331c8c71

It does not pay into EU budget - it contributes to and participates in specific programs and projects. The treaties are rather sectoral agreements which are always under the threat of swiss direct democracy. Bilaterals III has not yet been approved neither by the referendum nor the parliament - while it will likely pass the opposition is every significant.

That's an understatement...

I have heard at least for some cancers the risk actually lowers when you become old enough (because your cells become less active in general).

I was thinking that I actually use grocery shopping as a recovery activity. I could cut it out but don't feel the need that much. It's not that I feel I'd do something incredible instead (which requires energy and/or recovery time of its own)...

Bought a travel click by Braun a few years bact to put next to me when I work. The quality is abysmal, the hour arm is half to a full hour ahead after I used for a while. And it costs like 30 bucks I guess one just pays for the brand name while the product is the same quality as no-name ones on aliexpress for a tenth of the price.

He always striked as genuinely nice person generously sharing knowledge insights etc and not caring particularly about money and status. The difference with the loudest tech bros who now dominate the field is staggering.

So all you did is just illustrated above.

Yeah it's more like personalized therapy - often the only hope for rare diseases.

While AI has definitely helped quite a bit I am wondering how much all this research and treatments cost. Not sure the current health systems could sustain this for _everyone affected_. If ai enables it all the better.

I'd definitely say both and the cultural component is becoming more and more important to keep up as AI capabilities increase.

> Are we gonna get the same pushback from medical researchers if the models cure xyz diseases?

Lol. As long as the process aka trials is respected not many would complain.

The feedback loop required to make progress is very different in medicine compared to math.

Happy he had a great career regardless!

Looks like he developed the original on his employer's equipment during work hours.

And the copyright on tetris pieces is just ridiculous given the Colomb's publication and probably others.

I personally appreciated the write-up as it presents an alternative to the glossed up candy narrative that I have read and seen more than once.

Didn't know about Gerasimov either (who single-handedly coded up the DOS version it seems).

> In reality most individuals are good people.

I'd agree if we are talking about personal interactions. Few hundreds people that we personally know and interact with is the scale we are wired for by evolution, isn't it?

What civilization enabled and continuously rely on, however, is the type of deindividualization of actions and bucketing of people, which, in turn, enables pretty horrible things at scale (from the weapons of mass destruction to objectively psychopathic profit-maximizing corporations). One can even say that not facing the consequences of one's actions is a feature and not a bug of the system.

Yeah the bureaucracy like eu is almost a perfect setup to deflect responsibility. "Apparently the measures taken by our predecessors were not ideal in hindsight but the need to protect our children remains of utmost importance. With the lessons learned we will now take steps to ensure the bright future for us all!" lol

I think 1/2 and 1/3 are quite nice as far as numbers go! Also 2/36 = 0.5555... is not that far from 5%

I think almost everyone threw a dice quite a few times while playing board games.

The idea is quite similar to Chekhov's "Rules for Aspiring Authors":

Any newborn baby should be thoroughly bathed and, after giving him a rest from his first impressions, severely whipped and told: “Don’t write! Don’t write! Don’t be a writer!” If, in spite of this punishment, the baby will show writing tendencies, a caress should be tried. If a caress doesn’t help, give up on the baby – he is as good as lost1. The writing itch is incurable.

The path of the writer from start to finish is paved with thorns, nails and nettle, and therefore any sensible person must remove himself from writing by any means ... (eventually gets to actual advice)

https://nova-nevedoma.com/rules-for-aspiring-authors/

> You think people just magically started liking kpop in the us?

How about British Invasion, also facilitated you think?

More than sad...

> if you can't remember the boundary conditions they hold under.

At the outskirts of one's knowledge this is inevitably the case. My impression it is still useful to know that a certain implication is possible - and one can look up the exact conditions.

It's certainly quite pleasant to work with...but I would rather use sql for etl, the backend be whatever it needs to be...

The real world data transformations can get gnarly very quickly and sql is the perfect common debiminator compared to dplyr which is still niche...

How do you feel about polars?

Well the onus is obviously on a driver to make sure they see what they need to see. And that they drive a vehicle that allows them to see things.

That doesn't mean the pedestrians should not be careful...

I looked it up and it's quite fascinating indeed but I cannot stop thinking about sanitary challenges...

I am not sure what specifically you mean by "AI" here but it's a bit naive (no offence) to think the field is so dumb that it haven't been looking at "AI" for a few years already. See https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.10.02.560464v1 for instance

nostos/limbus, genoox, engenome, congenica are a few companies/products that I have heard about and have been around for years (the last one was defunct from what I heard last however).

Disclaimer: not affiliated to any of these.

Thanks for the reply. I have read your post but I haven't seen the preprint obviously and without knowing the details I remain skeptical.

> The WGS NICU diagnostic rate is only ~30%, depending on who you ask.

Agreed. It does not automatically mean, however, that it can be significantly improved with better variant interpetation or better analysis of the same wgs data in general sense.

> I'm planning on publishing evals and benchmarks in the next few weeks, but out-of-the-box systems actually don't do very well for a variety of reasons.

Happy to see it. I wish you all the luck and will be the first one praising your solution if I see convincing results.

The post is written almost as if there is no prior art on (germline) variant interpretation. In fact, it is an established niche field with multiple commercial vendors existing for years (and diagnostics for critically ill infants is the most well known use case - google Stephen Kingsmore or Rady's children hospital for one). I'd be surprised if the approach is really something novel at this point.

It is definitely the case that the parents of babies and kids with life-threatening conditions are often one the most motivated people you see on Earth and what they accomplish sometimes is truly incredible. My heart goes out to them including the OP - I can only imagine how hard it must be....

These are not bankers, but the culture is still bonkers

You are asking about one-sided vs two-sided tests. Not really "more often" because formal type 1 error rate is still the same. I'd say two-sided tests leave more space for post-hoc theorizing but there are valid situations when there is no clear one-sided hypothesis a priori. Do we really know whether that the hypothesis should have been "ruder prompts are better"?

I'd say this is benign compared to other ways of (mis)using statistics e.g. looking which way the difference goes and then running one-sided tests or tweaking the setup until one gets "significant" p vals.

EDIT: I looked in the paper again and noticed that they actually did pairwise t-test on all possible combinations of tones. They should have adjusted for multiple testing since they are doing 10 tests (choose 2 from 10) and not one.

Interesting.

I am wondering why would anyone use a t-test when the experiment is clearly modelled by a binomial distribution: 250 independent questions and each one is either answered correctly or not (the null is that the success rate is the same).

10k only??? Incomparable to the value delivered any way you measure it...

It's suddenly you who's deciding for others what's stupid?