albertTJames

How they spin it as a duke achievement is ridiculously vain. They were not the one inventing the tech nor the first to implant it.

That must be one of the more interesting blog post I have read in a long time. We need more solution driven people, great insights.

Install conda then use pip ... does not make much sense. Conda is so clunky.

Cases like this are just proof decentralised/deregulation argument would destroy the earth. Governments and international agencies need more power to control these behaviors.

I have hard time imagining how this "unregretted attrition rate" (URA) works for very specialised position like research scientists. If you expect to lose even 1 of those per year it seem like the interview process could be a bit lighter.

tldr: There is no other science which is based on the study of a tool. A computer is a tool and so cannot be the main subject of a sciencific field. Hence Computer Science is a bad name.

The amount and quality of the professional/VC network available at the start make this pretty hard to emulate.

This is the best role the Shanara lead actor got after the series.

I feel this extends to other field. Its basically describing two of the big five personality traits conscientiousness and openness.

This is misleading. Crypto is used by most ransomwares nowadays and terrorist groups have embraced crypto as a valid source of financing.

That crypto is still a low percentage of overall illicit transactions makes sense, but give it 10 more years and that wont be the case anymore.

https://t.co/TFB02c7FEM

The secret management seems overly complex, why not use https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/containers/aws-secrets-controll... or https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/configuration/secret/ ?

Its surprising that a 3sigma results is promoted in such a way. It is not psychology.. in Physics we usually expect a 5sigma.

World fairs were possible because labor was cheap and the west was rich.

This name triggers some deep and still ongoing trauma

As asked by the author, here is an example of application in medicine: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17419-7

“Seems” That’s all it is to you LIDAR fanboys.

You simply do not know what you are talking about.

Another very balanced piece ! I'm so glad this world is only filled with good and bad guys.

The author seem to omit how much money customers of Robinhood made since its inception.

another baseless musk bashing. Waymo doesn't have nearly as much data as Tesla. They're not playing in the same category.

The republican party has no counterpart anywhere in the world. They are led by evangelical bigots and some of them even believe in QAnon conspiracy theories. It is the hideous face of inbred de-evolution of philosophical and political ideas into fanatisms and childish naratives. They are not going away. Educate you population, separate church and state now, and maybe future trumps wont be able to do so much damage.

No mention of social media, facebook or any other platform. If the argument is that there was political misinformation before 2016 then of course, it has existed for centuries. I am referring to the spread of misinformation through social media, at scale, which is the theme of the article. This was not seen at scale before cambridge analytica/brexit/trump/troll factories. Yet the platform existed for ~8years before it started.

Do you have any example ?

Mercer/Bannon/Trump and co. are super spreaders of misinformation. They happen to also use facebook, but I dont remember any issues of "fake news" in elections pre-2016/brexit. So no, its not inherent to the platform, only to the bad actors on it.

The study is mainly based on the results of this meta-analysis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4103214/ which showed an increase mortality risk for patients < 30ng/L

They seem to say the confounders were corrected for in most studies but drawing a causal link between vit D and mortality purely from observational data is shaky.

They say:

>> Differences in the amount of adjustment may account for some of the heterogeneity that was present among studies. All studies adjusted for age, and most adjusted for other covariates. Even with extensive adjustment, residual confounding is always possible. Confounding is also possible by factors that were not measured, such as genetic predisposition. It is inherently difficult to completely exclude any possibility of confounding in observational studies, so caution in interpretation of the findings is appropriate.

>> Supplements of 2000 to 4000 international units (IU) per day of vitamin D3 would produce an approximately 20 to 40 ng/mL increase in serum 25(OH)D.65,66

But the conclusion about the usefulness of Vit D supplementation can only be drawn from Randomised controlled trials:

>> Two randomized controlled clinical trials using 2000 IU per day of vitamin D3 are under way in the United States, a study designed to replicate the study by Lappe et al.,8 and a new randomized controlled trial by Manson et al.67 These studies will not have results available for several years.

That is why I always keep the water running while I talk about my merge requests. People did not believe me.. Who's the paranoid schizophrenic now Dan ?!

I am pretty sure every scientist would agree. But the issue arise because there are too many scientists/passionate/smart people for limited resources. What you are describing does happen for a selected few, the extremelly gifted esp. in maths and physics live their research career in this bubble.

Social inequalities and limited access to higher education created a high barrier of entry. Economy was strong, positivist, the status of doctors was still high and they had more agency into how they spend their money, overall, assessment of productivity was less of an issue because there was enough money for science.

"Approximately correct projection of world population by 2100, given that nothing horrible happens by then."

https://mobile.twitter.com/Level3 (not an internet level, just a company :)

Bravo ! Making the world a better place one y at a time !

Militarized AI is nothing to celebrate. It should be banned or at least controlled with international agreements. 200K people died due to the atomic bomb, but AI weapons will not cause such apparent destruction. They will continue to be improved and integrated into the military and our culture. Because they will never be so scary to cause an outcry from the public or the experts, and politicians will not feel obliged to control them seriously.

Until it becomes completely accepted that flying robots kill human beings every other day... oh but wait. Already the case, never mind. It is okay I guess, as long as you are born in the country equipped with it.

I had an interview with Improbable in London, the CEO of their "Defense" research arm is a complete nutjob without any care for ethics or forward-thinking into the risk of what he is building. And that's a tech startup, I can't even imagine what's the mindset in the R&D labs of the old-school defence industry. Probably ridiculously entitled and self-congratulatory.