It's interesting to see these unconventional solutions. Genetic algorithms evolving antenna design produce similar illogical but very efficient designs. Humans have a draw to aesthetic. Robots don't have such limitations.
I've tried. In fact, I spent a good portion of my life trying to become more extroverted and "likeable". While I found I could very accurately mimic the people who had this trait over time it became exhausting to keep up with. As I've gotten older I've learned to work with what I've got. Instead of trying to chase this idea of what I consider a "good" personality I simply tried to improve the weakpoints in my own personality.
I would recommend you do the same. Don't "transform" anything. Just sand down the rough edges of what you have and find a group of people who are okay with you as you are. You will be happier for it and far less stressed. If you're anything like me, you will become exhausted very quickly trying to be something you are, intrinsically, not.
These comments are always so hilarious. It demonstrates a significant lack of understand of how statistics actually works. You see this on reddit all the time, you'd think it'd be better here.
Power and sample size are determined by numerous factors depending on the question under study. You could have N=10 be statistically powerful and N=1,000,000 be statistically meaningless. It depends ENTIRELY on the subject under study. More is not always better and in many cases completely unnecessary.
Here is a decent guide. You may wish to read it so you can learn when you can dismiss a study based on N. You never mentioned, did you back out the study numbers and determine the N=17 number was outside the range of statistical power? If so, would you mind posting your calculations?
This is clinical nutrition. There are so many confounding factors that it is not reasonable to draw any conclusions about how the body works (especially as a layman reader on HN) from a study that tested 17 people. Indeed, their own introduction claims that previous larger studies have found no correlation between meal plans and effects on the body, at least wrt caloric expenditure.
> These comments are always so hilarious. It demonstrates a significant lack of understand of how statistics actually works.
I do have a PhD, but thank you for your input anyway.
Would this be an intuitive way of putting it? If I pull a random 17 phones off an assembly line, and 16 of them are defective, I can pretty confidently say there is something wrong with the whole product line even though n=17?
Dongles don't prevent piracy. Famously, I remember paradox cracking several dongle-secured audio tools that were claimed to be "uncrackable". You may not even need to clone a dongle to do it.
Used to run into these problems all the time when I was doing work in numerical analysis.
The PATRIOT missile error (it wasn't a disaster) was more due to the handling of timestamps than just floating point deviation. There were several concurrent failures that allowed the SCUD to hit it's target. IIRC the clock drift was significant and was magnified by being converted to a floating point and, importantly, truncated into a 24 bit register. Moreover, they weren't "slightly off". The clock drift alone put the missile considerably off target.
While I don't claim that floating points didn't have a hand in this error it's likely the correct handling of timestamps would not have introduced the problem in the first place. Unlike the other examples given this one is a better example of knowing your system and problem domain rather than simply forgetting to calculate a delta or being unaware of the limitations of IEEE 754. "Good enough for government work" struck again here.
I think part of the problem comes to the sheer amount of jargon in even the simplest research paper. During my time in graduate school (CS) I would often do work that used papers in mathematics (differential geometry) for some of the stuff I was researching. Even having been fairly well versed in the jargon of both fields I was often left dumbfounded reading a paper.
This would seem to me a situation that is easily exploited by an AI that generate plausible text. If you pack enough jargon into your paper you will probably make it past several layers of review until someone actually sits down and checks the math/consistency which will be, of course, off in a way that is easily detected.
It's a problem academia has in general. Especially in STEM fields they have gotten so specialized that you practically need a second PhD in paper reading to even begin to understand the cutting edge. Maybe forcing text to be written so that early undergrads can understand it (without simplifying it to the point of losing meaning) would prevent this as an AI would likely be unable to do such feat without real context and understanding of the problem. Almost like adversarial Feynman method.
I'd like to add one more thing to this you probably experienced as well. My family has several people in medicine. All of them have done a stint in a hospital before quitting for greener pastures.
The homeless problem (now renamed "experiencing homelessness" as if this is a cure-all) has reached such critical mass that hospital beds fill up with patients that have no ailments. How do they do this? I'm sure you know. A homeless person who is either withdrawing, or cold, or hungry, or just a nuisance will come into the ER and tell the attending that they are suicidal. At this point a bunch of alarms go off. At least here where I live this means they are issued a bed immediately ahead of nearly all other patients and subject to 24 hour monitoring. They can, depending on hospital load, be given free room and board for up to 72 hours before a psychiatrist is mandated to give them a cursory once-over before sending them back to the street. They'll be back next week, once again suicidal, and once again consuming more resources than they will ever in their life time put back in.
The hospital can do nothing because turning down one of them who is actually suicidal would damage the hospital. So, people with actual real problems are pushed even further to back or left to line the hallways on gurneys because a homeless person was mildly inconvenienced by their, in all likelihood, self-imposed suffering.
Your notes on primary care are spot on. That has been my experienced as a layman with medical family. I know what they are going through yet I still feel shortchanged and often ignored by my PCP. Private clinics are no better.
You are aware you can have more than one big problem right? I drink too much diet soda. The cost of a 12 pack has more than doubled in over a year. There are now cheaper 12 packs of rot gut beer than soda.
Price gouging should be stopped everywhere. The soda companies have taken full advantage of the pandemic and should be punished at the very least for colluding.
This isn't raising the price of a necessity such as food or gas during a storm. It isn't price gouging as it is commonly understood.
Just don't buy it.
I do understand the govt looking into it for reasons of keeping a slightly more level playing field between large and small retailers.
from the article: The companies’ pricing strategies are being scrutinized under an obscure law known as the Robinson-Patman Act, the people said. The law prohibits suppliers from offering better prices to large retailers at the expense of their smaller competitors. The largely dormant 1936 law is aimed at promoting a level playing field between small retailers and large chain stores.
I don't understand them in any field. I was forced into signing one for tech that blocks me from working from any competitor for up to 2 years. Depending on how loosely you define competitors that could mean I can't work in tech for 2 years after this job. Unfortunately for me I can't afford a lawyer. Fortunately for me non-competes of this level are generally unenforceable.
You have NDAs already. It's not like you're working for Lockheed with secret stealth aircraft knowledge where a non-compete might be a national security protection. It's a representation of the inequality of bargaining power. If I didn't take the job I would've been out another job for possibly months to reach my payscale (Staff). They are a representation of the scourge of the neo-liberal variety of capitalism. It's not true capitalism, it's actually neo-feudalism, and it's not the only symptom of it.
You will never get anyone in power to agree to make non-competes force payment of a stipend while you're under one. The powers that be have paid off congress. The fact the FTC even wants to look into this after decades of this abuse just demonstrates that fact further.
Non-competes make more sense when you're working a highly personal job. It's very common for doctors to sign a non-compete saying they can't set up a practice within 15 miles of their employer for some time so that they don't take all of their clients with them when they leave.
The power imbalance is such that it won’t matter if a non-compete clause is enforceable or not. If it scares former workers from trying, they are in effect despite never actually being enforced. I think this is probably true of most workers which sign them.
you're not automatically entitled to use or benefit from the IP developed by others and then disclosed to you just because you signed a paper that promises to pay you for work. maybe it makes more sense where your opponent is a horrible but huge company like facebook but this move can kill development of sensitive or novel tech by underfunded entrepreneurs. it is a mistake for the USA. maybe you guys should downvote me more while you ride around in your teslas powered by slave labor batteries.
I think you are confusing non-compete and NDA, IP rights, non solicitation agreements and the like. You can go work for competitor, but it doesn't allow you to use any of your previous employer's IP, poach colleagues, clients etc. Doesn't prevent you from using your expertise and come up with novel things.
And some big companies do care that you don't do it, because they don't want to go into litigations because layers like to target fat cats.
i'm not confusing them. i know what i wrote. humans cannot avoid using IP from previous companies. what's your background ? (are you technical?) and there's more to this than existing big companies and their disposable funding.
I don't think my background is important here. But I'm technical if you need to know.
I had first hand experience of colleagues specifically not working on certain parts of projects because of NDA from their previous employments.
What does tesla batteries have anything to do with this? And california has banned them for years but its tech sector seems to be thriving and much, much stronger than anywhere in Europe that actually enforces them. So what are you basing your prediction on?
Try to open a large text file in VS Code and watch it grind to a halt. While VS Code offers a buffet of features that are cool and convenient it has a lot of problems.
I find I occasionally look at "huge" text files in my day job, but they're almost never source files -- so I don't need syntax highlighting, jump to definition, etc.
Is this something you do often in your C++ development?
I work with data, so it's not uncommon to load a large file either deliberately or accidentally. Highlighting isn't the issue. Even a CSV on the order of 100-200MB kills VS code dead. I assume this is because it's an electron app. Other apps do not have this problem.
