epgui

I'm a scientist, so I know how science works. More research is always needed.

Thinking that watching video content on a different box is any different in this context is wishful thinking.

Obviously? Why do you think it would be any different?

That’s quite judgmental and shows an impressive lack of scientific curiosity.

Nanopore data is a lot easier to analyze than short read sequencing data. You just don’t get the same alignment/assembly issues: these things sequence incredibly long reads.

(also a biochemist, MSc)

The word abstraction does not mean the same thing as the words analogy or comparison.

What does that have to do with the article?

I thought half the point of captchas was to train vision models?

They don’t create energy, but they do create heat. It’s entropy, can’t avoid it.

What would you say are the benefits of the grammar-of-graphics approach?

When a mathematical formalism exists, just use that. Other approaches just reinvent the wheel on an ad-hoc/piecemeal basis and end up making all sorts of unnecessary compromises.

The selling point is the grammar of graphics. See Wilkinson on the subject.

Presumably they should have said “sources” but that’s not a helpful answer

I find them just as complicated as k8s.

I think everyone deserves to participate in meaningful and dignified work.

Yes, iphones do process images using AI.

I wouldn’t.

I’ve never thought of Linear as particularly fast.

Cognitive ability can be highly specific. If you don't use it you lose it. You may be able to keep your chess ELO high, but realize you can't implement basic algorithms in C++ quite as readily as you used to. Or you can't write as well as you used to. Or you can't quite make that old recipe taste as good as you remember.

We can argue about what skills are important or not, but these things tend to sneak up on us.

I don't think my actual cognitive skills have declined by using AI

I'm not speaking about you but... I know most people would not have much awareness of their cognitive decline. I know this because that awareness gap is there with or without LLMs, across all age groups and cultures.

It’s easy to imagine this being a problem both in quality and in volume. Verifiable work is less valuable than verified work. And noise is always costly.

That seems about as shortsighted as claiming the value of human understanding has cratered after the invention of the electronic calculator.

The “higher level of abstraction” phrase used to describe what LLMs are in relation to programming… That phrase needs to die.

Yes.

The python type hints are useful for static analysis (and yes, should be the default) but it’s a joke compared to the utility of types in a language like Haskell.

Support for anything Trump in this context is completely detached from reality. Unhinged.

The WHO admits they screwed this outbreak handling up badly

Uhhh no? How did they screw up? They were notified late, and then they did what they were supposed to do.

This is not even grammaring.

I’m calling BS on this. Biggish claims that are so vague as to be borderline unverifiable, no scientific basis laid out.

There was no aggression.

Why is that relevant or noteworthy? There are files that were updated recently too.

AI is not even an abstraction over a CLI command, in any sense.