When I was a young(er) postdoc and had to overhaul my bicycle -- my main transportation to work-- this site was invaluable. Forever grateful to Sheldon.
IPA makes these conversations less ambiguous. The point is that parts of the South are more likely to use an "ah" sound rather than an "oh" sound in certain places. The BBC's example (supposing it's in good faith) is lacking because it drops the second half of the dipthong following that morphed vowel.
Attempting to write out something close to what I'm imagining they're trying to get across in plain English:
hell-ah-ooh
It's obviously not universal across the South, but you'll rarely see it outside of the South, so "might suggest you're from..." is probably accurate.
It doesn't have a hard/soft contrast though, unlike the West and East Slavic languages. Palatalisation isn't a feature of the western South Slavic languages anymore.
Honestly this doesn't fit my usecase. If I understand it correctly, it is just like any other retention policy meaning it is not related to the fact that the attachment was deleted by user, but it just deletes everything after a certain point.
I don't mind storing things that people can access for many years - if I wanna see that funny picture from 10 years ago, I should be able to find it (even though GUI in Element sucks for that now). But what I do care about are things they uploaded accidentally or that they wanted to delete for whatever reason and it stayed on my server.
There are papers showing the common variants associated with intelligence. For example myelin sheath variants linked to intelligence as it increases fatty insulation around nerve fibers which speeds up transmission. But ones like that are surface level. This matters, but it isn't the only thing and for me the more interesting is the meta of what these have in common (besides often related to the brain).
The real problem is that most historical papers look for single SNPs. But a gene could have dozens of variants that do the same thing or you could have a genetic path where a major variant in any gene on that path results in the same outcome. These papers overlook this.
So you have to step back and asking: What are the principles of intelligence? and how would I expect to see them in human biological or other biological systems? (And related, why does humans have intelligence "now"?)
For this crowd, if I take an LLM and make it bigger is it intelligent? Obviously a key component of intelligence is raw stuff. Someone with fattier myelin sheath's straight up has more/faster "brain stuff". You might say ChatGPT 4.5 is "smarter" than 3.5, but not intelligent. There are two other key attributes missing. For those following along with the arc-agi you might already have a hint what those are simply based on what is moving the needle forward. Now even with all three and you are close and simply need to provide an environment for self-replicating with a selection pressure and energy constraint. For one definition (others will have a different definition) I have had a primitive AGI for 13 months now and regularly put it to work on sub problems of mine.
This really took off when I was reading genetics files like books and noticed I was reading files that are very similar, but some were Mensa level folks and others were more just "smart". Didn't take too much longer to piece together the key paths and differences and even went tracing back through Neanderthals DNA (How cool is it these days that we can simply poke around Neanderthals DNA!).
So it isn't forbidden, but more like I know what to look for and people are super sensitive around saying someone is probably smarter or not from a genetic file so I usually don't comment because of the Gattaca problem.
P.S. If you have a bio/genetic background and are playing around with AI I would love to chat. There are so very few of us. DeepMind is thinking of some of this, but they are in the UK. (It would be fun to give a meta talk to them explaining why their smartest engineers are smart.)
I've found the same. I've moved from a homebrew tinkerer's delight home network with pfSense running in a VM, Supermicro FreeBSD ZFS fileserver, hodgepodge of cameras etc. to a top-to-bottom Unifi Stack.
My time is worth a lot more now, my family appreciates very much that it "Just Works" (tm), and -- most importantly -- the cognitive load for me is a fraction of before.
Partially true, and the answer to that is runway -- it will be a very long time before all the other specialties are fully augmented. With respect to "non-surgical" you may be underestimating the number and variety of procedures performed by non-surgeons (e.g. Internal Medicine physicians) -- thyroid biopsy, bronchoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, liquid nitrogen ablation of skin lesion, bone marrow aspiration, etc.
The other answer is that AI will not hold your hand in the ICU, or share with you how their mother felt when on the same chemo regimen that you are prescribing.
The belief is -- and it is one that I share -- that this makes for more well rounded, human physicians.
Additionally, a greater depth of thinking leads to better diagnosticians, and physician-scientists as well (IMO).
Now, all of this is predicated on the traditional model of the University education, not the glorified jobs training program that it has slowly become.
Cynically, it's also a way for the US system to gatekeep "poor" people from entering professions like medicine and law because of the extra tuition fees (and opportunity time-cost) needed to complete their studies.
When I went 20 years ago, my school did not require a bachelor's degree and would admit exceptional students after 2 years of undergraduate coursework. However I think this has now gone away everywhere due to AAMC criteria
In Australia, Medicine was/is typically an undergrad degree.
In the mid-90s my school started offering a Bachelor of Biomedical Science which was targeted at two audiences - people who wanted to go into Medicine from a research, not clinical perspective, and people who wanted to practice medicine in the US (specifically because it was so laborious for people to get credentialed in the US with a foreign medical degree, that people were starting to say "I will do my pre-med in Australia, and then just go to a US medical school").
When I was in Australia and applying to study medicine (late 90s):
Course acceptance is initially driven by academic performance, and ranked scoring.
To get into Medicine at Monash and Melbourne Universities, you'd need a TER (Tertiary Entrance Ranking) of 99.8 (i.e. top 0.2% of students). This number was derived by course demand and capacity.
But, during my time, Monash was known for having a supplementary interview process with panel and individual interviews - the interview group was composed of faculty, practicing physicians not affiliated with the university, psychologists, and lay community members - specifically with the goal of looking for those well-rounded individuals.
It should also be noted that though "undergrad", there's little difference in the roadmap. Indeed when I was applying, the MBBS degree (Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery) was a six-year undergrad (soon revised to five), with similar post grad residency and other requirements for licensure and unrestricted practice.
reply