paraph1n

Could someone point me towards a good resource for learning how to build a RAG app without llangchain or llamaindex? It's hard to find good information.

> The outcome provably does not exist until you measure it.

This is not true. It only provably does not exist in local hidden variables.

I think it was a top level post, but my confidence is low.

What do I search for to find music/audio like this? It sounds so beautiful.

How does it compare to zapatos?

https://jawj.github.io/zapatos/

GrapheneOS for phone

That's not quite true. The function call in question is

> ImageInstanceQ[x,"caprine animal",RecognitionThreshold->i/100]

I think it's less misleading to say it has a generic image recognition function that supports goats, among many other recognition targets.

Now this is an application of AI that I can get behind!

Highly unlikely? Tim cook literally said in the quote "You can never say never."

What about people who game on their laptop (at home) but don't need to game on the go? In that case an eGPU also sounds like a reasonable choice. They can just leave the eGPU at home and still be productive away from their desk.

> "Critical" has a precise meaning in these kinds of systems; it essentially means when correlation lengths diverge (or, with a finite brain, become the size of the whole).

If someone doesn't know what "critical" means, they also don't know what a "correlation length" is, so I don't think this clarification is very helpful. Who was the intended audience?

This is not generally true in my experience. You can buy cheap take-out/counter-service food, or expensive take-out/counter-service food.

3-4 hours every day?! How do you find the time to do that, in addition to medical school? That's 1/4 of the waking hours in a day.

Can someone explain? I can barely parse this quote. Who are the 1P devs? Why does it matter that they didn't notice they had made a minor change? Why were they "tricked"?

Edit: I think I might understand it more now: This person got tricked into carefully reviewing the "entire" code, instead of focusing on the one minor change that was made to it, because they didn't realize it was only the minor change they had to review. In their careful review of the code, they uncovered vulnerabilities which were actually related to the original code (ie. VSCode) rather than the changes that this person was asked to review. Did I get it? I'm still confused about the use of "1P" here though.

Can you elaborate on what doesn't "ring true" for you?

It's an odd statement to make, since these aren't true/false facts we're talking about.

What parts of his work haven't aged well?

Indeed. Interestingly, psychedelics (mushrooms, LSD) work wonderfully for me, but cannabis is typically a bad experience (anxiety, nausea, no attention span, racing thoughts). Every brain is wired differently.

In order to understand the difference, you'd have to have a blinded and unblinded study, and compare the results. Then you could understand the difference between a guess with 90% confidence and actually knowing what treatment you received with certainty.

It seems reckless to presume the difference (between blinded and unblinded) is small. The numbers you cite (94.7% and 90% confidence) have nothing to do with the question you're trying to answer.

For example, an important difference may be with respect to expectations. If you're told you're receiving a psychedelic treatment, you may go into the experience with different expectations than if you were unsure about what treatment you were getting.

There's still a difference between "guessing" correctly versus actually knowing the truth. It's different from an actually unblinded study even if participants can "guess" correctly.

> knowing ones own neurotype

How does one going about finding their neurotype?

Citation needed. They host their source on GitHub [1].

[1]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea

> I recall from school the equipartition theorem-- 1/2 KT of kinetic energy for each degree of freedom. These things obviously have many degrees of freedom. So wouldn't they be "thrashing around" like rag doll in a blender at room temperature?

It's funny you say that, because the first image on the English Wikipedia page for Equipartition Theorem[1] is an animation of the thermal motion of a peptide.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipartition_theorem

What's unique about Japan's economy?

OP specifically stated they aren't asking about what tools you use, but rather "what kind of notes are you taking down and how you're organizing your thought"

Haha, genuinely curious, how did you end up linking to smart speakers instead of VR equipment?

Sharp seems reasonable, but I've never heard someone use it to describe garlic in isolation. I've only heard people use it when describing garlic flavor as part of a dish eg. "This pasta has a sharp garlic flavor".

Fresh raw garlic really burns, and I think it's quite normal to describe it as hot or spicy in American English.

Have you tried chewing on a fresh raw clove of garlic? You may find yourself using different words :)

Actually it's quite normal in American English to describe garlic as hot or spicy, especially raw garlic.

Why do you want to see ads in your search results? Wouldn't you rather see results based on quality rather than who can pay the most?

No one is arguing that the average remote worker is doubling up on jobs.

But many more are now compared to recent history.

Stealing catalytic converters is directly harming another person and also punishable with prison time, it's hardly comparable to working two remote jobs. But sure, some (potentially large) proportion of white collar workers may not be willing to violate trust by working two jobs, but many would.

Beyond that, if you think that all knowledge workers are ethical people, I would remind you about all the horrible software that exists in the world for the sole purpose of scamming or harming people. There's a lot of it. And it's all unquestionably much less ethnical than working two normal white collar jobs.