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

Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 73 posts

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#61

Post by AlecSchueler »

Krssst wrote: post #59
kjkjadksj wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cannabis is widely used today. Half of US adults have smoked it at one point of their life. 20% regularly smoke it. We are at the point where more people use it than alcohol in the US.

From the standpoint of "hard to ban what's used by a large part of the population" this does justify legalization indeed. I don't have strong opinions on this, I was mostly a bit triggered by the parent's comment weird theory that "cannabis was only forbidden because of criminal big pharma". (I assumed "only reason" implied that they thought it was a safe drug without side-effects or risks; all (medical/non-medical)…

> From the standpoint of "hard to ban what's used by a large part of the population" this does justify legalization indeed.

I think they meant more that the negative effects don't seem that big because most people are ok even with such a large proportion of people already being experienced with it.

> triggered by the parent's comment weird theory that "cannabis was only forbidden because of criminal big pharma".

I don't believe it was either but I'm not sure your counter evidence really works. The science that you alluded to about long term effects all significantly post-dates the ban so couldn't have played a role in it.

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#62

Post by [deleted] »

Krssst wrote: post #59
kjkjadksj wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cannabis is widely used today. Half of US adults have smoked it at one point of their life. 20% regularly smoke it. We are at the point where more people use it than alcohol in the US.

From the standpoint of "hard to ban what's used by a large part of the population" this does justify legalization indeed. I don't have strong opinions on this, I was mostly a bit triggered by the parent's comment weird theory that "cannabis was only forbidden because of criminal big pharma". (I assumed "only reason" implied that they thought it was a safe drug without side-effects or risks; all (medical/non-medical)…

[deleted]

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#63

Post by reactordev »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #47
reactordev wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could get behind this so long as there’s still limits on your person and in public places. Colorado has a great system. However, legalization has only created weed monopolies by abuse of the law language. Essentially making it illegal for smaller shops to compete. Those same people are the ones contracting out these systems with local governments.

The limits don’t really make sense either. Plenty of people grow for personal use and all of them will be in violation considering the yield from a single outdoor plant could be well over a pound dry.

If you grow for personal use, why are you transporting it? I’m fine with storing as much as you like as home. If it’s legal across the US then this doesn’t really matter at all. I’m talking about limits on your person, for personal use, when not at home, in public. I don’t want to smell like a Rastafarian when I go to work.

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#65

Post by yieldcrv »

aspenmayer wrote: post #54
yieldcrv wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All good, I wouldnt say conflating, they both use bonding curves that Uniswap pioneered For the uninitiated: Uniswap’s liquidity pool concept changed crypto forever and there are infinite code branches from that at this point. Pump.fun is a homegrown version of the same blueprint, with scripted automation and gamification built on top of it. What used to be separate processes and cost teams tens of thousands of dolla…

Have you followed what Robinhood is doing? They were tokenizing private shares of OpenAI and others, way before most private investors would have access to these shares. That allowed Robinhood to also fractionalize them. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/02/openai-robinhood-tokens.html They also are doing a lot of stuff with prediction markets, which is pretty interesting even if I think the issue there is one of deferrin…

I have been following, Robinhood is really leveraging the technology! There’s some open questions on what the tokenized shares are exactly, like shares of a special purpose vehicle that owns the private shares, or something else

A step in the right direction, more competition needed, liquidity pooling this way will be so good

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#66

Post by to11mtm »

amy_petrik wrote: post #51
recursive wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems totally unrelated to whether cannabis should be recreational. If my insurance company leaked my PHI, that would certainly not be evidence that any of my prescriptions should be OTC.

I mean... if you ask me prescriptions for things like cholesterol or blood pressure should be OTC, benefit outweighs the risk. Nobody is getting high off statins. Imagine how much that would save our healthcare system. Insulin is the one dubious thing because it can be very deadly if misused... and it IS in fact OTC because it can be deadly if unavailable, benefit outweighs the risk.

> Nobody is getting high off statins.

I mean, fun story time; back in 2014 my dad's house was broken into, and among other things they stole was a bottle of a benzo, and while most of my dad's medications were untouched they stole his blood pressure meds.

As I was opining this to a colleague, another employee that was within earshot explained that no, for certain things it can 'enhance' the high... go figure.

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#67

Post by kjkjadksj »

reactordev wrote: post #63
kjkjadksj wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The limits don’t really make sense either. Plenty of people grow for personal use and all of them will be in violation considering the yield from a single outdoor plant could be well over a pound dry.

If you grow for personal use, why are you transporting it? I’m fine with storing as much as you like as home. If it’s legal across the US then this doesn’t really matter at all. I’m talking about limits on your person, for personal use, when not at home, in public. I don’t want to smell like a Rastafarian when I go to work.

To smoke with others?

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#68

Post by kjkjadksj »

carlmr wrote: post #55
kjkjadksj wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cannabis is widely used today. Half of US adults have smoked it at one point of their life. 20% regularly smoke it. We are at the point where more people use it than alcohol in the US.

>We are at the point where more people use it than alcohol in the US. Citation needed on that one.

https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-cannabis-alcohol-drinki...

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#69

Post by reactordev »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #67
reactordev wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you grow for personal use, why are you transporting it? I’m fine with storing as much as you like as home. If it’s legal across the US then this doesn’t really matter at all. I’m talking about limits on your person, for personal use, when not at home, in public. I don’t want to smell like a Rastafarian when I go to work.

To smoke with others?

Do you need a kg to do that or is an ounce enough? I feel like an oz is enough to transport to your friends and get them all passed out. Which in some states the limit is 2 oz.

Re: Medical cannabis patient data exposed by unsecured database

#70

Post by kjkjadksj »

reactordev wrote: post #69
kjkjadksj wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To smoke with others?

Do you need a kg to do that or is an ounce enough? I feel like an oz is enough to transport to your friends and get them all passed out. Which in some states the limit is 2 oz.

Why even limit it though? I can bring ten thousand cans of beer to my friends house I don’t see why this is any different. It is just designed to still have a mechanism to entrap people is why. If dealing without a commercial license is already illegal, then having some personal amount limit is redundant if that is supposedly the reason for it.
Post reply on HN