The Braindump Blog

Everyone has their own special goals and dreams in life, and it’s good to know that sometimes they come true. For just £12,480, a gentleman known as Toko procured the costuming services of Zeppet to temporarily transform himself into an uncanny-valley-ish border collie.

Perhaps this is less surprising than it should be, but it turns out Twitter illicitly misused the contact details they’d requested from users, supposedly only for 2-factor security purposes, in order to to let advertisers target them.

In what I’m sure must just be a tremendous coincidence, our prime minister, who is currently under investigation as to whether he breached the ministerial code, just amended the rules such that people who breach the ministerial code don’t have to resign. Hmm.

This slide from Dr. D’Agostino McGowan is one of the best summaries I’ve seen of what exactly a p value does and does not do. I do use them frequently, but “p < 0.05 does not mean your result is important” is something I find myself saying a lot, hopefully more tactfully than that would imply.

The deck this comes from is definitely on my to-read list. I understand they come from a talk you can also listen to in podcast form here.

An insight into how business is conducted in the modern era.

Meanwhile, Musk’s relationship with Twitter’s management reached a new low on Monday after he tweeted a poo emoji at the platform’s chief executive.

I enjoyed the most recent Normcore Tech newsletter, with its discussion around the unreasonable efficacy (at least for me!) of DuoLingo’s push notifications.

I greatly appreciate the openess with which the DuoLingo team publishes studies about how they select, test and experiment with them. Plus it’s surely a real accomplishment to have your notifications become a meme.

Just came across the R package conflr which lets you post R Markdown output (including images) directly to Confluence. Aiming to try this out today. It could be a personal gamechanger if it’s as great as it looks!

In a continuation of the odd tendency some companies seem to have to see activities described in books that to the rest of us seem dystopian as in fact aspirational, Coinbase apparently has its employees instantly 1:1 rate each other after interactions such as meetings.

They utilise software called Dot Collector, which is most famously used by the notorious hedge funddot company Bridgewater.

During their meetings, Bridgewater employees are expected to live rate each other as the meeting goes on from 1-10 on numerous attributes such as open-mindedness and assertiveness, as well as any specific comments they’d like to make explaining their ratings.

These ratings and comments are by default public, so at the end of the meeting one can view a matrix of which person rated each other person at what score, which I’m sure never causes any problems, let alone exposes structural biases or prejudices, whatsoever.

In case you too aspire to this level of minute-by-minute judgement of the inner character of anyone unlucky enough to work with you, the software is also available as a Zoom app.

I mean, even the way they talk about the software is extremely The Circle. To quote from the Zoom addin user guide

That’s why all Dots are gifts…especially the constructive ones…to help you along the way.

Just as the Circlers like to say, sharing is caring.

7 years behind the rest of the world, I’m just starting to watch Mr. Robot 📺. Choice very much influenced by it featuring on a whole lot of “what should I watch if I liked Severence?” - one of my favourite shows of recent perhaps even all time - lists.

I was recently searching for information as to in which ways coffee might be bad for one’s health, even when drunk in moderation. I was considering giving it up if there were thought to be any significant negative health effects I’d rather do without.

One of the most comprehensive-looking papers I chanced upon in my endeavors was Coffee, Caffeine and Health by van Dam et al in the New England Journal of Medicine. Below then are my summary notes of what I gleaned from it. All credit of course should go to researchers, and all mistakes in summarising are my own.

It turns out that I did not find anything that suggested much benefit in giving up my up-to-1-cup-a-day of coffee habit. In fact I was somewhat surprised to see that there are thought to be associations between drinking moderate amounts of coffee and positive health outcomes.

Another couple of links I noted that referred to some of the same data for anyone not in the mood for reading the paper itself are:

• Coffee | The Nutrition Source | Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
• Is Coffee Good for You? - The New York Times

Brief summary:

• Consumption of up to 3-5 cups of coffee daily is possible as part of a healthy diet, and in fact has been associated with a reduced risk of several diseases. However the evidence as yet doesn’t warrant recommending caffeine / coffee intake as a method to prevent disease.

• However, high caffeine intake can have adverse effects, including exacerabating anxiety. A limit of 400mg of caffeine per day has been recommended for adults who are not pregnant or lactating, and 200mg for those who are pregnant/lactating.

• Most, but not all, of the beneficial effects seem to be associated with decaffeinated coffee as well as caffeinated, so that is an option if sensitive to caffeine.

• Caffeine can interfere with sleep, although this varies between people. Nontheless, drinking it late in the day may be unadvisable.

• Unfiltered, and to some extent espresso, coffee have cholesterol-raising compounds so it may be better to limit consumption of those, but filtered or instant coffee does not have that effect.

In more detail:

Coffee and tea are amongst the most popular beverages in the world, with their substantial caffeine content making caffeine the most widely used psychoactive agent.

Caffeine content is typically highest in coffee, energy drinks and caffeine tablets, intermediate in tea and lowest in soft drinks.

In the US 85% of adults consume caffeine daily, with an average intake of 135mg a day (~1.5 standard cups of coffee).

Coffee is the main source of caffeine for adults. For adolescents, soft drinks and tea are their primary sources.

Potential issues in research on caffeine and coffee:

• Coffee contains hundreds of other biologically active phytochemicals. Thus we should be cautious in assuming any effects of coffee are due to the caffeine alone.
• Observing the immediate effects of caffeine may not tell us about long term effects, as tolerance can develop.
• Epidemiological studies of caffeine intake and risk of chronic disease are potentially confounded by smoking or other lifestyle factors. Earlier studies did not account for this bias and produced misleading conclusions. Residual confounding is a risk even for recent studies thatdo adjust for potential confounders.
• Measurement error in assessment of caffeine intake - although self-reports on frequency of coffee consumption are thought to be mostly accurate.
• Most studies use coffee and tea intake as the dominant sources of caffeine. It’s not certain that any outcomes would also apply to other sources of caffeine.

Metabolising caffeine

The half-line of caffeine in human adults is usually between 2.5 and 4.5 hours, but can vary between people a lot.

The rate of caffeine metabolism is partially inherited.

Factors that reduce the rate of caffeine metabolism:

• Being a newborn baby
• Taking oral contraceptives
• Being pregnant
• Certain medications, including some quinolone anti- biotics, cardiovascular drugs, bronchodilators, and antidepressant agents.

Factors that increase the rate of caffeine metabolism:

• Smoking

Caffeine can affect the actions of some drugs.

Health effects of caffeine

Positive associations

In moderate doses (40-300mg) caffeine can reduce fatigue and reaction time and increase alertness as well as vigilance during long duration tasks with limited stimulation. However it cannot compensate for lower performance after long-term sleep deprivation.

Coffee consumption is associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular diseases, including coronary artery diseases, strokes and death from cardiovascular events. There is no increase risk of cardiovascular events in either the general population of people with a history of hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease.

There is strong evidence showing that consumption of coffee and caffeine is not associated with an increased incidence of cancer or an increase rate of death from cancer.

In fact coffee consumption is associated with a reduced risk of:

• melanoma
• nonmelanoma skin cancer
• prostate cancer
• breast cancer
• endometrial cancer (similar with caffeinated or decaffeinated coffee)
• hepatocellular carcinoma (stronger with caffeinated coffee)

Coffee is associated with liver health, including lower levels of enzymes reflecting liver damage and a lower risk of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Caffeine metabolites reduce collagen deposits in liver cells. Coffee polyphenols may protect against liver steatosis and fibrogenesis.

Caffeine may improve energy balance by reducing appetite and increasing the basal metabolic rate and food-induced thermogenesis.

Increasing caffeine consumption was associated with slightly less long-term weight gain, and there’s limited evidence suggesting a small beneficial effect on body fat.

Caffeine intake reduces insulin sensitivity in the short term. But consumption of 4 - 5 cups of caffeinated coffee every day did not affect insulin resistance. Coffee reduces hepatic insulin resistances, and habitual caffeinated or decaffeinated coffee consumption is associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes. This suggests the adverse effect of caffeine on insulin sensitivity is either offset by beneficial effects of other coffee components or tolerance is developed to it.

Coffee consumption is associated with a reduced risk of gallstones and gall-bladder cancer, with a strong association for caffeinated rather than decaffeinated coffee. Both types of coffee are associated with a decreased risk of kidney stones.

Caffeine intake is strongly associated with a reduction in risk of getting Parkinson’s disease, and also prevents Parkinson’s disease in animal models. This association doesn’t exist with decaffeinated coffee.

Coffee and caffeine consumption is associated with a reduced risk of depression and suicide, although this may not be true for people who consume >= 8 cups of coffee a day.

Consumption of 2-5 cups of coffee per day is associated with reduced mortality in studies across the world. The effect is similar for caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee.

Consuming > 5 cups of coffee was associated with a similar or lower risk of death than no consumption after adjustment for smoking status. Whilst confounding by baseline health status could be an issue, the effect is still seen in studies of participants who don’t have chronic diseases or poor self-rated health.

Negative associations

High levels of caffeine intake can induce anxiety, particularly on occasions >200mg are consumed, or >400mg a day, and people who are sensitive to it, including those with anxiety or bipolar diagnoses. Effects can very a lot between people.

Caffeine consumption late in the day can increase sleep latency and lower quality of sleep. Effects can very a lot between people.

Very high doses of caffeine are also associated with restlessness, nervousness, dysphoria, insomnia, excitement, psychomotor agitation, and rambling flow of thought and speech.

Caffeine can become toxics at intakes of >= 1.2g. It may be fatal at doses of 10-14g. This is equivalent to around 75-100 standard cups of coffee.

High consumption of energy drinks and shots, particularly if mixed with alcohol, has been linked to adverse cardio-vascular, psychological, and neurologic events, including fatal events. The reasons may related to consumption patterns, usage among children, lack of clarity about caffeine content and possible additive effects with other ingredients of the drinks. Recommendation here is to avoid consumption of >200mg caffeine per occasion and not to mix with alcohol.

Quitting a caffeine habit can lead to withdrawal symptoms, lasting from 2-9 days. Gradually decreasing caffeine consumption can help with these.

Unfiltered coffee has high concentrations of the cholesterol-raising compound cafestol, with expresso having intermediate levels and filters or instant coffee having almost none. High consumption of unfiltered coffee increases cholesterol levels in comparison to filtered coffee, which would predict an 11% risk increase of major cardiovascular events. In the same study, filtered coffee did not raise cholesterol levels. Recommendation is to limit consumption of unfiltered coffee, and moderate consumption of espresso.

Many caffeinated beverages, such as sugary soft drinks or creamy coffee servings, are high in calories, which could lead to weight gain.

In pregnancy, higher caffeine intake is associated with lower birth weight -associations have been seen for both coffee and tea. Also with higher risk of pregnancy loss, although less so at lower levels of intake. It may induce uteroplacental vaso-constriction and hypoxia.

Prepregnancy coffee consumption has been associated with an increased risk of spontaneous abortion.

Evidence of negative effects of caffeine on fetal health is not conclusive, but a prudent recommendation might be to limit caffeine consumption to <= 200mg during pregnancy.

No or uncertain associations

High caffeine intake can stimulate urine output. No detrimental effects on hydration have been seen with long-term consumption of moderate doses of caffeine <= 400mg per day.

Although caffeine is associated with increased blood pressure, no effect on blood pressure is found in trials of caffeinated coffee, even amongst patients with hypertension - possibly due to other components of coffee. Coffee consumption is not associated with increased risk of hypertension.

No association has been found between caffeine intake and atrial fibrillation.

Associations with dementia or Alzheimer’s disease have been inconsistent.

☕

Some days the world surprises you. Other days the Bored Apes dating club shuts down because only (presumably heterosexual?) men showed any interest.

Not sure a dating site that lets you filter on someone’s $ worth or how diamond handed they are is a great loss to society tbh.

Somehow I’d missed the fact that Florida recently banned 41% of proposed maths textbooks from it’s schools, mostly on the basis of them apparently being “too woke”. A list of the 54 textbooks that were rejected is available.

Or as the Florida Department of Education writes in their definitely not over-dramatic press release:

Florida Rejects Publishers’ Attempts to Indoctrinate Students

Pressed for examples of what that could even mean - exactly what level of Rich White Man Anti-America hatred mind control was infused into these books? - well the worst they managed to produce were a couple of examples that asked students to answer standard looking (to me?) math questions, which happened to use a dataset of Implicit Association Test results.

Now there is certainly substantial debate to be had as to to what extent the results of the IAT translate into real world racism. And perhaps the textbook authors could have been a little more careful with their chart titles given that the FAQ of Harvard’s “Project Implicit” says that the authors wouldn’t necessarily use the word “prejudice” in describing the results of the test. But “indoctrination” seems a strong word if this is the worst example the Florida DoE could come up with. I don’t think many people belive that the IAT measures nothing.

This is a math textbook. So a more relevant issue might be more whether the results have patterns that you can use math to describe, and, well, that seems pretty self-evident. Plus, if you were looking to argue that the IAT is invalid, mathematics would likely be one of the main tools you’d use.

It seems publishers are nonetheless willing to rewrite some of them anyway, with 17 books since being approved on the basis that all WOKE CONTENT has been removed - communicated by the Florida Department of Education with a graphic that the makers of Brass Eye would be jealous of.

DuoLingo, an app I use to learn Spanish, informs us that a single sentence can potentially have over 200,000 “correct” translations 🤯. They’ll accept more than 2000 for “No necesito un taxi, vivo cerca”, one of which is “I don’t need a taxi, I live close by”.

Currently reading: The Trial by Franz Kafka 📚.

It’s probably about time I read the original source, given how much I like the word ‘Kafkaesque’.

Has Texas - admittedly a state that is not shy of creating harmful and unworkable laws - really just outlawed social media content moderation? And maybe even any algorithm that prioritises what you see when you log into such sites.

I’m no fan of a lot of these big social media companies, but I can’t see forcing them to show you every piece of garbage anyone wants to spill out of their troll-brains into the digital ether is going to make for a better experience.

Twitter declining to host Trump’s tweets on the basis that they break its terms of service and incite violence must really have annoyed certain people.

Texas’s law makes it illegal for any social media platform with 50 million or more US monthly users to “block, ban, remove, deplatform, demonetize, de-boost, restrict, deny equal access or visibility to, or otherwise discriminate against expression.”

And no, these services can’t necessarily even just roll their eyes, give up and go elsewhere.

Buried in the law is a prohibition on discriminating against Texans based on their geographic location. By withdrawing from Texas, tech companies could expose themselves to allegations they have geographically discriminated against Texans in violation of HB 20.

Am loving building the Lego piano set. The attention to detail is awesome. Gotta build the Lego hammers so the keys can hit the Lego strings.

Some longer-form thoughts on the Roe v Wade leak with relevance to data privacy. Honestly, however that turns out - personally I’m not at all hopeful - there’s plenty to worry about around how much of our personal data is flying around and how it could be used against you.

A friend reminded me that Boris Johnson’s critique of working from home as being a series of inefficient wanders around the kitchen making drinks, having snacks, and getting distracted is in fact an accurate description of…office life.

Our Prime Minister is against working from home on the basis that:

…you spend an awful lot of time making another cup of coffee and then, you know, getting up, walking very slowly to the fridge, hacking off a small piece of cheese, then walking very slowly back to your laptop and then forgetting what it was you’re doing.

Feels like one of those occasions whereby by making a general claim that people are doing something “wrong” you end up revealing more about your own behaviour than anyone else’s.

There should be a name for that phenomenon if there isn’t already one. Projection? Pot calling the kettle black? Hypocrisy? Nothing quite seems to perfectly encompass it.

Incredible visualisation from Our World In Data showing the flow of human existence, from birth to death. About 7% of all humans that ever existed are alive today!

Currently reading: Violent Borders: Refugees and the Right to Move by Reece Jones 📚.

From the preface:

…borders that are open for corporations, capital, and consumer goods but closed for workers and regulators are creating dramatic inequalities in wealth and opportunity within individual countries and at a global scale

is a sentiment I already tend to believe. I’m interested to see what evidence the authors muster up in support of it.

🎥 Watched Dune.

Let the modern incarnation of the spice battles begin.