Not quite sure how to interpret this without a strong caveat regarding reliability of data sampling in the current environment. There's a lot that's changed within the last year and I lack the expertise to know whether that affects this comparison or not, whether on the overall ranges or the needed sample size to make a conclusion.

... and that's surprising? It's a case where people are constantly having to deal with syntax, which we process poorly. It has immediate, stateable goals, and can be directly tested and checked and basically involves getting a machine to help you communicate with a machine. Pretty clear use case. I use Copilot for just that, all the time. It's not like "Hey, make this 15 step process with scripts", but when you want to offset a row based on an entry elsewhere and process it a certain way, it sure beats digging through the documentation to refine exactly the syntax you want.

Updated: Found the link! It does exist. https://www.science.org/doi/10...

Sources that I can find cite PNNL as the lab and August edition of Science as the pub... but I'm not seeing it on the PNNL site and the recent issue of Science doesn't seem to have it. Searching for the supposed quotes doesn't bring the actual paper up anywhere. https://www.science.org/toc/sc... It all seems *too* convenient. PVC solution into useful hydrocarbons and hydrochloric acid at room temp and standard pressure? Really? I'm not certain we're not being had.

More relevant: Apple doing the *exact* same thing with the pulse-ox tech lifted from Masimo.

Can't get a job with your specialized knowledge? Why not spend your time trying to create your replacement? They're just going to turn around and drop it into services as a way to prevent the need for actual expertise.

Austin's pretty fond of the turn signal and tends to respect it. It's Houston and Dallas where you take your life into your own hands. Houstonites take a blinker as a challenge to protect the lane. Consequently, 3 of the 5 most dangerous stretches of highway are in Dallas and Houston.

Ah, yes, Uber's claimed a ridiculous number in their earnings report. If I were to publish such a claim on a paper, I'd be gone over with a fine-toothed comb. Actual data and analysis or we're just looking at more marketing "puffery." It's important to remember that Uber's only stated business strategy to become profitable is to obtain a monopoly on all ride-sharing and taxi service the world over so they can juice the prices. They're... not exactly reliable.

We're going to discuss population, but not the sheer volume of travel and consumption at the top? Look at who's contributing the greatest volume of the carbon footprint, even in the US, and it's top-heavy as hell. We're discussing this like 8 people don't control more than half of GDP. One of the fundamental problems is that these folks are in monopoly levels of influence but can't be bothered to prioritize the changes needed to actually clean up their value streams.

One of my ongoing questions is: When will they finally produce a mechanical version? If ergo's supposed to protect against RSI for heavy use, then strictly having rubber dome versions just ignores the customer's need.

Labeling it "Full Self Driving" and hiding behind the legalese in the confirmation screen? Absolutely moving fast and breaking things. Selling to the public like it's L5 when it's L2.

Prime's already under FTC consideration for its effects on the market. Adding this might very well be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Obligatory addition: we'd get more replication studies if 1.) replications were funded and 2.) replications had any affect on the market. I know people who've clearly, roundly failed to replicate studies, but get less support and attention than the study they're critiquing, which continues to be cited.

Psychology's really hard research. The problem is that people want acclaim and easy answers, but it's one of the most imprecise fields because people keep moving around and don't behave as you'd expect. Never trust a psych researcher whose priors always conveniently match their outputs.

Musk was a founder of OpenAI. He's not exactly lacking a spot for leverage, but, weirdly, stuff like this gets taken as a demonstration of expertise in a field as demanding as AI. "We're going to pursue truth" as defined by what? That's a pretty nebulous definition that will require operationalization.