cscheid

You're right that I can't reproduce it like a phone camera could, and that the more precise you are the better (and it might be that with my eyes closed I'm doing something closer to addition in log-odds, like a separate comment responded), but this is super useful even coarsely. The visual affordance gives Bayes's theorem a physicality unlike any other tool I've found.

Seriously, though, there's one nomogram you (yes you) should know about and have it well-enough engraved in your mind's eye that you can use it with eyes closed. A nomogram for Bayes' theorem: https://www.ovid.com/journals/nejm/abstract/10.1056/nejm1975...

Gentry Lee is in this? That's very funny.

If you stare at the CYK algorithm long enough and see it for the dynamic programming approach it is, you'll then realize that you can do the same parallelization trick for any context-free grammar!

CRAN has very different social structures and culture than other languages' package repos. CRAN _will_ pull your package from the repository if you fail to play nice with all packages, for example. This is evidently controversial, but it's accepted practice and one possible explanation for why CRAN feels more cohesive than NPM or PyPI.

(People might not know the inside joke here, namely that WotC has in the past sent the actual Pinkertons after some people suspected of leaking unreleased cards)

I want to point out that you are posting from a 5-months old account (squarely within a time frame where LLM-powered accounts would be created), with an UUID-sounding username, claiming a 10-year-old professional history in the field, and using those credentials to bring up the possibility that a 14-year-old account claiming to be an MD with `md` in the username and _lots_ of comments is LLM-generated and asking for skepticism.

It's not particularly helpful; you could easily have done the 5 minutes of work.

Yes! That "prefeitura do Rio" huggingface URL is definitely shocking to read to this Brazilian as well (I'm assuming you and parent also are from your usernames).

I know this is irrelevant on the grand scheme of things, but that WebGL animation is really quite wrong. That is extra funny given the "ensure it has realistic orbital mechanics." phrase in the prompt.

I prescribe 20 hours of KSP to everyone involved, that'll set them right.

(Disclosure: I work on https://quarto.org, for the same company that the author of WebR works on) Thanks for sharing that PDF link. It's so good! Would you be willing to write a bit about how you produced that PDF? It's a great example of what places like CIDR should be encouraging in terms of academic publications.

Science is just Stochastic Graduate Descent, as we used to say.

(FWIW, I'm the technical lead on the Quarto project)

RMarkdown isn't going anywhere! Quarto exists to bring the RMarkdown experience that folks love to a broader set of users and contexts. It is true that we try to keep the .qmd experience in Quarto pretty close to the .rmd experience in RMarkdown, and it is true that Quarto does things that RMarkdown never will. But it's not the case that "RMarkdown is being phased out and replaced with Quarto".

I’m dismayed that people are willing to put their names on garbage like this.

If you want the serious version of the idea instead of the LLM diarrhea, just go Jonathan Shewchuk’s robust predicates work: https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~jrs/papers/robustr.pdf from 1997.

Presumably because one of the two things are true:

- there's competition, and so if it's possible to rent for less than 1000-eps and still profit, someone will

- there's no competition, which is a cartel, the kind of thing that civilized societies ought to frown upon

You can also just grab the same piece from Substack: https://thenoosphere.substack.com/p/just-how-many-more-succe...

This is the kind of task that LLMs are precisely terrible at; there isn't an abundance of Zod 4 examples, and the LLM will sure as shit will give you _something_ you are now by definition ill-equipped to assess.

I'm confident about this assessment because I maintain a large-ish piece of software and perenially have to decipher user reports of hallucinated LLM syntax for new features.

(I imagine you agree, so this is just to expand) a secondary, insidious issue is that administrators diffuse their rules through the bureaucracy. In the case of CS, you start seeing references to csrankings in recommendation letters for grad applications, faculty applications, or even tenure letters. At that point, it can be hard to fight against it.

Please - if I wanted to know what an LLM thinks about this, I would have asked it myself.

(Context: I’m an IC and told my Manager multiple times that I’d quit if they ever make me a manager)

If you truly believe that, please do yourself a favor and read “The tyranny of structurelessness” to understand what a managerless place becomes. everyone and no one becomes a manager, and there’s no explicit avenue of recourse. There’s a good reason management arises. We can discuss good management vs bad management, but pretty fundamentally there’s no such thing as “no management”.

My understanding is that "weird" unicode code points become https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punycode. I used the 󠅘󠅕󠅜󠅜󠅟 (copy-pasted from the post, presumably with the payload in it) to type a fake domain into Chrome, and the Punycode I got appeared to not have any of the encoding bits.

However, I then pasted the emoji into the _query_ part of a URL. I pointed it to my own website, and sure enough, I can definitely see the payload in the nginx logs. Yikes.

Edit: I pasted the very same Emoji that 'paulgb used in their post before the parenthetical in the first paragraph, but it seems HN scrubs those from comments.

(I worked tangentially on software for analyzing data that will come from the Vera Rubin telescope, and) yeah, while it was designed for spotting weird supernovae and such, the first half of its operation is expected to be dominated by the discovery of near earth objects.

(Late reply, but) I got to play this over the weekend together with some other suggestions in this thread, and Dark Room was actually pretty good! Thanks for the recommendation.

Since we're all sharing clicker games, this one by Frank Lantz is a real classic: https://decisionproblem.com/paperclips/

(Disclosure: I’m a former academic with more than a handful of papers to my name)

The parent comment is harshly criticizing (fairly, in my view) a paper, and not the authors. Smart people can write foolish things (ask me how I know). It’s good, actually, to call out foolishness, especially in a concrete way as the parent comment does. We do ourselves no favors by being unkind to each other. But we also do ourselves no favors by being unnecessarily kind to bad work. It’s important to keep perspective.

if you think of all people as people, even Republicans

The OP didn't accuse Republicans of being non-people. They specifically made a -- true, incidentally -- factual claim:

> That's why they spread lies about refugees and other legal immigrants, right

It is notable, though, that it is the Republican candidate that has very directly been using dehumanizing language. And you are here asking people to get into a both-sides argument. The situation isn't symmetric: the arguments shouldn't have to be.

I understand you might not able to think in these terms when it comes to the hated enemy

Also notable it is that one specific candidate is using the term "enemy within" to describe US residents. It's not the Democrat.

Or even that they don't hate illegal immigrants, but think that laws are a good idea and criminals should be punished, not rewarded.

Again, your statement has nothing to do with what you're responding to.

Fun. It reminded me of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_the_Long_Now, which uses a similar noon-sun mechanism for keeping the daily clock cycle accurate.

In case anyone else is curious about the specific term for the concept you are describing, it's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leverage_(statistics)

(To reproduce exactly the scenario being discussed, you fit a constant-only model to the data using least squares: that gives the average as the best fit. Then, you measure the leverage of each point of interest.)

I once heard Pat Hanrahan (who among other things was involved in some of the early realistic hair rendering work) claim that L'Oréal funded some of that work, exactly because they were interested in what the models said about the (control of) appearance of real hair.

Dropping passive voice helps most writing, but

"content will be synced" -> "content is synced"

FYI that's still passive voice.

I’m the lead dev on quarto.org. I’m aware - I designed and implemented our observablehq integration.