shpongled

Beyond children, more people in the US in general are killed by drivers/cars than firearms. In the 25-44 age bracket, it's the most probable cause of death IIRC.

And, as an avid pedestrian and cyclist (and as a driver), the more humans we get off the road, the better.

There is a relatively widely adopted tool (100+ citations, >500k invocations collected via telemetry) for mass spectrometry-based proteomics written in Rust, and quite a few others in the works.

[1] https://github.com/lazear/sage

The title is >Create value for others and don’t worry about the returns.

Isn't being an anti-masker the opposite of this viewpoint? Literally saying, I only care about the returns for myself, even if creates negative value for others.

As someone who is "into" programming languages (and making toy implementations of them), I think some of the most important macros are along the lines of Rust/Haskells `derive/deriving` for quickly enabling serialization, printing etc. Using a language without such capability quickly becomes frustrating once you move to any kind of "real" task.

As someone who has been primarily writing Rust for the past 8+ years, I am actually unaware of any political drama surrounding Rust. It's just a programming language.

Looking at their profile I'm inclined to agree. But I think in isolation, this one post isn't setting off enough red flags for me. At the very least, they aren't just using default prompts.

No, it doesn't. The "I'm an expert at AI detection" crowd likes to cite things like "It's not X, it's Y" and other expression patterns without stopping to think that perhaps LLMs regurgitate those patterns because they are frequently used in written speech.

I assign a <5% probability that GP comment was AI written. It's easy to tell, because AI writing has no soul.

Unclear why you think this is ChatGPT, doesn't read like it at all to me. Many people - myself included - use punctuation to emphasize and clarify.

If you consider correctly citing a source that is explicitly provided in the context via tool use, then sure.

They absolutely cannot correctly cite sources otherwise.

The value proposition is multi-cursor editing, which is very nice

It's not totally novel, but it's very cool to see the continued simplification of protein folding models - AF2 -> AF3 was a reduction in model architecture complexity, and this is a another step in the direction of the bitter lesson.

Probably because ByteDance and Facebook (spun out into EvolutionaryScale) are doing it

Protein folding is in no way "solved". AlphaFold dramatically improved the state-of-the-art, and works very well for monomeric protein chains with structurally resolved nearest neighbors. It abjectly fails on the most interesting proteins - just go check out any of the industry's hottest undrugged targets (e.g. transcription factors)

There's no problem with randomness in FP?

You could use a monad/external state for an OS-level RNG, or define a purely functional PRNG

2016 remains one the greatest single player FPS games I've played (Titan Fall 2 is the other)

When I mean "use" them, I mean make heavy use of them, e.g. structs or functions annotated with multiple lifetimes, data flows designed to borrow data, e.g. You can often get by just with `clone` and lifetime elision, and if you don't need to eke out that last bit of performance, it's fine.

As someone who loves SML/OCaml and has written primarily Rust over the past ~10 years, I totally agree - I use it as a modern and ergonomic ML with best-in-class tooling, libraries, and performance. Lifetimes are cool, and I use them when needed, but they aren't the reason I use Rust at all. I would use Rust with a GC instead of lifetimes too.

Thanks! I'm not super up to date on all the ML stuff :)

Do you know when this was introduced (or which paper)? AFAIK it's not that way in the original transformer paper, or BERT/GPT-2

I looked through their torch implementation and noticed that they are applying RoPE to both query and key matrices in every layer of the transformer - is this standard? I thought positional encodings were usually just added once at the first layer

I think you cropped out the important part of the quote:

> It’s rare that I have more than a drink or two in one night.

I don't drink that often any more, but 2-3 drinks in a night, done occasionally is not a problem. I've had weeks where I drink a beer (or two!) every night, and also don't struggle with any alcohol problems.

2 drinks every single night? Leaning that way - and not great for you just from a health/caloric perspective.

I would pay $5000 to never have to read another LLM-authored piece of text ever again.

One possibility is trying a different form of cardio. I personally don't enjoy running at all... but I love cycling. Running for 30 minutes is super boring, but I can go do a 4-hour ride no problem. If you can't go outside at all, then this won't really help you though.

"It doesn't get any easier, you just get faster"

- Greg LeMond

True, I should have qualified "actual" duration, not perceived duration!

N,N-DMT is very intense and not to be taken lightly - but you could say the same with LSD, psilocybin, etc. Personally, I am much more wary of large doses of LSD/psilocybin than DMT, in part to the substantially longer duration of the former. Ego death and the complete dissolution of reality makes it harder to have a bad trip

Yep, I would love anonymous record types, ala StandardML/OCaml

I just googled "car fatalities [alcohol/distracted]" etc, and found either NHTSA or California statistics. All of them could be prevented using modern tech, but considering that we can't even get speed cameras socially/legally accepted I don't see it happening. We just don't have a culture of caring about this stuff in the US, despite >40,000 people dying each year due to traffic fatalities.

[1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving [2] https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/speeding [3] https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving

Most car "accidents" are intentional - drivers are choosing to speed (35%), drive intoxicated (30%), or scroll tiktok (15%) rather than pay attention to the road.

Firearms are a constitutionally enshrined right - driving is not. For the vast majority of Americans, cars represent a significantly higher threat than assault by gun [1]. We also let drivers flagrantly and repeatedly break the law and negligently kill people with essentially near-impunity. The same cannot be said for firearms.

[1] https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-o...