j_bum

I wonder if there is an XKCD number: how many ref outs until you can find an XKCD comic?

I am a calm coffee (espresso) snob.

I love the basic, and I love the fine.

Believe it or not, expensive grinders (~$500 range) create an unbelievable difference.

But they’re a luxury :)

Lance Hedrick (popular coffee YouTuber) demonstrates time and time again that cheap machines and setups can rival even the most expensive end-game setups.

Loved this story.

Although, *spoiler*, my mind is still having a hard time understanding how the characters could exist before their simulation started.

Did they just not realize that their reality was sped up before the moment where the simulations began?

What a beautiful example of image processing. Great post

I’m in the same exact boat with deadlifts helping my back pain from my desk job.

I prefer source mode when building Quarto files in RStudio.

Thanks for listing this feature request... It's pretty shocking to me to see that so many people don't use inline plots! I am particularly fond of them for ensuring that plot dimensions are correct so that I don't need to resize everything once I render a report and add it to my Quarto website.

From curiosity on my end - are inline plots a technically challenging problem? I have no idea if VSCode would enable something like this out of the box. :)

The only thing from keeping me from transitioning from RStudio to Positron is the lack of inline plots in Quarto files.

Is there any plan or consideration for this to be implemented? It's a wildly important aspect of mine and many other RStudio user's analysis pipelines.

R being so high makes no sense to me either.

I think as of the last Stack Overflow developer survey, it only had ~4% market share…

I say this as an R user who spams LLMs with R on a daily basis.

Honestly the picture guide was easier for me to follow

Fun (but not fun) story :)

Anecdotally, I got my MBP as a graduation present when I graduated high school and was heading off to college many years ago.

So I got it in ~May, when my college program started in September.

Not a source, but the fact that we can treat AD in mice but not humans should demonstrate OPs point sufficiently.

I’ve always wondered about this actually. My assumption is that they always “pick the best” result from these tests.

Instead, ideally they’d run the benchmark tests many times, and share all of the results so we could make statistical determinations.

I’ll have to give this a try. I’ve always included “Be concise. Excessive verbosity is a distraction.”

But it doesn’t work much …

Just FYI, when I open this on mobile iOS, a blank white page appears. Not sure if this is intended or not.

Glad you’re ok. Stories like this are good to rebase myself and remember how important it is to enjoy life now while I can. No matter how healthy I try to keep myself, luck can change things in an instant.

The Hemingway editor is great for word pruning [0].

[0] https://hemingwayapp.com/

I’m curious why you find it immoral?

This is a good counterpoint that I hadn’t considered, honestly.

That even if a show is apolitical (or mostly apolitical like TAL), it will inherently have some political bias because the creators are inherently biased.

This will create a “niche” for the show, whether it’s intentional or not. Thanks for expanding my perspective on this.

Reminds me of a recent quote from a scientist interviewed by the NYT, who said that science is inherently political, because the system and people it’s built on are political.

Just to push to have you expand your counterpoint, what other views of American life would you want to see that they haven’t covered?

Nothing inherently, but the problem is that it can be misleading.

Let’s make an arbitrary example. Say a study is designed to measure the difference in lifespan between group A (water drinkers) and group B (coffee drinkers). Imagine there is a true difference in lifespan (say, 87.8yr vs 87.9yr) and the study is powered to observe a statistical difference.

Now imagine plotting the average lifespans between the two groups.

If the scale starts at 0 and ends at 100, the difference would be imperceptible.

But if the scale is shown on a range of 87.6-88.0yr, with breaks of 0.05yr, the difference between the groups would appear quite large. This Y axis scale is shifting your frame of reference to potentially think the difference is bigger than it actually is.

Maybe that 0.1yr is meaningful for some contexts or opinions, but maybe it’s not. This is why reading the units on an axis is very important: so we’re not mislead by the visual difference between two group values.

Hi Dan, I wanted to share a few links to articles on pain and circadian rhythms that I wrote during my PhD. Would love to connect if you have any questions.

[0] Circadian rhythms and pain: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01497...

[1] The disruptive relationship among circadian rhythms, pain, and opioids: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/1...

[2] Circadian rhythm disruption exacerbates pain behavior in male mice: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03064...

Eminem? Is that you?

I think this is dangerous rhetoric.

I’m glad that you had an experience where you found the corner of your internet to be boring. I do not think this is the common experience.

And simply because you didn’t feel impacted by it, does not mean that it’s not bad. This is obviously hyperbolic, but your comment reads to me like someone saying, “I used narcotics all of the time when I was younger, and I’m fine now. So everybody chill out.” That doesn’t mean narcotics are ok.

Social media does change your brain. It doesn’t take much to find research on this, but here’s an example of a longitudinal study of US adolescents [0].

This type of online content is a form of a non-pharmacological “drug”, so to say, as it can dramatically impact reward system connectivity.

[0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9857400/

This is incredible… congratulations on creating such an amazing piece.

Agreed. Maybe you’ve seen this, but Destin Sandlin’s recent video on this topic does a good job of demonstrating the institutional knowledge gap [0].

He also was a guest on the Search Engine podcast to discuss the same topic earlier this year [1]. I enjoyed this more than the video.

I think there’s some nuance and slight nationalism to take with a grain of salt, but the point is extremely well demonstrated.

[0] https://youtu.be/3ZTGwcHQfLY?si=2jaYQZEinXsJBk2L

[1] https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/search-engine/id161425...

Do you just add this to your “instructions” section?

And what type of questions do you ask the model?

Thanks for sharing

Why are we posting LLM responses to a question?

I’m not engaging in HN for LLM content… I would be willing to bet almost no one on this site comes here to read LLM text.

Is there some rule against this?

First, you’re cutting an in vitro study. Second, “permanent” is a serious claim that bears a large burden of proof.

I think defining “permanent” would first be useful. The brain is extremely plastic.

Beyond that, OP comment was referring to psychosis effects. See his comment below.

I’m sorry to hear that.

I know that there absolutely are people who shouldn’t take it based on their mindset and underplaying predispositions.

There is certainly a point to be made about psychoactive (and other) drugs inducing episodes of psychosis. This is something on the uptick with marijuana legalization in the US [0].

And I think am plainly wrong about my understanding of these effects not being “permanent”. I suppose I was thinking about this too much from a “neurotypical” angle, and not from the angle of how substances can alter the neurological trajectory of people with predisposed sensitivity.

[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/health/mental-health/marijuana-induc...