lukko

Really great! The way of filtering by equipment available, and then body part is nice and intuitive.

I found this article interesting [0]. It's about a fitness site from 1999 (https://exrx.net), that is still an incredibly dense and useful resource for fitness and nutrition. Makes me miss the 90's internet, but also I think shows we often hugely overcomplicate UI/UX.

[0] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/rabbit-holes/the-internets...

Amazing! I'm a doctor and founded a software company (https://www.piahealth.co) - even for software as a medical device (SaMD), the regulatory hurdles are tricky and time-consuming, I imagine it's at least 10x for hardware. I have huge respect for what you're doing and hope it makes a big impact.

Thanks for sharing! Amazing video...

Also reminds me of this classic - Schrodinger's smoke from SIGGRAPH 2016: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C9BLAXCe1I

Yep, I think fundamentally it feels wrong. I think many families would see it as a sign of incompetence if the doctor cannot explain a diagnosis or treatment plan - time pressure is part of the job unfortunately, and people may not process difficult information in stressful situations with as much clarity, you have to allow for those things. Reading a script from ChatGPT is insulting.

Patients hate when doctors just google their symptoms / rash in front of them, this is quite a step further. Printing out supporting information for families / patients is ok, but it needs to be validated – I think this is quite a dangerous use of generative AI for both the doctor and the patient.

I agree it's a realistic scenario. I always thought one of the most important things about being a junior doctor (FY1 / 2 in UK) was to be able to have these conversations with next of kin in a way that is empathic and easy for them to follow. If they are not processing the information then you have to allow for that, but I do think some relatives would react very badly if given a printout from an AI to explain a situation, patients always bring up if a doctor has googled their symptoms / rash in front of them, this is giving much more authority to the AI in a more sensitive and potentially difficult situation.

I think the way AI is used in medicine has to be thought about very deeply, I don't think it should just be a fallback in time-pressured or difficult scenarios.

Side note: there is also a stress-induced heart problem called tako-tsubo cardiomyopathy (aka 'broken-heart syndrome'), which also seems to be more common on Mondays.

It's caused by sudden stress (e.g. bereavement, illness) which leads to weakening of the heart muscle, causing the heart to bulge out at the apex. It's named 'tako-tsubo' because the heart starts to resemble a round vessel used in Japan to catch octopuses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takotsubo_cardiomyopathy

Yep, it will be interesting to see – Apple Watch can already monitor for atrial fibrillation: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT212214. Though, it looks like the patient must already have a diagnosis from a doctor. So rather than diagnosing, it's sort of an AF tracker - which is useful as AF can come and go.

The problem obviously with heart attacks is the implications of false negatives and positives are huge, and the tracing from a watch would be less reliable than the gold-standard ECG / EKG.

I definitely felt Mondays on-call were much busier in the hospital. I always thought this could be due to patients spending weekends with family, not wanting to cause a fuss and maybe ignoring symptoms of cardiac chest pain until it evolves into a serious heart attack (STEMI). Also, they may be waiting to see their GP on Monday morning and then get referred to hospital (although less likely with STEMIs).

I also remember the time between Christmas and New Year being very busy - I thought for a similar reason - people understandably just don't want to be in hospital for Christmas.

Can download an Xcode project and view documentation here: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/vision/detecting_a...

Just in case you were wondering, animals seems to be just cats and dogs: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/vision/vnanimalide...

Edit: you will be able to preview in simulated rooms in Xcode simulator; Apple will have testing locations where you can test on a physical device.

This is the first time I have been excited about XR - it feels right. Seeing it makes me feel like how I saw technology as a kid, sort of like a magic parallel world.

I think a spatial UI will sit much better with people, our brain obviously evolved to manipulate stuff in 3-dimensions. It's very exciting to see where this will go.

I think they will probably offer some kind of developer program? Developers apply for early access to a device.

I wonder if it will also be possible to preview Vision apps on Xcode via the simulator... Very interested to see how much access they give to the hardware and sensors via APIs.

Pia (https://www.piahealth.co) | Remote / London, UK | Full-time (Contract) Pia are developing beautiful, interactive & evidence-based digital health technology. We've recently released Lungy (https://www.lungy.app) a smartphone app that transforms breathing with real-time generative visuals and audio, to help relieve stress & anxiety. We're working towards creating a next-generation breathing platform for patients with asthma, COPD and long-COVID.

We're looking for iOS software engineers and creative technologists to work on a project initially for 3 months - any experience with Metal / shader code, real-time graphics, ML or audio development a bonus! (Must be eligible to work in the UK)

Please get in touch with CV and/or links to projects you've worked on: hello [at] lungy [dot] app

It took a long time. I think I could have launched about a year sooner, but wanted everything to be perfect, which seems a bit ridiculous now. I think it was the realisation that all the work would sort of be for nothing unless I launched it - that made me actually do it.

The most useful initial feedback was from a reddit group (r/testflight), but friends and family gave very helpful feedback too. I just tried to show anyone I could, it was also very helpful to watch how people use it without guiding them. The most useful feedback will feel brutal initially.

After launch, I did a ShowHN on here, which after posting a few times eventually picked up. Press was tricky initially, but after a lot of persistence, there were a few articles too. I had no idea how much work promoting something would be.

One of the things I realised after shipping my app, was that almost everything I was worried about before the launch was completely irrelevant. It's quite nice being in a bubble and just continuing to make something you like working on, I actually really miss that feeling, but the reality is most of what you make will have to change as soon as people use it.

Before shipping, I had no sense of how large the landscape was and how much noise there is - the trickiest part for me was getting people to see it.

Hmm seems he is a retired researcher, although it doesn't mention his background. The problem is it's quite a step up from anecdotal evidence from one guy, to doing any kind of trial involving volunteers, and it would need momentum and money behind it.

It does seem there is some evidence already on breath re-training / diaphragm strengthening: https://www.europeanreview.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/4547-45...

Yep, definitely. I think it'd be a good fit - email hello [at] lungy [dot] app

Really cool! I did try One Sec, but actually setting up the shortcut to divert is quite tedious, and it only works at the point of opening the restricted app.

I like the UI, just wondering if the 'Breathe' prompt will get old quite quickly. I created an app (https://www.lungy.app) that tries to make each breathing session feel very different, hopefully making it feel fresh each time - I wonder if more variation would work in this case too.

Interesting - it reminds me of the ‘strange loopiness’ in Douglas Hofstadter’s books - we have a model of ‘I’ that reflects in on itself.

We obviously have a huge evolutionary pressure for having a semi-accurate internal model of ourselves that we can use to project out into the future and avoid possible harm - I guess there is no similar pressure / incentive for LLMs.

For people in London, the game is on show at Somerset House this week: https://nowplaythis.net/

Lots of good stuff.

Pia (https://www.piahealth.co) | Remote / London, UK | Full-time (Contract)

Pia are developing beautiful, interactive & evidence-based digital health technology. We've recently released Lungy (https://www.lungy.app) a smartphone app that transforms breathing with real-time generative visuals and audio, to help relieve stress & anxiety. We're working towards creating a next-generation breathing platform for patients with asthma, COPD and long-COVID.

We're looking for an ML engineer, ideally with audio/computer vision experience, to work on an interesting project initially for 3 months. (Must be eligible to work in the UK)

Please get in touch with CV and/or links to projects you've worked on: hello [at] lungy [dot] app

It's hugely different - imagine the number of decisions a person makes when making an oil-painting - each stroke is somewhat influenced by past experience but also by the current state of the painting, their emotional state etc. The AI is just directly interpolating based on past input.

Making the two processes equivalent is very reductive.

Then the AI is performing a sort of collage of copyrighted work and the AI / prompt writer would not own the copyright to the derivative work. If a photographer stages a photo based on an existing photo, and it shares enough features with the original work, it likely would be copyright infringement.

This kind of 'training' is not at all equivalent. There's a reason copyright places value on the expression of an idea (i.e. taking the photo) - image-making is difficult and was a valuable skill, even for a stock photo.

Then with DALL-E it is like you are instructing a commissioned artist (who would own the copyright). I think it's fundamentally different to using a tool in Photoshop - content aware fill uses the rest of the image to fill in space, so whoever owned the original image would own the content-aware fill section. If an AI is used to generate new features - images, people - then it is like a collage or original and copyrighted work. Artists that throw paint around made the artistic and creative decision to do that, would choose the paint, the canvas etc. and actually it is very difficult to create work that has that quality of spontaneity and randomness - they would definitely own the copyright.

Yep, exactly - I think people generally regard artistic work as getting to a successful end result. When actually the process of creating something, and potentially wrecking something at any moment, is usually the most fun / exciting and fulfilling part. That magical process is lost with AI generation.

I don't think it's like any tool that has come before in that it can take much of the decision-making process away from the artist - it is much more like hiring someone to paint a picture than using Photoshop.

For image-making, there is a decision in the prompt and selecting images, but that is very different to making a decision about each color and brushstroke, and working to finish a painting. It's orders of magnitude more difficult and why great masters are celebrated. Creating stuff with AI will suit certain people, I definitely don't think necessarily the 'best' will automatically use it. It does seem to take away a lot of the fun of making images and truly original work will always push quite far outside the training set.

That’s true - not so much UVs, but texture coords I find are useful for quickly flipping the screen horizontally or vertically - so storing both a vertex position and a x,y value 0-1 for sampling a texture. I guess could just interpolate the vertex positions directly, just it’s less intuitive with a large triangle.

This is interesting, but also wouldn't the texture mapping / UVs be more confusing and possibly outweigh the benefit of micro-optimisation?

The good thing about having 4 vertices is can just use a vertex position and set of texture coordinates (x,y) on each one and the texture can just be mapped exactly.