> The reality is we need more doctors. A lot more.

I think building a better prevention layer is more important.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that we need more doctors (and nurses, and physios, and dietetists, and ...), but it is much easier to scale a good prevention system than the number of workers in healthcare.

Widespread use of GLP-1 agonist drugs will prove to be the most effective prevention layer. I absolutely support people living healthier lifestyles in order to delay the onset of the chronic diseases that drive the majority of medical care demand. But on a population basis, attempts at lifestyle interventions have been broadly ineffective. A lot of the chronic disease burden including type-2 diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, MSK, etc is downstream of obesity so if GLP-1 drugs can cause a lot of people to lose weight then we might see some real improvements within a decade.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that everyone should be on GLP-1 drugs, and it's obviously better to maintain a healthy lifestyle and body composition without those drugs. But for people who can't or won't do that on their own the drugs seem to work pretty well. There's also promising evidence that they cause reduction in alcoholism and other substance abuse disorders.

Do you have a plan on preventing the effects of aging, such as mutations in DNA and wear and tear?

Prevention is not about age related diseases, but early onset cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure caused by alcohol and tobacco use, unhealthy diet, and sedentary lifestyle.

A significant amount of cases could be prevented before they need medical intervention (and put burden on the medical system). There are several researches about this, the number of people with type 2 diabetes doubled in the past decades.

This is why some healthcare systems reward for example doing 10.000 steps a day with lower insurance fees. They recognized they save a huge amount of money if they get people to move.

> LFS takes the wrong approach in my opinion.

Shameless plug: I started a series of blog posts exactly because this. https://serversfor.dev/linux-inside-out/

Unfortunately due to some cervical spine issues and a surgery I wasn't able to finish it, but I am planning to pick it up and continue.

Thanks for posting this, I hope you will continue

I’m pretty sure that same discourse was seen every mass production epoch, from textiles to electronics. Yet here we are, hand-crafted high quality things are rare and expensive.

> mass production epoch, from textiles to electronics

I see this comparison a lot, and I think it's a trap, because it invites us to confuse scaling duplicates with scaling design changes.

Duplicative mass-production was always core to software from the moment it first became "soft". A factory churning out 10,000 copies of the same book maps to 10,000 downloads of a single software release. The paper and bindings of the book may be below hand-crafted standards, but the words are largely unaffected.

In contrast, LLM-coding is the design and prototyping stage. So if we want to learn from textiles/electronics, we shouldn't be thinking of acres of looms, but instead about fashion-design, custom tailoring, determining patterns for clothes, designing new appliances, choosing circuit layouts, etc.

I have seen so much production code with garbage code and massive bugs, the industry doesn't care for 'real'.

They care in principle, for the most part bad code makes changes and extensions slow to implement and causes unnecessary production issues which costs time and money. But there is always the tension between implementing something quickly now and being able to implement things quickly in the future and unfortunately the preference is almost always quickly now despite everyone knowing that this is the way more expensive choice in the long run.

It isn't necessarily the more expensive choice in the long run. Let's say that companies A and B are direct competitors who start from the same point. Company A quickly codes a bunch of buggy software and ships it in a month. Company B takes its time and ships good, clean, well-organized, mostly bug-free code in five months. Company A makes money. Company B goes out of business and its code is useless, its nice qualities irrelevant.

This is just a hypothetical example, I'm not saying that this is how it would necessarily go in all cases.

Not even in principle. Like how often you had to fight a product manager to do this or that.

"Does that code work?" "yes" "so lets ship it" "but its not good" "but it works right?"

But they also ask why the next feature is taking so long, because of the mess we created with the last feature, and I would consider this caring in principle. Unfortunately this almost always filed as unavoidable.

Even if they’re just matching battery life while adding frequent HRV readings, they’ve made a big advancement. Frequent HRV is a requirement to be a WHOOP/Garmin competitor.

Previous Apple Watch can do it if you tell it you have afib, but that hurts battery life.

FWIW I have told it I have afib. I used to have problems with battery life, but I find the Series 11 can finally last all day and overnight with always on display+afib/HRV monitoring; and it charges fast enough I can get close to 100% in the shower, meaning it effectively does not have battery issues.

As someone that has had heart issues, their continued improvements there will keep me a loyal customer for a very long time to come.

Its position as a health device is underrated in tech circles. As we tech savvy generations age there’s a big market there.

I have hearth issues too, and the metrics Apple provides still do not help detecting them. Not to mention that there is no improvement of their high blood pressure detection. So despite the marketing that they have the most accurate sensor, there is no real advancement here.

Relying on an Apple Watch instead of a proper medical device if you're having heart issues is, well, uh... There's a reason an Apple Watch isn't a medical device.

Consider for a moment that I and my doctor know my medical situation better than you do.

(it is, by the way, an FDA approved class 2 medical device…)

It puts the AI on its wrist or it gets the hose again.

No, it’s not. 24 hours is the same as series 11. And you are comparing to series 10, not 11, that already had this improvement. I do not work out 10 hours a day, so that number is literally meaningless/pointless.

Oh, I'm confused, I was told there were "MASSIVE" (with lots of emphasis) improvements to the processor, battery life, the camera!

On the camera side I see "more post processing"... cool?

I've found e-ink displays super fragile for this use case. They break from a little fall, or even from the constant shaking.

For all their readability benefits under direct sunlight, prolonged exposure also damages or kills them. You need at least a UV blocker for outdoor use, but the heat cannot be avoided.

Yeah, but if OpenAI provides a cheaper model with the same capabilities the megacorps will buy from OpenAI. If you want to target enterprises you need to have some competitive advantage, it's not enough that "I wanna target them".

> either fix opus 5, make it completely free, or delete it entirely

They should pay for us for using it!

> He spent the next three years pursuing this vision.

I had the chance to try this procedure out when I was 20, and it saved my life. Without it there is a high chance I would be dead. And it is because he had an idea that he pursued.

It is fascinating what modern medicine is capable of.

That is what happens when someone without a clue what is he (khm, DHH) doing vibe codes a distro.

I noticed the same on myself.

In a few years it would be interesting to see a research about how LLMs influenced the choice of words in the general population.