The core issue is that the BBC report inflates what the study actually shows. The paper is a small, single-centre RCT of one specific surgery (laparoscopic cholecystectomy). Its primary outcome is a modest reduction in propofol and fentanyl dose under a very specific anaesthetic protocol. It does not demonstrate broadly faster recovery or an across-the-board clinical benefit. The authors themselves are cautious and explicitly list limitations.
The article strips out that narrow context and generalises. Phrases like “music eases surgery and speeds recovery” and “strongest evidence yet” extrapolate from a sample of 56 people undergoing one procedure to “surgery” in general. The paper doesn’t measure global recovery outcomes, discharge times, or longer-term effects. Satisfaction and pain scores are even reported as comparable between groups (P=0.361 and P=0.07).
There’s also mechanistic speculation in the article (implicit memory, psychological responses, “humanising the operating room”) that isn’t in the study’s data. The paper reports dose differences and perioperative physiological measures—not neuropsychological mechanisms.
> Its primary outcome is a modest reduction in propofol and fentanyl dose under a very specific anaesthetic protocol.
Ooh, that sounds like p-hacking. How many other protocols, and other potential outcomes in general, did they look at before picking the one to publish? If it's on the order of 20, then we can expect they'd encounter such a result by pure chance.
The headlines says that music “speeds recovery” but the paper specifically says that patients had similar recovery profiles.
The media article overall overstates the findings of the study. It’s a very specific study on a specific cohort and a specific surgery (minimally invasion) but the article implies strongly that music helps with all surgery.
Also the paper specifically doesn’t touch on medial outcomes from the music - that’s fine as science since it’s granular, but it’s a pretty big thing to miss in the article.
The article misses a bunch of further questions that need more research. How does the patient playing music affect the surgeon? Is it music in general or specific music that helps? Is the patient choosing the music relevant?
“Reshape how hospitals think about surgery”? Not really, hospitals already use music in surgery so it’s not going to “reshape” anything. Over dramatisation.
It’s also just very shallow. Makes no mention of existing science/practice for example. Didn’t speak to any other researchers.
Look, the article is fine-ish but it’s just a regurgitation of the paper with more dramatisation and no analysis. Just post the paper especially on HN.
I really struggle to wrap my head around how this engine works. I haven’t used it, but I have experience with Source 1 and its systems and I imagine Source 2 is an extrapolation of that. But I really can’t wrap my head around how they’ve turned it into a scene-based game engine when Source 2 is map-based, how they’ve managed to build a completely different editor that still leverages Hammer maps somehow, and all the other stuff.
I've never tried s&box but Source 2 did overhaul the map and asset pipeline quite a bit, everything's a plain mesh instead of BSP and maps are also regular .dmx files, so I'd imagine it's slightly easier to build tools that work on top of it
This website appears broken in a very unique way on my iOS device. Whenever I swipe to scroll, the page gets zoomed out and it zooms back in when I stop swiping, but half of the content is cut off.
I'm struggling to imagine what the feature is intended to be. Being able to see a larger portion of the page while scrolling? This...doesn't help at all, sadly.
Sounds like a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem. My main issue is to even get myself to sit and stare at the work to be done. It has been really frustrating seeing the lengths I go to, consciously or unconsciously, to procrastinate.
I used to work a non tech office job, one day it became so unbearable, I was literally falling asleep and was no longer able to bring myself to do the job at all, because of how much mental effort was required for even the smallest things. I stood up and quit.
I think it's mostly about accepting that you are the one in control. The problem of "getting yourself to do something" is poorly formulated, as though some other person was in charge of your actions that you have to convince to do what you want.
This confused conviction is the real problem. There is no other you to convince. The same you that you are bargaining with to do the thing is the same you that's doing the bargaining. You can at any moment just do it.
That's really nice but not really true. There is another you that you need to convince to do boring stuff. That's our own body fighting against doing that stuff. Will is a finite resource.
What’s with this trend of not capitalizing and punctuating? Are we running out of budget for capital letters? It makes the writing look sloppy and pretentious. Who is the author trying to impress?
1) There are species of small "catfishes" (on Asia or Australia if I remember correctly) known to climb waterfalls in rainforests. We are talking about > 100m long fully vertical waterfalls.
2) In fact, they aren't catfishes. Belong to a big family of mainly marine fishes called gobies. Totally different orders. Should be named climbing gobies.
3) They do it for the same reason as Salmons do: to reproduce in freshwater.
4) But unlike salmons they don't swim or jump. They climb the slippery rock wall like a freestyle climber, using the suction cups in their belly that gobies have (pelvic fins transformed), and their other fins and tail to propel
Also interesting is the presence of Ancistrus and Hypostomus in the mix of climbing fishes. Many people keeping aquariums breed this fishes at home. The first can lay eggs and care for the fry, the second is very difficult to breed.
reply