2,020 karma · joined May 9, 2016
Wouldn't it be better if you asked for it and rather than having to manage workers it was just... Done
My mid-range AMD CPU is multiple times faster than realtime with parakeet.
ONNX runtime is a single library, with C#'s package being ~115MB compressed.
Not tiny, but usually only a few lines to actually run and only a single dependency.
But you don't want to be that employee...
Is it? I see paragraphs of testimony from HN users who love anything whether that's a programming language, web framework, etc.
Does this mean you expect them to add additional analysis to their paper evaluating it against your unpublished work? That's what validating would involve.
I can see an argument for dropping the word novel, but it's a bit semantic as their approach is slightly different and your work isn't part of scientific literature.
I can't see how adding a sentence referencing your work would make sense as it didn't contribute to theirs, and they did not assess it. It would simply confuse. The omission of your work makes it clear they didn't know about it while doing theirs, which provides the accurate context.
If they were not aware of your work, which is the only reasonable assumption, then their work is original and independent research. Almost all work is novel, unless you're arguing they have literally copied your work.
Would you be happy if they dropped that single word?
They would only need to cite you if you're a source. Unless they mention your work or results of your work you're not a source. It feels like you're just giving reviewer feedback that they should improve their introduction by giving more context, which is a quality of writing issue not an ethical one.
If they were to mention you the reader would assume they knew about your work before publication, and the next question would be "why haven't they compared their model to their sources"
Simultaneous publication happens all the time, and it's entirely possible for both papers to be novel. Asking the slower paper to redo work and rewrite just isn't practical, and could be a never ending treadmill.
They went through the harder track of FDA approval for medical devices.
I have no idea why you seem to think the primary way for the FDA to approve of new treatments is somehow... not them approving of it?
The wording is really poor. "Pre-market authorization" is their approval process. As in, you don't get to tell anybody that your device has any medical benefit unless we've assessed it.
But how does it impact your average user rating?
Do you think they charge too much?
Do they charge more than you think it's worth?
The difference they don't tell you about their internal accounting so you don't join the dots.
Start ups burn money on silly things like offices way too nice for what they need all the time. That's much closer to unethical than a company with no real duty to outsiders throwing away money.
Would you be upset if they had just donated that excess to charity?
Are there particularly many vim shortcuts that use ctrl that are important?
Does it involve a bit of stretching your experience?
I'm not sure why I would work for less unless I was founder, or it was a charity or other public good.
I have a 15 year old bog standard Toshiba satellite which wasn't expensive.
You don't get what you pay for with hardware at all.
In the UK it's SMS, call, or in app approval. In app requires biometrics, or failing that usually a complicated two stage password.
I'm always reluctant to write long prompts because I often find GPT4 just doesn't get it, and then I've wasted ten minutes writing a prompt
My entire computer can be dying due to intensive cpu load and the teams call is fine. Zoom causes the cpu load. Google doesn't have basic controls.
I'm sure slack is fine but I've never seen anybody use it for external meetings.
Do you hold charities to the same standard?
I'd rather pay tax and have 50% of it be used inefficiently and have theoretical influence in how it's spent