patagurbon

> are women just poorer?

Within living memory absolutely 100%.

What parts of the biology of sex mandates different treatment? Do you mean that medicine should be tailored to biology? Yes obviously, and even very progressive research hospitals take great pains to ensure the treatment is tailored to biology. Perhaps more so than conservative hospitals. You would know this if you engaged with the research outside of the news.

Outside of medicine? What different treatment does “biology” merit?

I bet they’re reading the room. They will have some problems if they’re the only ones who sign, but fewer if there’s at least two others who join them.

Who, what? Elaborate. Waving your hands like this is meaningless.

What are these progressive views? What is this scientific evidence? Who are these people trying rigorously?

Again, I am not in favor of those things. I am perfectly happy for interviewees to be filtered for basic respect for people of all walks of life. I hope the reasoning there is obvious.

Regardless governments must let the natural academic process handle these institutional issues.

None of the other universities have agreed yet.

What do you mean by laser focused? Do you have specific policies to address this? If not then this is a natural part of the unfocused nature of knowledge work, and the natural weakness of human organizations.

University research and knowledge work in general is backtracking search, not gradient descent in a friendly loss landscape.

There is a fundamental issue with this kind of federalism though in that it increases strife and could easily lead to civil war.

Let’s say we get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, social security, and research funding at the federal level. What happens next?

The West Coast and North East form compacts, companies, or nonprofits that provide healthcare, retirement and funding for their schools. The south, parts of the Midwest, and the plains fail to do so (at least to the same level) and within a generation we have two separate countries and war.

What are “they” doing now that is not conducive to scientific knowledge?

> they produce a lot of anti-knowledge

Regardless of the hilarity of that phrase being associated with universities over the attention driven news and internet that is both: 1. Meaninglessly broad and intentionally vague 2. Part of the process of science. For decades most of the genome was believed to be garbage. It was through academic research that this knowledge has been rebutted and replaced not by politics or regulation. This identical process occurs from philosophy to gender studies and physics to climate science.

> whatever the mechanism

Is straining to carry the rest of this sentence. I responded to an assertion that a policy by certain limited universities was attempted and deemed unfit by the natural process was still active. This is how institutions grow and evolve.

> echo chambers

Publish your papers, rebut the research. This is actively happening every day in every field of science. It is happening in everything from gender studies to particle physics.

> poison the public discourse

What on Earth are you talking about. What public discourse are you frequenting which is driven primarily by this boogeyman of the university system rather than the attention driven rat race of national fear politics.

Sure, that’s why I said the process is an approximation of truth and only then in the limit.

This is known in the scientific, philosophical, and research communities. It is a reality that is only solved by the slow inexorable application of the scientific process and exchange of ideas, not by outside political influence.

We should never put researchers on pedestals, but the process of science is the most prized accomplishment of humanity. It is a farcical weaponization of the slow and often backtracking nature of science by the anti-intellectuals of the world which we are witnessing now. Not a real crisis

> universities pushing restorative justice

Universities? Can you point to a university whose explicit policy is restorative justice? That’s not how universities generally work. You’re probably taking issue with an individual department which naturally has a certain research and academic history.

Are you prepared to cite the works prepared and researched by individuals at a university or lab which counter the research on restorative justice?

If not then either it doesn’t exist and we’re operating on anecdata or it does exist and the research system is proceeding exactly as intended. You are also comparing the outcomes of policy to the work of scientists and philosophers without analyzing the specifics of imperfect policy meeting an imperfect world.

Research and knowledge work in general is often wrong. That’s not the point. For decades large parts of the genome were believed to be garbage. That wasn’t amended by the government it was amended by researchers following the scientific process. The politicization of the process doesn’t speed it up, it simply introduces an outside malignant influence to an otherwise slow but steady process of inquiry.

I am not in favor of mandated DEI statements outside of basic respect for students and colleagues, I’m not sure why that’s relevant or why you responded to me about it.

Most universities have moved away from those.

They are not reasonable. Ideological “balance” has no place in any of the sciences. Science is about truth not balance.

An eye for an eye is not how scientific progress is made.

This push to force ideological “balance” on universities is incredibly dangerous. The pursuit of truth is difficult and has its pitfalls but it naturally leads to the dominance of certain viewpoints, which hopefully approximate the truth.

What the Feds are doing here is just a hop skip and a jump from forcing universities to hire young Earth creationists alongside archaeologists, climate change deniers alongside climate scientists, etc.

Universities and the research they do must inform politics, but the reverse risks destroying the research enterprise all together.

It does seem fairly arbitrary. It’s not a list of schools with big labs, since Hopkins or Berkeley aren’t there. It doesn’t seem to be private vs state schools, it’s not Ivy League or blue state only.

One potential reason to select a diverse set would be to point to a few who may be forced to accept by their state governments as examples to paint the refusers in a negative light.

Zygote hasn’t been the “canonical” autodiff library for some time now, the community recognized its problems long ago. Enzyme and Mooncake are the major efforts and both have a serious focus on correctness

If you write Julia similar to Fortran, with explicit argument types and for loops and avoiding allocations it shouldn’t be too far off. Fortran IIRC has a few semantics which might make it more optimal in a few cases like aliasing

But indeed there are almost certainly less performance surprises in Fortran

I didn’t say it was illegible. I said legibility is paramount, and I don’t think it makes the right trade offs in that regard to be a great teaching language

It’s far more legible for numerics than a lot of languages, maybe except Julia and Chapel. Julia was just driven in large part by teaching mathematics at mit and I think that shows

The post dismisses Julia quite quickly, especially since it is a language essentially purpose built to teach numerical linear algebra. Numerical methods is taught in Julia in at least a dozen universities I'm aware of, including MIT.

Unicode support and a few other syntax niceties make translation from the blackboard to the editor nice and clean. Fortran is great but legibility and easy tooling like (reproducible) package managers are paramount in teaching

It’s likely ticks per second. Fairly common terminology in video game servers

AI (apparently) needs much lower precision in training and certainly in inference than gaming requires though. A very very large part of the die on modern datacenter GPUs is effectively useless for gaming

Only in the abstract / around election time, much in the same way they run on cutting taxes for the poor and middle class. There are Republican run states that do better on certain diminished state capacity things like zoning (Texas) or 2nd amendment rights, but surveillance, rights of the accused, free speech rights, right to repair, etc are largely worse under Republican governments.

See for example the Patriot Act

There is a 3rd point, that craftsmanship, machining skills, and logistics experience don’t fall from trees. As the US moves certain “lower” tier manufacturing overseas it can risk losing the experience needed to create tooling for production lines, or the industrial knowledge to build large numbers of ships, etc. The jobs argument on its face falls flat for me, but I think a better justification for it is depth of experience and knowledge being lost.

Julia is effectively hard locked to LLVM. Large swathes of the ecosystem rely on the presence of LLVM either for intrinsics, autodiff (Enzyme) or gpu compilation. Nevermind Base and Core.

The compiler is fairly retargetable, this is an active area of work. So it’s maybe possible in the future to envision zig as an alternative compiler for fragments of the language.

You would have to have a very complete audit trail for the LLM and ensure the paper shows up nowhere in the dataset.

We have rare but not unheard of issues with academic fraud. LLMs fake data and lie at the drop of a hat

Impeachment of Kristi Noem could be more likely to succeed though.

Unlike a lot of government spending research spending provably increases revenues by more than expenditures.

I would counter your anecdata with the 5 friends I have, all of whom are whiter than printer paper and 3 of whom are deeply conservative, who received GRFP. Your failure to get GRFP had nothing to do with the diversity statement.

They’re great for teaching. But I agree for actual work.