“Cops apprehensive about impending Orwellian state”
2,035 karma · joined November 18, 2016
meet.hn/city/in-Bengaluru
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/printSF/comments/y19ck8/i_finally_r...
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/printSF/comments/1fze6sx/blindsight...
SMSL has some good, well reviewed products; as do WiiM and quite a few other brands.
The Audio Science Review forum (1) has objective measurement based reviews of many of the newer amps, standalone and integrated.
I’m using the SMSL AO300 to drive Boston Acoustics VR3 floor standing speakers in a study, and they’re sound as good as they did when they were on an older Yamaha amp, or a Denon integrated amp.
Edited to add: most (none?) of the class D integrated amps can’t do Dolby -(licensing, I suspect, is the main issue here), so you’ll need to get a receiver in the middle for HTS though.
Edited post edit (sorry!): turns out Wiim streamers can now do 5.1, so some options are slowly emerging. (2)
(1) https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?forums/am...
(2) https://faq.wiimhome.com/en/support/solutions/articles/72000...
“Early human studies of ketogenic compounds have improved cognitive scores in patients with mild to moderate AD.”
While it requires behaviour changes (for the diet), this is something that's relatively easy to test & validate, and with a good sample size.
Edit: To elaborate -- getting on a keto diet results in production of ketone bodies; the keto diet is (IMO) hard to adhere to, but not impossible.
And if it is ketone bodies in the brain that are important, iirc, you can supplement the body with exogenous ketones (which the article alludes to, and the authors appear to be planning to test) which could potentially help.
If there's a measurable, significant effect with just consumption of exogenous ketones without even having to enter ketosis via diet- wow!
There are a lot of excellent authors who self publish, first on Reddit / royal road, and then some of them publish the same work as a book. The promotion channels, including review copies, etc - that a good publisher can facilitate - aren’t often accessible for this cohort. So that’s one big reason why - discovery becomes a challenge.
(1) https://www.goodreads.com/series/391892-the-battleship-chron...
Wonder if they will approach Lisa Su to take the job now :D
The Cleveland clinic has a nice, informative page if you want more information [0]
[edited to add]
The response of the innate immune system to the infectious agent / injury is what causes inflammation - i.e., for instance, fever, swelling, etc. It is a very very complex multi-cascade process, but one of the first responses to an injury, for instance, is the release of signalling molecules that results in localised swelling, slightly elevated temperature (which makes the tissue a little more inhospitable to bacteria / viruses), etc. all of which serve as the front line defense. <This is a severe over-simplification> Wikipedia has a good explanation that goes into the roles and triggers of the inflammatory response. [1]
Acute inflammation in response to infections and injuries is a good thing, and from everything we know, it is a necessary part of the immune response. The challenge is when the same inflammation response is mis-directed to target the body - for instance, in rheumatoid arthritis, and other inflammation related auto-immune disorders.
[0] https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/symptoms/21660-inflamm...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflammation?useskin=vector
Your analysis of the market structure and the challenges is consistent with my experience - I'd like to add 2 points though:
1. Building on what you've said about VC-level returns, while edtech (and industrial edtech) may not necessarily be fields where VC funded unicorns can actually form and then survive to profitability, I believe there is sufficient need and space for companies that are investable and can grow into profits / valuations in the 10s /100s of millions - they can follow the startup format, etc.; just not VC investable, as you've noted.
2. In the space of skill development (i.e., adults / professional learning), I would like to add that for many skills, as industries get more sophisticated (I am taking of manufacturing, automotive, energy, oil & gas, infrastructure, petrochemicals, infrastructure), there is value for the company in upskilling their staff - simply because that does directly convert to profitability if done well; and at least puts a floor on issues that poor or absent training may cause - like safety, quality, etc. So even if it is a cost, it is a cost that can directly affect their topline / bottomline, and I believe there is an opportunity here.
/off soapbox
There are (at the time of posting this comment) no comments raising any substantive issue with the arxiv submission itself (which ofc has to go through the peer review process of publication, and hopefully the original authors will respond / rebut this new article) - so curious why its been flagged? It’s not dead, so cannot vouch for it.
If folks in the HN community who have flagged it have done so because there are serious issues with what the paper is asserting, please comment / critique instead of just flagging it. If it’s because of the ambiguity in the title, I hope @dang and the moderators editorialize - there are some valuable comments in this thread that helped me understand what the issue is and what the bug is!
and there are some anatomical differences between mice and humans..
So its open at this point whether it is relevant directly to humans.
IIRC, mice do not get Alzheimer’s, for instance. There are mouse models (genetically engineered)that exhibit some of the physiological symptoms of Alzheimer’s; but mice make particularly poor models for human neurology [1]- so this reach for using these essentially biomechanical structures to identify parallels and try to target a cure for neuro-degerative disorders in humans: seems more like a grant application attempt. I do wish press releases were a little more circumspect about such claims.
[1] https://www.statnews.com/2019/04/16/trouble-mice-behavioral-...
I also used these two resources (the book was definitely useful; less sure if the arduino link the the same one I referred to then), which I found to be useful:
[1] https://docs.arduino.cc/tutorials/nano-33-ble-sense/get-star...
[2] https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/tinyml/9781492052036/
The platform documentation and support is excellent.
Thank you for developing it and offering it, along with documentation, to enable folks like me (who are not coders, but understand some coding) to test and explore :)
1) Have you read about Vannevar Bush, and what he has written, and his body of work?! :)
2) What sort of people are you looking for / to work with?
3) Would it need to be full-time? Are you looking to hire people full time (the generalists you mention), or are you comfortable working with people who are happy not cashing a cheque from you because they have jobs and other commitments / priorities, but still believe in what you are building and would like to invest significant time in supporting / driving the mission forward for some limited (or no) financial compensation? Because I’d like to check if I fit! :)
(I’ve also spammed you on twitter with a dm, but with more personal details, etc.)
Thank you!
One possible way of getting at this is to ask if people were more ‘happy’ when there wasn’t this level of tech available - and I’m not sure the answer is yes - I mean, there’s the mythos of ‘a simple life’ and ‘noble savages’, but from what I’ve read of life even a 100 years back - I would surmise folks were as unhappy / miserable then too - but likely for different reasons.
I think expecting just tech to make us happy is framing the wrong problem space.
IIRC, from earlier reports and articles, this will be more useful for biology and chemistry, and perhaps not necessarily for the kind of experimental physics being performed at the LHC.
The defendants are Welsh Carson, a New York-based buyout group, and US Anesthesia Partners, a business it created in 2012 that has acquired more than a dozen anaesthesiology practices in Texas. The FTC alleged they carried out a “roll-up scheme, systematically buying up nearly every large anaesthesia practice in [the state] to create a single dominant provider with the power to demand higher prices”.
Even if it is a real breakthrough, material synthesis of a new material in any lab, and doing so reproducibly, is tricky enough that I am absolutely not going to infer / conclude from, or pass any comment on any replication efforts this early into the process. Its going to be an iterative process - which means one has to start somewhere.
Some of the quoted folks come across (to me) as just peevish.
Derek Lowe [0] has a far more balanced take on it, IMO.
His article was discussed on HN a few days ago [1].
[0] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/room-temperature-s...
Fairly common, especially in life sciences, and I suspect chemistry and materials science.
Added in edit: This doesn’t make the result any more or less credible; for that, the true test is independent replication of both the synthesis as well as the experimental measurements. But the fact that the two authors published two papers with different groups is orthogonal to whether the result is real / an experimental error / fraud. I so hope its true - but..lets wait for replication and validation by other qualified experts :)
Armed with all of this data, and working on an assumption that current ‘laws’ of physics will continue to apply in the future, scientists can make reasonably confident predictions.
Similar approach, though admittedly with far less mathematical modeling, is also the case in biology. Even textbooks and scientific resources have to assume, at some point, that we start with a framework of axioms.
But most science textbooks also first introduce the idea of models, hypothesis and the notion that a ‘law’, is only as good as the most recent experiment that supports it - and that the scientific method requires us to discard or amend the ‘law’ if new evidence contradicts its predictions. To keep repeating this foundational idea every step of the way seems tedious - it’s reasonable to treat gravity on earth as a fact in the face of overwhelming observational evidence, for instance.
I don’t see how any of this reflects hubris and unwillingness to admit what we don’t know.
For instance, as an (ex-)biologist, I completely agree we do not have a good model for consciousness; or that we simply don’t have a solid functional model of a cell that allows us to model and predict its behaviour at detail and with all its complexity - we are still, in fact, discovering layers of complexity and nuance. But there are some things we do understand well.
Same in physics - the search for a Grand Unifiying Theory continues. ‘Dark matter’, as I understand it, is an acknowledged proxy for many things we don’t yet understand.
So..not sure I agree with your position :)
Although the amount of funding is small at only €7mn, it is significant as Proxima is the first fusion company to spin out of Germany’s revered Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics.' [0]
Joins a few other stellerator-based fusion startups.. what an exciting time..
[0] https://www.ft.com/content/c777f0db-1a4b-4ced-b02a-c27178032... (same link as the title I submitted)
Have you documented & written about your microscope experiments (both building them and the experiments themselves) on the web?
If you have, and are comfortable, can you please share the link?
Just curious. Ex-biologist, and among other things, I helped build / assemble an optical trap and other equipment including confocal / TIRF microscopes about a decade+ ago, so curious what a serious (amateur) student with time, passion and resources is able to do.
Thank you :)
Assuming the financial penalties are a significant fraction (i.e they are, say, greater than 5%) of the agreement value, I would interpret it as a more serious / confident commitment and expression of intent and viability, than just a contract that’s hope + way to support.
[0] https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/10/23717332/microsoft-nuclea...
Good article that contextualises the results and concerns about the lab that published these results.