If those users aren't reading the error dialogs anyways, why do the error dialogs need to pander to those users? I wonder if the "make it dumb enough for every user to understand" approach leads to user comprehension plateauing prematurely.
> Four predetermined questions were posed regarding sun exposure: (i) How often do you sunbathe during the summertime? (never, 1−14 times, 15−30 times, >30 times); (ii) Do you sunbathe during the winter, such as on vacation to the mountains? (no, 1−3 days, 4−10 days, >10 days); (iii) Do you use tanning beds? (never, 1−3 times per year, 4−10 times per year, >10 times per year); and (iv) Do you go abroad on vacation to swim and sunbathe? (never, once every 1–2 years, once a year, two or more times per year). The four questions were dichotomized into yes/no in the analysis (i.e. sometimes versus no or never). We created a four-score variable as a measure of sun exposure depending on the number of ‘yes’ responses to the above questions on a scale from 0 (avoid sun exposure: reference) to 4 (greatest sun exposure). Sun exposure habits were categorized into three groups: zero ‘yes’ responses (avoidance of sun exposure; the main study group); ‘yes’ responses to one or two questions (moderate exposure); and ‘yes’ responses to three or four questions (greatest exposure).
Of note, the surveys are of Swedish women and were conducted in Swedish. There could be some translation nuance for the word "sunbathe" which doesn't map well to English, or other cultural differences to explain the "but no one I know actually sunbathes..." thought that I immediately jump to.
Instead, I will assume that the FDA has not reversed a decades-long policy without evidence stronger than a local news station which uses a local weed doctor as their quotable source.
The change in _stated_ FDA policy is a huge shift. This explainable-by-a-simple-mistake news article seems much more likely to me. This article header says "Posted at 5:43 AM, Mar 21, 2024 and last updated 2024-03-21 20:13:30-04". That's a 100% full business day where _no other mainstream media_ picked up the story? Possible, but not likely.
I've been hunting for the related source for this (and similar) article today. I cannot find any FDA press releases[1] which point to any documents like this being released. From a YouTube video from the same source as this article, there is a brief image of a document, which is the August 29, 2023 letter from HHS to the FDA [3-redacted].
Has anyone found a more definitive source that the FDA has recently released a "report" with this content? I wonder if this is just slow news day recap of old information.
The javadoc tool is useful for creating simple HTML documentation directly from the source code. But you end up choosing between making the documentation comments legible as source code or legible as HTML. If HTML javadoc is important to a project, this often means that HTML-in-java-comments will prevail, which in turn means that the developer experience of working on and maintaining those docs is poor. Eclipse and IntelliJ both do good HTML rendering of these comments in mouseover/etc displays, but it is quite annoying to open a file and then need to hover the mouse over the main type just to make the documentation legible.