Reminds me a quote from Gibson's Spook Country: "That's something that tends to happen with new technologies generally: the most interesting applications turn up on the battlefield, or in a gallery."
I think we might make new jobs, but maybe not enough. I'll be pleasantly surprised if we get good at sharing wealth over the next few years. Maybe something like UBI will become so obviously necessary that it becomes politically feasible, I don't know. I suspect we'll probably limp along for awhile in mediocrity. Then we'll die. Same as it ever was. The important thing is to have fun with it.
You say this like it's some kind of ominous revelation, but that's just how capitalism works? Yeah, prepare for the future. All things are impermanent.
More indirection in the sense that there's a layer between you and the code, sure. Less in that the code doesn't really matter as such and you're not having to think hard about the minutiae of programming in order to make something you want. It's very possible that "AI-oriented" programming languages will become the standard eventually (at least for new projects).
I think we're entering a world where programmers as such won't really exist (except perhaps in certain niches). Being able to program (and read code, in particular) will probably remain useful, though diminished in value. What will matter more is your ability to actually create things, using whatever tools are necessary and available, and have them actually be useful. Which, in a way, is the same as it ever was. There's just less indirection involved now.
Cheaper than hiring another developer, probably. My experience: for a few dollars I was able to extensively refactor a Python codebase in half a day. This otherwise would have taken multiple days of very tedious work.
So, if we were to implement what this author is proposing, governments would be allowed to jail people indefinitely simply because they used effectively unbreakable encryption- regardless of whether what they encrypted was illegal (or evidence of a crime)? Because if so, that is absolutely unacceptable in any society that would call itself free.
I mean, as a rationalist, I can assure you it's not nearly as sinister a group as you seem to make it out to be, believe it or not. Besides, the explanation is simpler than this article makes it out to be- most rationalists are from California, California is the origin of lots of cults.
No, the downvotes are because rationalism isn't a cult and people take offense to being blatantly insulted. This article is about cults that are rationalism-adjacent, it's not claiming that rationalism is itself a cult.
To be clear, this article isn't calling rationalism a cult, it's about cults that have some sort of association with rationalism (social connection and/or ideology derived from rationalist concepts), e.g. the Zizians.
> Because these dodecahedrons have been found in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland — but not in Italy — Guggenberger views them as "Gallo-Roman products" with a possible origin in the Celtic tribes of the Roman Empire.
I'm not certain they're correct there, as various studies seem to quote different numbers. Either way, I'm not sure rats are so much more efficient that it would matter: e.g. if the half-life in rats was a few tens of minutes vs the hour or so half-life in humans, would that make the difference between no toxicity and toxicity? Still, I haven't seen other people report vision loss, so maybe the point is moot anyway.
Although, it doesn't preclude some kind of uncommon impairment to formate metabolism, which would explain why it doesn't happen to other people.
Very unfortunate situation, but I'm doubtful that it's the bacteria causing it. As far as I can tell, it just doesn't produce enough formate. The body is pretty good at metabolizing formate, so it really only causes blindness from large, acute exposures, not smaller chronic exposure, AFAIK. Combine that with no other reports of blindness from other users of the Lumina probiotic, nor any similar issues appearing in rodent studies, and the bar for evidence is pretty high.
Robusta is great if you don't go with the low quality stuff. Good quality Vietnamese Robusta is very enjoyable (and much higher in caffeine than Arabica, which I think is a nice bonus).
There's also the possibility of hybridizing Robusta and Arabica to get the best traits of both. A few hybrid varieties, such as Catimor, have existed on the market for a while. AFAIK Catimor has some of the hardiness of its parent Robusta.
As always, you'll have the best experience if you buy whole beans and grind them yourself (or at least find a supermarket that lets you grind beans fresh). No instant coffee that currently exists will be able to compete with that.
Looks like it comes from the original RIKEN article [1], where they call it an "artistic rendering" instead of an "artist's impression." More accurate, I suppose, but I wish people would just actually say if an image is AI generated or not, at least for the sake of clarity.
> Derivatives of parylene can be obtained by replacing hydrogen atoms on the phenyl ring or the aliphatic bridge by other functional groups. The most common of these variants is parylene C, which has one hydrogen atom in the aryl ring replaced by chlorine. [2]
I do that. Cook it to an internal temp of about 145 F (about 63 C). That's hot enough to kill Trichinella in an under a minute (as well as other pathogens), but the meat will still be pale pink and juicy. I've only done this with American supermarket pork though, so experiences may vary.
Consume multiple sources which are subject to forces with different incentives. All information is wrong, some is useful, and not everything is wrong in the same direction.
These kinds of semantic arguments are as pointless as they are unhelpful. There are shades of accuracy- state-controlled media often ranks lower than other sources on topics in which the state has a vested interest.
Depends on the radius, as I understand it. It could have more or less gravity depending on that, but we don't know what the radius of this planet is yet.
Wolfram Alpha has a good calculator if you want to play around with this [0]