jlglover

Ryobi make mostly good tools though. The results produced by most Ryobi users, myself included, are limited by user skill not tool quality.

As someone in an adjacent field who tried to keep up with the state of the art until the late 2010s, I really relate to this article. I'm reminded of another interesting personal story about AI-induced academic depression https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.01870. I think it's valuable to record things like these.

Squatters rights for IP

I live on a medium-sized lot within the limits of a city, so bow hunting is not allowed in my yard.

I completely agree with most of your points. I have a spot in my garden where I want to plant a large native tree, probably an oak. I would love to plant all natives, except that they quickly get eaten by deer in my neighborhood. Even many "deer resistant" varieties like coneflower and beebalm. Of course, this make no sense, since deer and native plants should have evolved to survive beside one another. I think this contradiction is because the local deer population is just much much higher than the historical levels, since they have no natural predators here. My neighbors say they weren't a problem until recent decades. I was somewhat skeptical, except that I see many plant varieties thriving in the 2012 Google streetview shots that would not be feasible to grow today.

I could imagine the radiation being able to affect some of the weaker bonds in certain chemicals

What you are describing is ionizing radiation, which RF and microwave is not.

CSET has lots of great analysis of China's AI policy, including references to official documents.

https://cset.georgetown.edu/publications/

It was a real shock when I moved to the U.S. and the posted price on items didn't match with what I actually had to pay. In Australia, the posted price is the price, and must "include any tax, duty, fee, levy or other additional charges"

Property tax is bundled into our mortgage payment, so even after considering the 1 % maintenance, our large house and yard worked out cheaper per month than our small rental condo and balcony. Unfortunately, we just had to replace our roof in Sept, but it only cost $6k (despite multiple quotes in the $15k range).

I will acknowledge that owning a house is sometimes like having an extra part time job. I'm forever fixing little things or gardening or changing things about the house. I consider this to be a new hobby, but if you consider it work then that's something else to consider.

edit: I put our loan details into the NYT calculator and it said "If you can rent a similar home for less than... $1,618 PER MONTH... then renting is better." That might get you a 1 bedroom condo around here, instead of a 4 bedroom house with a yard like we got.

Yeah, sorry. That was just my hyperbolic term for "monthly reduction in net worth in exchange for shelter".

Exactly. We just bought in the greater DC area and our mortgage payment is is only $500 more than our previous rent for a house that is much bigger/better. Given that $900 of our mortgage payment contributes to equity, we are throwing less money in the trash than before. Also, I have essentially frozen the amount I have to pay for shelter for the rest of my life (except for property tax and insurance increases). Even if our house never appreciates, it still made more sense to buy than rent.

The above only applies if you are very sure you want to stay in the same house for the long term, otherwise the high cost of real estate transactions will kill any advantage.

Exactly. Researchers have been doing tomography with energy-dispersive detectors for decades, especially at synchrotrons. They often represent that data in 3D with false color indicating material properties. If there is something particularly novel about this work, it's not clear from the article, which reads like a rehash of a University PR piece.

I found it enjoyable and understandable, but I guess I was already slightly familiar with matrix factorization for recommendation/characterization problems.