Actually, per that chart, perovskite/silicon tandem have hit 31.3%. It's the red triangle with blue fill. So it's not even a record there.

The link has nothing to do with the summary provided. The link is to a report on a US study indicating vaccines are less effective against omicron, while the summary is about a report from a UK study about omicron being no less severe.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I read it too.

What could possibly go wrong... https://www.theregister.co.uk/...

Probably imperceptible to people, but clearly not imperceptible to machines since it was picked up as a magnitude 2 earthquake.

Functional MRI is able to indirectly measure brain activity via the blood oxygenation level dependent signal, so no, she's talking about MRI, specifically fMRI. Except what she's really talking about sounds like fNIRS, which is functional near infrared spectroscopy, which measures the BOLD signal using infrared diodes on the scalp. But honestly I just have to laugh at the claims. fMRI is nowhere near being able to reliably read minds and fNIRS is even more limited in terms of spatial resolution. And that's totally ignoring that you can't input anything with fMRI or fNIRS, so you need some other technology to be able to stimulate the brain to actually have telepathy and that technology is even farther away than read-only.

Nope. I thought so as well, because that's what the statement in their press materials for it indicated to me. But the truth is it looks like the nag is based on a torque sensor or something on the steering wheel, so it only really nags you when it's going around curves above some threshold. There are videos of people filming their commute where they spend most of the time without their hands on the wheel.

The summary is incorrect. Only one of the 3 crashes had any fatalities. And so far as I'm aware is the only one yet to have confirmed that autopilot was engaged at the time of the accident. The second two accidents the drivers indicated they were using autopilot, but Tesla has not been able to confirm that yet (or at least has not publicly confirmed it).

None of the links in the summary even support the claim that there have been two fatalities.

All of the software packages tested in the article (AFNI, FSL, SPM) are open source, including the package the authors built to do massively parallel non-parametric permutation tests (BROCCOLI).

The paper has been available as a preprint for awhile now, and my lab has discussed it internally and I've also paid attention to outside coverage. The key issue that the paper reports is that false positive rates are two high for most existing software WHEN using a specific type of test under a specific set of conditions. They show that voxelwise familywise error (FWE) correction actually seems to work reasonably or even conservatively. Cluster level FWE correction (looking for groups of voxels that are active) fails when using a very liberal cluster-defining threshold, but works reasonably well when using a more stringent cluster defining threshold. It also says nothing about the performance of another very common correction method that is frequently used in fMRI studies (false discovery rate or FDR).

I'm not really sure how extensive the group of findings that these issues actually affect is, but it's certainly not 40,000 as is claimed in the paper's significance section. Many of the earlier papers (and even more recent) likely used uncorrected statistical tests, so are suspect for entirely different reasons from this issue. Of the ones that use correction, the findings in this paper only call into question the results for those that are using FWE cluster correction with a cluster defining threshold that is too liberal (likely > 0.001, the paper's findings suggest that at 0.001 the familywise error rate is in the ballpark of the desired 5%). Those using a cluster defining threshold of p=0.001 or lower are likely fine, and those using a different correction method like FDR are unknown as to my knowledge there isn't currently any similar paper on that correction method.

You can also check out this technical report by some other big names in imaging that basically says that this result is known and expected for overly liberal cluster defining thresholds:
http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/s...

You might want to read the article (or even the summary). Google is saying that their results suggest that these computers are NOT just doing simulated annealing, but rather true quantum annealing.

Though as one of the questions during the briefing asked, they don't actually know the mass. They're pretty much guessing based on the size by using the distribution of a smaller pool of past planets that they do have mass estimates for.

From the caption for figure 4 from their presentation: "While its mass and composition are not yet determined, previous research suggests that planets the size of Kepler-452b have a better than even chance of being rocky."

http://www.nasa.gov/keplerbrie...

Production of nanoparticle titanium dioxide is definitely hazardous. Titanium dioxide dust, present during production, is a possible carcinogen. Nanoparticle titanium dioxide has also been shown to cause genetic damage in mice. That said, I don't think there's evidence that the nanoparticles or powder present in paint pigment and sunscreen, for example, actually cause adverse effects in humans to this point, so it's unclear whether these coatings would be a concern or not.

Or, based on the timer going on the livestream now, they were streaming. But there was no apparent link from either the front page or yesterday's or today's story about watching it live.

So it's 11:04 EST now, and no live feed. I'm taking this to mean the clock was advanced past midnight, and we're all actually dead now.