Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

jamesdysonaward.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#21

Post by est31 »

pietherr wrote: post #19

The section about the sustainability winner completely ignores climate change. Mind boggling. > The problem: Fossil fuels continue to account for over 81% of global energy product according to the International Energy Agency. It is estimated that, if we continue to burn fossil fuels at the current rate, global supplies of gas and oil will deplete by 2060.

Is that relevant? If you do something you are way better than the folks who just virtue signal. The result is what counts. That's what Greta herself says.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#22

Post by cheschire »

pietherr wrote: post #19

The section about the sustainability winner completely ignores climate change. Mind boggling. > The problem: Fossil fuels continue to account for over 81% of global energy product according to the International Energy Agency. It is estimated that, if we continue to burn fossil fuels at the current rate, global supplies of gas and oil will deplete by 2060.

Sounds like they picked a scope limited enough to guarantee competing submissions are comparable on the same metrics.

That they didn't prioritize scopes the way you do does not seem that mind boggling to me.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#23

Post by mixedbit »

skummetmaelk wrote: post #20
mixedbit wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do cloud tests really change much? How many people will start Googling information about a disease as soon as they have a positive diagnosis, giving Google the information without any cloud tests.

Your argument is that because things are already bad it doesn't hurt to make them worse?

No, it wasn't my argument

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#24

Post by numlock86 »

pietherr wrote: post #19

The section about the sustainability winner completely ignores climate change. Mind boggling. > The problem: Fossil fuels continue to account for over 81% of global energy product according to the International Energy Agency. It is estimated that, if we continue to burn fossil fuels at the current rate, global supplies of gas and oil will deplete by 2060.

> global supplies of gas and oil will deplete by 2060.

In 1990 I was told fossil fuels will be depleted by 2010.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#25

Post by LoSboccacc »

bananapear wrote: post #13
blackbear_ wrote: post #7

With the usual caveat that a positive test to a rare condition is most likely a false positive.

At least in this case a false positive is unlikely to have any negative effects other than temporary anxiety while awaiting further screening, which is vastly more preferable to a false negative. The use of COVID PCR tests for "mass testing" of asymptomatic individuals in the UK has resulted in the number of positive "cases" corelating more closely with the number of tests performed than with other measures[1], such…

> vastly more preferable to a false negative

depending from the POV.

if a condition has an incidence of 0.001%, production capacity of test kits will probably be geared to that.

if you suddenly have 0.01% false positives, you're outstripping production by a factor of ten

it will also use up production capacity that might be necessary for other kits, driving up both test prices and/or wait time for everyone else.

for example: false positive in Italy are the reason you see a new case slowing down in the last week: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=italy+cov...

this is not because the containment measures are working, it's because a lot of tests are redirected to verify the PCR results, eating up test capacity and slowing down for example contact tracing tests, which are competing for the same kits.

so, no. false positives have far more implication than one individual short time of anxiety.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#26

Post by hobofan »

MattGaiser wrote: post #2

I feel like I keep seeing these as science fair wins and innovation award wins, but where are they in real life? Are they making it to (the biomedical equivalent of) prod?

I feel like "innovation award" wins are a strong predictor that you won't see something in real life, as it may indicate that the founders are chasing PR rather than focusing their efforts on building a real product.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#27

Post by DanBC »

Jugurtha wrote: post #14
blackbear_ wrote: post #7

With the usual caveat that a positive test to a rare condition is most likely a false positive.

Probably, but it's one of those scenarios where the upside of early diagnosis outweighs the inconvenience of false positives, as long as the scores are way better than luck, or WebMD.

For a bunch of stuff that's simply not true.

Over-testing leads to over-diagnosis which leads to over-treatment. People get treatment that causes them harm and which cannot benefit them because they don't have cancer.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#28

Post by JacobSuperslav »

numlock86 wrote: post #24
pietherr wrote: post #19

The section about the sustainability winner completely ignores climate change. Mind boggling. > The problem: Fossil fuels continue to account for over 81% of global energy product according to the International Energy Agency. It is estimated that, if we continue to burn fossil fuels at the current rate, global supplies of gas and oil will deplete by 2060.

> global supplies of gas and oil will deplete by 2060. In 1990 I was told fossil fuels will be depleted by 2010.

people are sometimes wrong, but i think the 2010 was sensationalized headlines, not actual science

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#29

Post by tsherr »

Hard pass on a cancer testing device that stores and processes my data on the company's server or their rented cloud storage.

This could be done locally with current phone or PC tech.

I know "cloud" and "AI" and "machine learning" are Pavlovian signals to venture capitalists, but come on.

Re: James Dyson Award – International and Sustainability winners announced

#30

Post by k_sze »

scatters wrote: post #17
redis_mlc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, the FDA usually has to approve medical devices like this. 23 and Me was paused while they talked to the FDA. The cloud connection of the award winner is of some concern. Should you include PII and a sample, US health insurers could use that against you in the future for pre-existing conditions. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/vitro-diagnostics/direct...

Isn't it insurance fraud to fail to report a pre-existing condition anyway? Are you suggesting that people engage in fraud?

Consider this: when you initially submitted your data, the NN said you’re fine, and so you forget about it. Later on, the NN is tweaked and would say you actually probably have cancer, but you don’t know because you never bother checking again. The insurance companies get their hands on those results. You’re not committing fraud (because you don’t know), but now the insurance companies are more reluctant to sell you insurance.

(To be fair, I don’t think the insurance companies are allowed to discriminate against you using only that data. They probably need an official, recognized diagnosis from a real human doctor.)

Post reply on HN