Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Sunday June 10 2018, @08:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the trepanation++ dept.

Submitted via IRC for Fnord666

[...] After all, who needs a hole in the head? Yet for thousands of years, trepanation -- the act of scraping, cutting, or drilling an opening into the cranium -- was practiced around the world, primarily to treat head trauma, but possibly to quell headaches, seizures and mental illnesses, or even to expel perceived demons.

[...] "In Incan times, the mortality rate was between 17 and 25 percent, and during the Civil War, it was between 46 and 56 percent. That's a big difference. The question is how did the ancient Peruvian surgeons have outcomes that far surpassed those of surgeons during the American Civil War?"

[...] Whatever their methods, ancient Peruvians had plenty of practice. More than 800 prehistoric skulls with evidence of trepanation -- at least one but as many as seven telltale holes -- have been found in the coastal regions and the Andean highlands of Peru, the earliest dating back to about 400 B.C. That's more than the combined total number of prehistoric trepanned skulls found in the rest of the world.

Source: Remarkable skill of ancient Peru's cranial surgeons


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by lentilla on Monday June 11 2018, @04:36AM (2 children)

    by lentilla (1770) on Monday June 11 2018, @04:36AM (#691286)

    No - the rules as they stand are simple, easily understood and consistent. It's like speaking in a public forum - once we have spoken, the words are out. There is always an opportunity to later issue a correction or retraction.

    When I reply to a post I am replying on the basis of what I have seen written. I would be most unamused to find that my reply (some minutes later) was invalidated by an edit between the time I hit "reply" and the time I hit "submit". (What are we going to do - lock posts whilst ever there is a reply pending? For how long?) No matter the strategy applied (per above: allow editing for two minutes, until first response or mod point), allowing posters to edit their submission opens the door to a whole lot of grief. (And bugs :-)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday June 11 2018, @10:45AM (1 child)

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday June 11 2018, @10:45AM (#691340) Journal

    I would be most unamused to find that my reply (some minutes later) was invalidated by an edit between the time I hit "reply" and the time I hit "submit". (What are we going to do - lock posts whilst ever there is a reply pending? For how long?)

    Why would you need to lock posts or do anything so cumbersome? As long as the system tracks which posts have been edited, it should be relatively simple when you hit "submit" for the system to throw up a flag: "The post you are replying to has been edited since you hit 'reply.' Do you still want to submit your comment as written, or do you wish to edit?"

    (Yes, if you spent time crafting a long detailed reply, this could be annoying, but how long can your reply be in the two-minute window suggested by GP? Personally, I think if we'd bother with such a feature, editable time should perhaps be five minutes to actually be useful. But whatever.)

    Even better (or in addition): the system always maintains a history of all versions of a posted comment which can be accessed via expansion or link or whatever, so no version is ever lost. In the rare occurrence of rapid-fire exchanges here, and someone makes an edit, you can always point out your comment replied to a previous version (or, in fact, the system could actually note that by default).

    No matter the strategy applied (per above: allow editing for two minutes, until first response or mod point), allowing posters to edit their submission opens the door to a whole lot of grief. (And bugs :-)

    As opposed to the current system where we have to put up with posts clarifying stupid things like spelling errors or missed words just to correct or clarify a minor error?

    No system is perfect. On the other hand, I have no major problems with the current system and agree with your last point that additional complexity has the potential for more bugs.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday June 11 2018, @11:08AM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday June 11 2018, @11:08AM (#691347)

      If you're responding to something specific, it's always a good idea to:

      quote

      it anyway. If we want to go hyper-correct on the whole thing, an edit history could be kept and made available complete with a reason for edit field.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]