Emphere

9 ms·

1.
by Emphere 11mo ago
Thanks, can you point to where you found this info?
2.
by Emphere 2y ago
+1. I was excited for it and it sounded nice in theory but in practice it was just too much of a slog for me. I picked it up because I have a non-traditional math background and while I more or less know calc + LA, I do lack fluency with th
3.
by Emphere 3y ago
You may like Typora.
4.
by Emphere 3y ago
Seriously? This article is obviously poorly written marketing copy and is just one step above the average InfoWars article. "Caffeine anhydrous was first developed by the Nazis" OK, so what? Not to mention the fact this is comple
5.
by Emphere 4y ago
PC has spoken admirably of Koch Industries and he thinks there's some merit to remaining private. That's probably why. I don't have the source at hand but probably one of his podcasts.
6.
by Emphere 5y ago
I would like to second this recommendation. For a long time I thought their content was low quality edutainment because of the generally 90s website design and the generic stock photos used for courses(admittedly, that's...a pretty sha
7.
by Emphere 5y ago
Nothing in our previous understanding suggests that they increase release of aerosols or aerosolization. Multiple previous studies have shown that they don't (see Asadi, S., Cappa, C.D., Barreda, S. et al. Efficacy of masks and face co
8.
by Emphere 5y ago
Yes, but they are a pretty good proxy for psychological discomfort levels/rates. And my point was that you can't really compare acne to covid as the latter is much worse (let me emphasize that you _don't_ have to agree with m
9.
by Emphere 5y ago
Your logic is flawed because additive risks like that cannot be compared to exponential risks (like the spread of a virus). There's an asymmetry in the outcomes and the potential upside is enormous; especially when your stated risks ar
10.
by Emphere 5y ago
What are the obvious negative of face masks?
11.
by Emphere 5y ago
Honestly, this is a problem with everything. Snobs are sort of a double edged sword. They are great because they are very passionate and likely spend a lot of time on the topic at hand (could be anything. Maybe it's running, classical
12.
by Emphere 6y ago
Nobody disagrees with holding judges accountable but from the context, what you're advocating for sounds like a blood feud and we all know how those tend to turn out.
13.
by Emphere 6y ago
Would be interested in seeing a source for this if possible
14.
by Emphere 6y ago
Yeah, basically this. I assume HN has a higher number of people who work in ML jobs in fields like finance etc. If you're working in any sort of social/public health research, then most new methods seem to be implemented as R pack
15.
by Emphere 6y ago
Very good, something I have been thinking about as well. Inequality is bad because of the massive power differentials. How do you propose we "solve" that while still being able to reap the benefits of scale? Any pointers or books
16.
by Emphere 6y ago
Countries that didn't enforce strict lockdowns do worse economically https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/to-save-the-...
17.
by Emphere 6y ago
Why wonder? You can read in the original press release that there were ~5000 patients under the age of 65 with chronic diseases such as diabetes, severe obesity and cardiac disease. There were also ~7000 patients over the age of 65. That se
18.
by Emphere 6y ago
No, fiber does not have that big of an impact on absorption. That's why most fruits are a big no on keto diets
19.
by Emphere 6y ago
Sorry but this is ridiculous. Your solution to inmates having crappy lives is to impose even more arbitrary restrictions on them? This would make sense only if they could voluntarily go outside for a smoke whenever they want or go to a spec
20.
by Emphere 6y ago
His book, "The Machinery of Life", is just wonderful.
21.
by Emphere 6y ago
Why shouldn't we have great recall of the details of books we read? All of the things you describe about actively engaging with the works you read are obviously correct (taking notes, summarising main points etc.). But often, I (and I
22.
by Emphere 6y ago
You're absolutely right. Please disregard my entire comment.
23.
by Emphere 6y ago
I...had such an epic brain fart, I don't even know what to say. Please disregard my entire comment.
24.
by Emphere 6y ago
This is not a strong signal. The adjusted odds ratio is 0.03 (95% CI: 0.003 - 0.25). For randomised trials, it makes no sense to say that the difference in baseline is not significant because we have already observed the outcomes. It is bet
25.
by Emphere 6y ago
But in practice, directing animosity at advertisers and platforms is an effective way to remove content you don't like. It doesn't matter if the platform/advertisers says that they don't necessarily endorse the content--
26.
by Emphere 6y ago
Yep. What you're getting at in a sense is "Knightian uncertainty", the presence of unknown unknowns (aka "black swans"). And the heart of the matter is certainty, which we cannot hope to achieve. So what exactly do
27.
by Emphere 6y ago
Others have already raised this point... but let me try to reiterate. The problem of getting priors is not just one of "acquiring more information". In many cases it's not even clear what such a probability means. For example
28.
by Emphere 6y ago
Of course it's not 1:1 but having money can certainly make it much more easier for you to say no aka "fuck you money"
29.
by Emphere 6y ago
Can't help but feel that people here are missing the point and perhaps too hung up on the specific example in the wikipedia article. The broader point is about the misuse and misapplication of technical/"rational" method
30.
by Emphere 6y ago
Understanding that deciding to weight the choices is also a a choice and not necessarily always a useful one :)

More ›