alpineidyll3

If error correction can be made to work they would revolutionize human life by allowing the microscopic world to be predictable. The recent result about error correction in surface codes from the Google group is encouraging, but still several OOMs away from anything meaningful.

Pairs trades are amongst the most common elementary quant strategies, which is why all equities are so damn correlated and which destroys the apparent arb described in the article.

Yeah... I mean the author is blatantly biased, but his low level discussion is cogent.

Beautiful

The end of Chinese immigration will force change on this issue, it will be great for science and humanity.

Yeah. Op: fix this. I am trying to use your stuff...

This is the straightforwards Aharonov-Bohm effect. There never could have been any doubt that any massive particle would experience it. Related, even weirder experiments were the stuff of niche journals, a long time ago. https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.48.17...

We just live in an age of hype.

- Going to the gym and generally keeping the focus on removing your own limits rather than the limits of our world is a great way to grow. People perceive limitations in the world, but really they are accepting their own limitations.

This is amazing. It's extremely disturbing to think how much better it could be with the benefit of a large-language model.

I'm certain it's possible to completely reverse language. Even on my macbook keyboard.

Assuming the logic is gate free lol. For real to call two qubits a 'processor' has to be a new low. These reviewers should be in science prison.

These models are definitely entering the space where no one could ever get bored of them, and many styles can be generated.

It's just about where the software development incentives are. Big shops have incentive to have service models. I think of it like a return to the mainframe days, and an old-IBM like mindset.

However the upside to pocket sized intelligence will eventually win out. It's just a question of when someone will scrape together the required investment.

If these things get put on specialized hardware for inference with much lower energy costs, the world will never be the same.

Bbgky.net

This is the opposite of the culture in chemistry. Step 1 would be for the ACS to allow researchers to do ML on scifinder. Faculty and other luminaries cower though, and do nothing.

Hype over crap like this grinds my gears. Organophosphines like VX are ALL toxic. There's about a zillion such toxic molecules all containing the same functional group. This study does not demonstrate that this tool is better generator of toxic molecules than anything that includes the basic rules of valence and rudimentary understanding of shape similarity.

When thinking about whether ML does something novel, we must always compare with some simple alternative. I would be impressed if it'd predicted something like Palytoxin, a highly specific molecule with extraordinary toxic activity. There's no way the tools of this paper would though.

-- director of ML at a drug company.

This combination of tools actually has a lot going for it. I love streamlit and snowflake isn't so bad either.

I cancelled my longstanding subscription to the Paris Review shortly after their change in editorship. It was absolutely painful to do so. It once felt like a thoughtful well-curated window into the emotional inner lives of others. It has comforted me through weird life circumstances better than anyone I know could.

Somehow though, technology has challenged the meaning of what an inner life is. It has turned insides out. Competing with that has made recent literature feel like an identity based gimmick to me. It tries to capture an audience moreso than wait patiently with something strange and unique. Or the selection process which rewarded nuance has stopped functioning.

It's tragic because our shut-in shutdown often trivial feeling lives bear a great need for elevation of the human experience these days.

I loved openscad but not it's eff. This is amazing news.

Absolutely definitely not. It's not even possible to simulate a single protein-molecule interaction to an accuracy such that reaction rates are reproduced at room temperature. Small effects such as the quantum nature of H-motion prevent this from happening with present computational resources.

This research is something like a pixar movie, or one of those blender demos with a lot of balls :P

Very far away, and there are competing experimental technologies which could have yielded the same result in less time. A twist on the same experiment used to do the binding assay called DNA encoded libraries (DEL) can screen millions of molecules against a target. In these screens it's routine to find hundreds of micromolar binders. It's not routine to publish micromolar binders.

This paper isn't really even quantitative scientific evidence that the methodology of the paper is a good hit filtering method. The authors don't say much about the ranking of the non-hits.

It's a valuation booster moreso than a scientific milestone.

The idea of marriage is statistically, demonstrably overdue for an overhaul. It doesn't work for at least half of people, and definitely shouldn't be a disaster when it predictably fails.

We need sane legal agreements for each dimension of marriage, child rearing, property division etc. And support systems to humanely shepherd people through life changes. Instead we try to preserve the illusion of a life where everyone is guaranteed a partner who will always be there.

I am grateful every day for my no contest divorce. If anyone is near divorce my advice is bend and shoot for no contest. Try to focus on mutual well being. Courts can do nothing but transfer assets to lawyers.

The interesting story here is why Calico would license the molecule whereas traditional pharma was not as interested. Age related incurable conditions are the happiest targets for blockbuster drugs. In all likelihood, someone with actual domain expertise would realize that there was already data which indicated the drug wouldn't make it to market. The team with the rights seized the moment of silicon valley longevity hype, and good for them.

...to write this article, and then you read it. For my next act I will be working for my bathtub for an entire week.

Screw deathbeds. I'm just a guy looking for his ice floe..

Eh more like: let's not have another war on drugs.

There are casinos in every major place I've lived. (La, Austin, Chicago) which are negative sum games (not zero like crypto)

Mileage: https://youtu.be/ggUduBmvQ_4

There are, absolutely, crypto Ponzi schemes. (And stablecoins are largely such things) However there are also valid uses of crypto/Defi. I've used them myself to send funds easily. They are enabling truly symmetrically fair exchanges etc.

If you don't like crypto, don't buy it, don't mine it. Following eth 2.0 the energy usage will be minimal and it won't be harming you. Preserving positive freedoms generally and avoiding negative freedoms (constraints on others) is a good thing imo.

Applied.

The US currently allows several forms of private currency: -airline miles -giftcards -the institution which controls the us money supply (the fed) is a private corporation.

The US also tolerates several giant MLMs several of which are on major stock indices (Herbalife, Amway)

There is a huge difference between the positive freedom to not buy crypto and the negative freedom to staunch the economic activity of others.

Is crypto purchased for productive reasons? Largely no. Are there productive uses like bankless wire Xfers? Yes! Is it worse than MLMs, mileage programs or gambling? No

On the scale of US fiscal horrors it doesn't even touch debacles like healthcare.

Bahhh do you want to get captchas? THIS IS HOW YOU GET CAPTCHAS!!!