> A new device is created that alerts 50% of the US population that they have a condition that needs to be treated. Only 10% of those cases warranted further action.

This just improved the lives of 16 million people. That is not insignificant. And that's assuming 16 million people would have the same condition.

This also might be underestimating the number of false positives doctors already deal with and that these devices may actually lower that number.

> Further, such an influx would have knock-on effects on unrelated patients, whose care would suffer due to the severe lack of resources.

Hypothetically, let's assume over a long period of time new devices are alerting users to possible medical conditions. Those appointments are paid for (I'm guessing). Will that money not fund more availability over time? The supply of doctors is not supposed to be fixed.

> there _are_ devices that can detect conditions that 5% of the population has _and_ have far fewer false positives - X-rays, CT scans, MRI.

Perhaps, but you can't wear one on your wrist and you generally have to be quite sure something is wrong first.

In the context of a system where it's almost impossible to lose money above a certain point and almost impossible to make money below a certain point (edit: without doing something reckless, which often happens).. No this does not make sense to me.

You may be being slightly hyperbolic, but in either case I would doubt that is a majority-held opinion.

One example within a couple of weeks of now means that statistically it's more unlikely to be unusual

Rhino also has Grasshopper for parametric/programmable design. The visual code aspect can be a little tedious though.

Some of the hardest jobs are underpaid, and level of education means less than it used to. Nurses and scientists for example. Partner is a microbiologist PHD graduate and starting salary wouldn't be much different my self taught first coding job - not that getting a job right now is really possible anyway.

Shopify doesn't seem to do this, and actually it's a bit of a problem because some of the apps have the craziest workaround for gaps in the backend.

Can't have multiple discounts in the cart? Splution: create custom discount codes on the fly for absolutely everyone in real-time.

I can't tell if you are arguing that the original vote was less likely to be skewed than this one, or just that this one doesn't pass the highest bar that could be set for it.

I'm arguing it's an 'online poll' and subject to all sorts of possible issues. It's probably a decent indication of what seems to be some otherwise obvious fraud at the polls, it's just not 'proof' of anything really.