Read the actual article, what they did, was tune a system to get the best results possible from ~80 case studies based on rules they devised for success.
That is not, even a little, the same as having it evaluate patients.
These articles are just exhausting. The tech is cool, but no, they don't have an 80% accuracy in diagnosing patients compared to a doctor's 20%.
Yeah. And that "random" podcast includes experts in the field explaining this in detail.
Even if it's just some AC, it scares me how dismissive people are of actual science now. They've found something to panic about, and by god, they're sticking to it.
What you said is exactly what they go into. Because labs have so much plastic in them, and the procedures that measure them require burning that can break other chemicals down into things that look very much like plastic, plenty of studies have been off by literally many orders of magnitude.
Basically all actual experts say yeah, wait for someone to replicated it, the single study, should not be a headline outside of the circles of actual experts.
Microplastic studies have been so wrong so many times, I just can't muster the freakout until other people replicate the results.
While I'm about as big an Elon detractor as there is, you know, I like him on this. Not $4.20 specifically, but that he's happily unserious about the things that aren't serious.
The Model 3 being named the Model 3 is still funny.
It's OK to keep things a little weird.
"Mozilla however has been a dumpster fire since they ousted Brendan Eich."
Kind of begrudgingly . . . yeah. That's it. They've had bad times ever since. They need an engineer back in charge. They need their Lisa Su or Jensen Huang, someone who really, deeply understands what they can and can't get done, and can really focus their development on the things that get the most for the least effort.
They haven't had that since Brendan Eich. And it's been a mess in a lot of ways.
I'm optimistic about a lot of what they're doing now, the renewed focus on Firefox, the mail service that's coming, feels like they're really pushing their core strengths, but a lot of the criticism is well-earned at this point.
100% this is about giving these big tech companies data on the students, and instead of paying the students or giving them a discount, telling them they are getting something for free.
At the risk of sounding overblown, this may be the moment higher education in this country really dies to business. They're behind the eight ball in enough ways already, and this just feels like the final death throes.
May very well be the marketing person whose job it is to pretend that they're job has been replaced by AI.
Sure, but what I mean is, Fedora is probably a bigger chunk than is being counted, as while you may not use Flatpak, a large number of Fedora users do, and I think Flatpak is #3 or #4 in the rankings.
You probably are. They count the flatpak runtime all in one big blob, and I think most Fedora users are actually in there, not in the Fedora category.
Seriously. Did we spend all this time putting the names of everyone who flew across an ocean in a jet in newspapers?
It's silly. They're reach people doing tourism. No one should care, no media outlets should be boosting them.
NASA is getting constant attacks and defunding, and we're reporting on this nonsense like it's space news . . .
Seriously, it will help boys, probably white boys, the most. They're not like, grading on a curve to include things like a family's background, but making the grade entirely exam based, to eliminate teacher bias.
It's been well known for a long time, sort of an open secret in K12, that girls get better grades, but boys do better on exams.
There was this push a few years ago, to drop ACT/SATs because they were sexist. The argument was that since girls get better grades in K12, and better grades in college, it must be the tests that were biased since they don't do as well on the tests. By all means, let's make the grading more like the tests . . .
This will help the kids who have access to things like tutors (rich white kids) and boys, the most.
Wrong kind of hopeful for Google.
There was no money on the Enterprise . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Downright dystopian.
Seriously. They might as well tell us how many iPods the new U2 album is on.
This is one of the most blatant advertisements ever. It's almost worse if
Yeah, the pattern is pervasive.
You'll see something similar if you look at talk of standardized tests being biased towards girls. The boys somehow get worse grades in class, but do better on standardized tests. And somehow, even with all that evidence about grading bias, the argument is made all the time that *the tests are biased against the girls* rather than just being ill prepared by a system giving them a free pass when "behavior" is taken into account and no one is auditing the teacher's marks.
People seriously arguing that this was evidence that the tests were biased rather than the grading was one of the absolute final straws that made me quite K12. It's so broken, they just . . . hate boys.
I worked for a major textbook publisher for years, the whole experience was summed up by one newsletter. How K12 treats boys was basically an open secret.
I got two emails, this was maybe in ~2016, back to back. One was a general education newsletter. In it there was this article, about a study done in the UK. They asked boys to gauge how much they thought their teachers, specifically high school biology teachers I think it was, were biased against them. They audited the grading of those teachers in a gender-blind way and found the boys surveyed were shockingly good at estimating this. The researchers were suggesting that basically boys don't try very hard in school by the time they reach high school, because they are actually quite smart about where they choose to spend their effort.
The next email was about yet another "Girls in STEM" promotional event we were running.
The best way to accelerate a Macintoy is at 9.8 meters per second per second.
