subroutine

Downvoted, but I'm genuinely curious. At that point (5 employees) the company probably had the standard 10 mil authorized stock.

10 mil * .001% = 100 shares

Was that like 100 shares?

But the fraction of computing that deals with quantum systems is a tiny. I would like to see performance on a more neutral benchmark than Gaussian boson sampling. I mean, it's fine to include boson sampling but it would be nice to see QC performance on general hard problems improve over time as well.

Reminds me of the scene in The Big Short where Baum learns about synthetic CDOs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A25EUhZGBws&t=111s

What is a viable alternative to fiat? Both commodity money (e.g. gold shillings) and representative money (e.g. backed by precious metal reserves) have already failed.

Indeed, this would be both interesting and an important control metric.

There was an interesting comment on HN a few weeks ago [1] where an engineer at Fast (1-click checkout) attributed their downfall [2] to "Toxic Positivity".

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30947595

[2] https://www.npr.org/2022/04/05/1091077398/checkout-startup-f...

In San Diego we just use a blanket "be there in 20 minutes" no matter where you are going.

I don't know what you mean by n=1. If someone goes to the hospital to get treatment for a rash, the doctor has methods to determine if the rash is from poison ivy, or an allergic reaction, or a burn, or eczema, even if those rashes all look visually similar, even with an N=1 patient. Because we have established diagnostic lab tests to assay for certain biomarkers.

If your question is, how can we currently do this with Autism, the answer is, we cant. Yet. That is the whole point of performing basic research to understand the underlying etiology. If we stop doing this research, we'll never find out.

Wrt. your second question, a lot of medications are simply "bandaids", and that is indeed a problem. Adderall doesn't cure ADHD, Zoloft doesn't cure depression, Levodopa doesn't cure Parkinson's. They are acceptable for now because they offer some relief from the symptoms, but do nothing to fix underlying problem.

So for a concrete example Levodopa is given to both Parkinson's and Huntington's disease patients. However if we get to the point where we can reverse Huntington's disease using CRISPR to edit the trinucleotide repeat issue, should we expect this same method to work with Parkinsons patients just because the two disorders have similar symptoms? Absolutely not. Parkinsons has nothing to do with trinucleotide repeats. Which is good to know, so we don't attempt a highly invasive treatment on people who we know for a fact won't benefit from it (and may likely do more harm than good on them).

The distinction is subtle but I would say physiology vs. psychology. The former (probably) manifests from genomic, epigenetic, or early developmental biochem conditions; the latter arises from experience (e.g. manifests from stored explicit or implicit memories).

Whether that matters is a different discussion. One area it might is treatment (for those who want it). If two similar disorders have wholly different etiologies, there is a good chance that a treatment that works well for one won't work at all for the other.

If someone labels cats and dogs and sheep and goats and a bunch of other animals as "dogs" just because they want to be called dogs, and feed those labeled samples into a classifier for training, when given novel samples of species, the pretrained classifier will recognize ("diagnose") anything on 4 legs as a dog. I imagine the same will happen if we compile a genotype database that includes dna from everyone on the "spectrum" (i.e. the "case" dataset will be highly polluted with control samples, which will no doubt turn up null results).

Don't get me wrong, I take your point. It's just that whatever is underpinning severe autism is subtle, and was already going to be difficult to tease out. Now I feel like it's perhaps impossible.

> These things are not mutually exclusive. There are people who can speak articulately and campaign on Twitter some days, and have disabling meltdowns and total inability to manage life on other days.

That describes 90% of the population. The group of kids I worked with I'm sure have never used twitter. My main qualm is with the anti-research advocacy. Those that are advocating against basic research seem worried about losing their autism 'affiliation'. More research means scientists working towards defining physiological underpinnings, which would lead to more scientific diagnosis criteria (e.g. genomic markers, fMRI/DRI markers, etc.). And if they are found to not have those characteristics, well, what does that mean for them? Does it mean their issues aren't real? Of course not. But it certainly doesn't make sense to call them Autistic. Their disorder should be coined a different name.

> while others, including parents of children with severe autism, complained that he trivialized the real problems of a real disability.

As a former autism researcher I empathize with these parents. The cohort I worked with, considered mild Autism 20 years ago (now probably considered "severe") had unmistakable psychological impairments. They were not just quirky, or socially awkward, and certainly not giving highly articulate TED talks, or campaigning on twitter for NIH 'normies' to cancel genetic research on Autism.

I don't question there exists a spectrum of asocial phenotypes, with some neurocorrelate. But it's been a great disservice to individuals with Autism 'proper' to be grouped (even if just by name) in a spectrum with folks with such mild issues.

This one's got me stumped too. I was expecting to see either an absurd amount of rabbits, or at least one adorable bunny.

Ok guy.

Actions other than... (1) obtained access to a Heroku database, (2) downloaded customer GitHub integration OAuth tokens, (3) enumerated metadata on customer repos with the OAuth tokens, (4) downloaded some Heroku private GitHub repos containing source code, and (5) exfiltrated customer hashed and salted passwords?

Yeah I gotcha. Don't get me wrong, nothing beats sitting down to work. It's the best. But with kids I don't have time for the gym, and a stroll in the yard wasn't helping my growing waistline.

fwiw my walking desk is set to 2.4mph, which seems to be the sweet spot between my natural walking speed and a pace that I can still comfortably read and type. Pretty much a linear ramp up from 1.0mph to 2.4mph over 1 year period.

It can if your standing desk is shaped like a donut; then it can go forwards, backwards, and sideways ;)

To counter, try standing for a few hours vs. walking slowly and you will be surprised that walking is actually easier. Humans anatomy seems to prefer walking over standing. It's particularly obvious after those long moments where you are deep into woking through some code, where you totally forget to move for about 20 min. The treadmill takes care of that. So if you already bought that standing desk...

https://www.lifespanfitness.com/products/tr1200-dt3-under-de...

Interestingly, young chimps outperform humans in working memory tasks...

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12993-chimps-outperfo...

I know it's not really the point of this missive, but I average right around 12 miles per day at my treadmill desk. So for anyone who'd like to multitask their walking and work, I'd highly recommend trying it. After about a month the walking bit really becomes second nature.

Here's an interesting fact about the cerebellum: it has more neurons than the rest of the brain combined, and as far as we know, all it does is help with balance a bit. There have been cases studies of people with a fully ablated cerebellum, and they can still walk, just a bit unsteadily.

I didnt say I was specifically opposed to Bitcoin. However, until it meets my prereqs, I have little use for it.

> Sadly, the "crypto space" was quickly invaded by hordes of people who never really cared about the technology itself, how it works and what it's actually useful for.

If having a solid understanding of the tech underlying crypto is a prereq of any sort, it will never reach mass adoption. Personally idgaf what fiat we choose or tech underlying my debit transactions, so long as the value is reasonably stable, my account reasonably secure, and my form of payment is accepted by almost all merchants.

Nice summary. A thought on point #2: (from a total costs perspective) is this still true considering yellow cab drivers still need to acquire, maintain, and insure their personal use vehicle?

Drones are reported to have been used to harass the vessel and keep its air defences distracted before the missiles were fired from a hidden battery near Odessa. At least two of the missiles are then reported to have struck the ship – causing a massive explosion and inferno as they are believed to have detonated one of Moskova’s exposed deckside missile tubes.

https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/sneaky-way-ukraine-dist...

"Ukrainian soldiers on Snake Island, this is Russian Warship Moskva, surrender yourselves or die"

"Russian warship Moskva, go fuck yourself"

Then Moskva opened fire. Everyone on the island was (edit) captured.

Guess where Moskva is now?

At the bottom of the ocean. The Ukrainians are so badass.

Wikipedia already does this for many symbols. See for example...

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

Aside from the table describing each symbol, if you scroll to the bottom of the page, it links out to full articles related to each. For a full list see...

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

Apple is not doing too bad. It has a $2.8 trillion market cap, and is the most valuable company in the world. Started in a garage.