gene is a tragic reality, it's not the test's fault. If you have that question you can get a test (not 23andme, though, as far as I know). At that point whether the person prepares for the eventuality by making arrangements or kills themself or lives in denial or whatever, it's going to be some flavor of tragic. If they want to know and it's knowable seems reasonably uncontroversial that they should be able to know. If they don't want to know then that's also fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
There's also the fact that they originally gave results for 254 different issues and many were of dubious quality to begin with. They kind of remind me of those SV nootropics startups that think they're doing he right thing by "doing their own research" but simply have no loving clue about medical ethics, experimental design or regulatory procedure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:The point is that it's not enough to say "Congratulations, you drew the ace of spades"; if you get the information from a doctor, or from an organization, it can come with counseling. "This thing has happened to you, here are some support groups, here is some information about ongoing research." Back when home AIDS tests were controversial, when you called in to get your result, if it was positive you were automatically transferred to a live human to talk about it. A fatal diagnosis needs to come with empathy, with a discussion of future options, and probably with a cup of coffee. Having it arrive in the mail is devastating. Just as an aside: HIV testing follow-up was a lot more important, especially in the earlier years, for the public health aspect of things. You need to talk to recent partners, be safe with future ones etc. Genetic stuff only has that angle wrt having kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:There's also the fact that they originally gave results for 254 different issues and many were of dubious quality to begin with. How long ago did someone post the "disrupter" that planned to get a license to work on class 4 level biohazard materials and was composed entirely of engineers and tech dudes and not a single bio/biochem expert. They were planning to apply engineering/tech principles to high level biotech research and someone pointed out that if the zombie disease was going to become real it'd be a place like that. For reference, apparently at level 3 stuff in the event of the smallest leak you shut down everything and flood the room with chlorine gas as a safety precaution to not cause a disease pandemic. Safety precautions of course something that disruptors famously ignore in their quest to disrupt conventional wisdom.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:The point is that it's not enough to say "Congratulations, you drew the ace of spades"; if you get the information from a doctor, or from an organization, it can come with counseling. "This thing has happened to you, here are some support groups, here is some information about ongoing research." Back when home AIDS tests were controversial, when you called in to get your result, if it was positive you were automatically transferred to a live human to talk about it. A fatal diagnosis needs to come with empathy, with a discussion of future options, and probably with a cup of coffee. Having it arrive in the mail is devastating. This post legitimately changed my opinion on the topic. Very good point. I did 23andme last year despite being a huge paranoid privacy nerd cause my wife really wanted to. Was honestly pretty underwhelmed by their reports, the accuracy didn't seem much better than educated guessing. You could still get all the weird/scary/borderline analysis from places like promethease.com though, so the cat may already be out of the bag.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
pentyne posted:How long ago did someone post the "disrupter" that planned to get a license to work on class 4 level biohazard materials and was composed entirely of engineers and tech dudes and not a single bio/biochem expert. They were planning to apply engineering/tech principles to high level biotech research and someone pointed out that if the zombie disease was going to become real it'd be a place like that. What the gently caress, class 4 is the highest it goes and includes stuff like Ebola and smallpox. What is it with tech bros like this and the belief that their supposed mastery of IT and software engineering means every other rigorous discipline under the sun must be a cakewalk in comparison? Just because the Soylent dude got rich making a crappy imitation of Ensure in a rat infested factory by reading about nutrition on Wikipedia doesn't mean every app developer can do the same thing and cure all disease for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:What the gently caress, class 4 is the highest it goes and includes stuff like Ebola and smallpox. My mastery of IT and software engineering is a mystical power to VC and makes it really easy to convince them to give me money if I say 'disrupt' three times no matter what discipline I choose to stick my fingers into.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
I'm surprised no one has pitched a zombie movie themed around techbro excesses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/matt_hamilton10/status/850527626439651329 The question is whether Uber itself is still going to be around in 90 days. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
My initial exposure to 23andme was their name repeatedly coming up when I was doing research into the reconstruction of pseudoscientific categories of race. Like too many people in too many fields, they teach the happy funtimes equation: disease ~= genetics ~= geographic ancestry ~= race ~= I shouldn't hire this job applicant because he's black, so he's going to have a heart attack. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 03:13 on Apr 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
axeil posted:That or Uber has some crazy system that masks files related to lawsuits. I mean it sounds nutty but then again they had a routine in their app that prevented cops from finding them operating in jurisdictions where they're not allowed. Don't forget about that time they were raided by the Quebec tax authorities and issued a remote wipe to the seized computers and devices.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:My initial exposure to 23andme was their name repeatedly coming up when I was doing research into the reconstruction of pseudoscientific categories of race. Like too many people in too many fields, they teach the happy funtimes equation:
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:My initial exposure to 23andme was their name repeatedly coming up when I was doing research into the reconstruction of pseudoscientific categories of race. Like too many people in too many fields, they teach the happy funtimes equation: Got any details on that? I know a pile of scientific racists (particularly from the LessWrong rationalists) were huge fans of 23andMe, but wasn't aware of any from the company itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 10:38
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:My initial exposure to 23andme was their name repeatedly coming up when I was doing research into the reconstruction of pseudoscientific categories of race. Like too many people in too many fields, they teach the happy funtimes equation: Could you explain how they teach this, especially the latter component? What presentation of genetic information would be more appropriate?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:My initial exposure to 23andme was their name repeatedly coming up when I was doing research into the reconstruction of pseudoscientific categories of race. Like too many people in too many fields, they teach the happy funtimes equation: Perhaps you could show us this rather than tell us about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
divabot posted:Got any details on that? I know a pile of scientific racists (particularly from the LessWrong rationalists) were huge fans of 23andMe, but wasn't aware of any from the company itself. 23andme aren't racists, of course. They're just a silicon valley startup with a dominant hold on a new area of medical technology and a sophisticated marketing and legal team, with all the same problems we'd have with any other such entity. The company itself is very careful to not espouse using their products for racist purposes, in the same way that twitter isn't racist. Rather, they promote things directly to the public in a manner which invites the conflation of the genetic, ancestral, and racial categories in terms of how people perceive them. They take advantage of public ignorance of these distinctions through what they don't say. (In broad strokes this is similar to the broader problem of DTC pharma marketing.) Showing this is tricky, because of course their marketing materials got scrubbed when FDA came down on them. Even so, the best way to understand how the company plays to this is to note how it avoids ever directly mentioning race when describing its service. In fact, they avoid using the word "race" even when they're talking about it. They've taken a firewall approach to it -a quick search suggests the word is probably completely absent from all of their marketing material. But not talking about it isn't the same thing as not knowing about how it's being perceived, or (certainly) not benefitting from it. If they were trying to avoid the conflation, you'd expect a big 'ol disclaimer about that difference. Instead, if you go to their results, they like to swap out "ethnicity" (which people use interchangeably to refer to race and ancestry) and "ancestry" freely when discussing the tests for medical conditions that are quote:statistically associated with the composition of some markers that may be statistically found more commonly among people descended from a particular geographic region, which may overlap with racial conceptualizations- note, however, that race is a social construct and not a product of genetics or ancestry, and such conditions and traits will be absent in members of the group, and present in individuals not of the group, and should not be the basis of discrimination such as alcohol flush responses. The inset quote is a quickly made bare minimum of the kind of language I'd want the FDA to require to be spread all over the company's consumer-facing materials, except obviously way more legible to the public. Maybe with big red warning signs and photos of mixed race couples, and one of those soft-edge pastel-colored infographs tech companies love, explaining the idea of social construction. Instead they're avoiding the language and inviting confusion, because they recognize that people who think Black is a gene make up a significant part of their consumerbase. My reason for outsized concern isn't that 23andme is especially rapacious, but that the public is profoundly ignorant on these genetics and race issues, and this sort of testing product is a powerful way to retrench outdated scientific conceptions of race. I initially encountered 23andme when I was studying NIH scientists who were directly equating race and genetics in both research and lay-facing educational materials. I'd rather not reveal those sources, beyond saying that a) it's in violation of the relevant OMB standards, which were adopted by NIH (with a crucial typo, which is a whole other story) and b) they were at NIDA, which is...not the place I want this sort of mistake to be made. 23andme are the big fish in this area, setting the standard with well-publicized data pools, so they come up a lot when scientists in other fields talk about how they understand genetics. I sat in for/helped run a bunch of ethics roundtables at my institution where high level researchers that weren't working directly on human genetics would make the same mistakes, based on a kit they'd ordered from 23andme. And then the discussion would move rapidly from there to the eugenic policy area. This is of course particularly relevant in the context of recent legislative activity. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Apr 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Showing this is tricky, because of course their marketing materials got scrubbed when FDA came down on them. Even so, the best way to understand how the company plays to this is to note how it avoids ever directly mentioning race when describing its service. In fact, they avoid using the word "race" even when they're talking about it. They've taken a firewall approach to it -a quick search suggests the word is probably completely absent from all of their marketing material. But not talking about it isn't the same thing as not knowing about how it's being perceived, or (certainly) not benefitting from it. Ew. That first one in particular, it's like a chart of euphemisms scientific racists will adopt in 2018. And the LW/SSC crowd is way into the totally-not-race aspect of 23andme already of course, so their dogwhistling was heard by that audience.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
So your concern isn't with the health stuff, it's with the "ancestry" part. I'm going to say what I always do which goes always over great just GREAT: Please embrace and espouse an egalitarian philosophy (or politics or state of understanding or whatever) that doesn't absolutely depend on there being zero genetic differences between sub-populations. If you think such a difference means EUGENICS well you're part of the problem, and if your response is SOCIETY CANNOT KNOW you're part of the problem, and if your response is the all-over-the-road mess DV just posted, you're part of the problem. It reminds me of the subset of religious people who consider atheism and think well without God what keeps you from killing your neighbor and raping your daughter?. We can have a decent and fair society premised on the usual and fighting the regressives in the usual ways. Race as a social construct not 1-to-1 mapping to identifiable historical sub-populations isn't that confusing a concept, building a temple on the premises and saying well this topic is only for those who have learned the 13 sacred postures of dissembling only makes the converted feel safe. The idiots and racists aren't listening. Bring on the snarky race realism posts!
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
I oftentimes don't agree with DV but this is kind of his wheelhouse and it appears you are misrepresenting his position in the first place
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
I would probably find this more interesting than the usual feminism and immigration arguments but I am not sure you're even talking about the same thing. App idea: matches Jews with a person/service who can help clean/cook for Passover who can understand family idiosyncrasies and customs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
23andMe has had a plugin for a race-based authentication scheme made by a third party. https://github.com/offapi/rbac-23andme-oauth2
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:App idea: matches Jews with a person/service who can help clean/cook for Passover who can understand family idiosyncrasies and customs. Goyr?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:48 |
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:23andMe has had a plugin for a race-based authentication scheme made by a third party. Holy poo poo the issues on that project.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2017 17:25
|
|
