muaytimbo

10.7B endowment. Clearly can't make it without federal funds.

22.3 billion endowment. Maybe they can fund a little research without taxpayers?

giving DOGE sudo is a whole article?

I will elaborate, for the intentionally obtuse and for people who have not lived in the world of academia. When writing NIH grants you typically have a section describing prior foundational work in the field or in the lab itself that the grant proposes to fund.

In our lab, at the time I was there, the majority of our publications were from 2 white and a chinese male. When writing grant proposals to continue this work (to be continued by the same 3 chemists) the gender/racial characteristics of other members of the lab who were female and of other racial backgrounds were described in great detail, even though they had not contributed to the prior work and were not going to continue the project in the future. Our backgrounds were left unmentioned. This was the way to secure funding was what the PI in our lab told me when I inquired about the glaring discrepancy.

It is my opinion that backgrounds should be irrelevant and funding should be granted on the strength of the proposal. That's not the case today.

EDIT: I left academia in 2013, maybe things have changed.

It's past time these institutions were audited. I had an NSF fellowship and was on numerous NIH grants during my PhD work (Chemist). All of them, even in 2013, had DEI language that made it clear if you were a white/chinese/indian male you were not going to be funded. The institutions, already, were self sabotaging, doling out tons of taxpayer money, not to the best ideas, but to labs that had a few women of various colors other than white working in them. It pushed me and almost all of the other chemists (who were generally white/chinese/indian males) in my class to leave the field either after our PhD or post-doc.

Center left is already authoritarian IMO. She’s definitely not the worst, her views are on her medium: https://medium.com/@marietje.schaake

Take from it what you will.

This very article reeks of authoritarianism. Read her blog, not the first time she’s advocated for bureaucratic regulation of tech companies.

The author is an authoritarian lawmaker. This is a false flag to consolidate additional power over the last vestige of the free Internet.

CA wants to control who sits on private company's boards and who can be admitted to private school's student bodies. Is there any limitation on what CA can require of a non-public entity in the state?

What is the purpose of the 34k? Why not just put them on a plane back to their country of origin?

Are they not able to be found?

One set of rules for the ruled and another for the rulers. This is well known, what’s new here?

This is interesting work but I think something has been intentionally overlooked. Creating proteins is difficult and it's also unclear how many of these sequences folded into the predicted 3d structure. Small molecule synthesis is still easier, cheaper, and more scalable than protein therapeutics. I think this would've been more impactful had they focused on improving on the SOTA small molecule - protein interaction models.

some things are more important than returns, I'd rather export free speech than import censorship. That said you should know that up front.

Yup, lots of moochers out there. Makes sense to me.

Probably none, 50% of the population pays NO federal income tax.

Totally agree, it doesn't matter who earned the money, only that the government needs it for welfare

Exactly, I think the US ought to make some extremely ambiguous laws and fine EU companies, dollar for dollar.

"What about the users' freedom to live without being spied upon?" Pretty simple, don't use Uber.

It has indeed. American companies basically finance the EU superstate bureaucracy. I'd like to see some reciprocity on the American side, fining EU businesses dollar for dollar.

it says the track embedding vectors are inputs, the music representations are probably learned in an earlier model, w2v or a two tower model.

and vietnam.

2nd amendment protects the 1st. You either have both or neither.

I don't know anything about this, but indictments mean literally nothing. You can "indict a ham sandwich" as the line goes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_Wachtler

In an efficient market safe drivers wouldn't be compelled to subsidize unsafe drivers.

The US sanctions Russian and Chinese companies it accuses of being vassals of the state. Why do we not do the same to Israeli companies? AIPAC.

Reminds me of this other article on HN: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/2024-0...

Israeli propaganda bot networks deployed to influence lawmakers.

Israel is literally everything US politicians say they abhor in a foreign government.

This was an obvious outcome, the government always protects its own. The government class gets immunity from the bottom, cops and judges, all the way to the top, legislators, and now, the president.

Not sure how you reached that conclusion:

"English Heritage, which manages the UNESCO World Heritage Site, said it was “extremely upsetting” and said curators were investigating the damage."

But what about Donald Trump's conspiracy with Russia? Or the Russian Hunter Biden laptop disinformation op? Or the Russian spy whale?

Oh whoops I guess you're right, all of those were lies about Russian perpetuated by US govt and media.

Side note: Russia has an economy the size of TX. Are they really wasting all of their money convincing Americans which octogenarian to "rule"?

So Israel does the exact thing all the politicians try to scare us into believing Russia does every election in the US. I guess the difference is AIPAC.

There’s nothing they won’t tax.

HN is a fact free zone, didn't you know that?