ppod

Yes, your second paragraph was basically what I thought was the case, it does seem quite recent. I don't have access to the Knuth article, I'd love to know what he means. Ramon Llull maybe?

Right, but the lesson is that we ought to look after the stable boy, not that the invention of cars was a bad idea.

As diagrams? I couldn't find anything, who used them then?

There don't seem to be many (any?) network diagrams (or what mathematicians strictly refer to by "graphs"). Are they a very recent invention?

Only point 2 is from the employer's perspective, the employee has control over the others. While there is truth in those, I don't think people would naturally settle into a 5/7 day week just for those reasons. You'll see a spread with big differences in age groups/family situations, but the average days at the office will be much less than it was before.

Agree, and the article sets up a weird dichotomy between empiricism and innovation. The empirical work of adapting a Transformer architecture to be smaller or faster or work better on a particular task is scientific work. Like a lot of Comp Sci, a lot of it is engineering, but there is a clear scientific component in that you come up with a model first, then implement and test it (using a lot of pre-built components). It's certainly as scientific as e.g. designing a medicine.

"No justice no peace"

Very clickbaity headline. The problem described is real, but just as real or worse in other statistical software, so it's not 'R' as a whole that poses a threat to reproducibility.

>it is, of course, absolute bullshit

I'm sorry that I briefly lowered the tone by linking to data, thanks for your help.

People who are making claims about hospital capacity should compare them to the same times in previous years. The data is all available online:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas...

You'd think considering academics do the reviewing, proofing, and typesetting for free the $1600 publication fee might enable the publisher to at least make a site that can stand up to HN traffic. Here's an arxiv version: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09961

Did they actually meet the guy at the time, or know where he was? What is the ethical status of that -- if he was admitting to murders to them, don't they have an obligation to turn him in? I didn't think journalist-source privileged would cover beheading civilians?

Roald Dahl co-designed a device to treat hydrocephalus for his son.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00701-010-0834-z

Couldn't the process in the article also explain why that's in the bible?

Is there any way to turn off the custom css, my eyes are still in 2020.

Might be reading too much into this, but I think there are a few layers going on here politically. Grenfell has been held up as an example of the failure and incompetence of successive Conservative governments. The Spectator and The Times are both publications that would be seen as centre-right and more Tory-friendly than most, and they both have stories today very pointedly (and totally correctly) blaming the Irish company Kingspan and this French company. Things are especially tense between the French, the Irish, and the British (especially the Conservatives) because of the Brexit crunch talks.

They are completely right to point at these companies, and the Irish media has totally failed on this story:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/the-irish-t...

But I think there is an underlying reason why the national adjectives are sprinkled all through these articles.

"Make something people want" is ambiguous in an interesting way. It could mean "Find out what people want, and make that" (Ford's faster horse), or it can mean "make something that people will want when they understand it".

Looks like this site is down maybe they should have hosted it with a reliable cloud provider.

>First, the SAT, it turns out, does not measure scholarly aptitude or native intelligence independent of social and educational background. To the contrary, SAT scores are highly correlated with wealth.

Why start the article off with an obvious falsehood? The fact that SAT scores are highly correlated with wealth does not mean that none of the variation in scores is explained by aptitude.

When people make the argument in this article they never seem to propose a fairer alternative. I'm suspicious that the criticism of SATs is actually a movement towards returning to patronage and nepotism.

This looks great. Under 'compatible e-pub' format it says "all devices except kindles and kobos" -- I thought epub files worked on kobos?

Yeah a blog post showing off a few things would be great.

I wonder is the author old enough to remember the Ethiopian famine in 1984. I would enjoy reading an article that made an argument about what was at stake and what might be lost with high intensity farming and capitalized distribution, but I can't take seriously something that long about food in Ethiopia that doesn't even mention the fact that 1.2 million people died only of hunger only a generation ago. Was that Melinda Gates' fault too?

A couple of interesting things about the journey from the press release to the story: the press release says "associated with", but the summary says "impacts on", and the headline says "critical for preventing"! Also, they pick "screen time and sleep" from among five factors, the others were less tobacco smoking, more physical exercise and more (yes) alcohol.

I don't have a problem with causal claims from these kinds of methods in principle, if the regression is well done with good controls. But I'm not at all convinced that they can isolate self-reported sedentary screen time reliably from self-reported physical activity.

https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s129...

I'm mostly joking but.. didn't they hire the guy who wrote the really famous "charge more" post?

Aside from the book, this brings back all those fuzzy feelings of learning ruby. Boolean functions end in ?, in-place transformations end in !

each, unless. It's just such a beautiful language.

I don't think prepping is silly, but I can't understand why this pandemic would increase people's perceived value of prepping. The whole world shut down, and there were basically no serious shortages.

What's it like in the kind of places that don't have pool decks?

An interesting aspect to this debate is: what kind of actions do we sort of instinctively judge to have very large tail risk, and should we trust those judgements? Of course, the argument here is about the precautionary principle. But the precautionary principle sort of assumes that we can correctly judge which actions have potentially disastrous (non-ergodic, to use Taleb's vocab) consequences. That in itself is an inexact science. Maybe these mosquitos are about to naturally cultivate some horrifying virus, and it's actually not genetically modifying them that would be catastrophic.

Taleb's ilk tend to respond with a kind of Chesterton's fence conservatism: things we haven't yet done, haven't wiped us out, so lets not do too much new stuff. But that's an anthropic argument, with weird Bayesian properties.

Yes, I think a lot of people here didn't read beyond the first third of the article, which is understandable because it tries to be very poetic and sci-fi and fails to actually make clear what it's talking about until more than halfway through.

Here's the bit that confuses me. I have "youtube premium". I go there, and there's no link to youtube music. So I google "youtube music", and it says:

"Get Music Premium to listen ad-free, offline & with your screen off. You have YouTube Premium"

Are they two different things?