Readit News>> we'll immediately be at the point where smokers [...] should pay more, after all, their way of life statistically causes higher costs.
> Wait, do they not?
Why should they? It's not obvious at all that smoking causes higher costs; a smoker who gets lung cancer is a smoker who never needs the medical care we give to the elderly.
The smokers who DON'T get lung cancer still have more heart and lung problems (like emphysema, COPD, etc.), and those get significantly worse late in life.
For collarbones specifically? Nothing I'm aware of. At least if the explanation that was given to me for the high prevalence of collarbone injuries is correct, that makes sense. Someone explained it to me as "when you start to fall, you instinctive tend to reach our towards the ground to try to break your fall. So your hand is the first thing that hits the ground, and all the energy of the fall goes up your arm and into your shoulder / upper chest area. And the collarbone just happens to be the "weak link" there and so tends to break."
Now maybe that's just folk wisdom that isn't really true, but it sounds plausible to me. And if we reason by analogy a little, it's not too far off what my surgeon told me when I tore my rotator cuff. I fell and came down on my elbow, and he explained that the energy from the fall pushed my humerus up into my shoulder, and pinched my rotator cuff between two bone heads, which is what caused the tear.
So yeah, not much padding can do about stuff like that I guess.
Hmm. Every time I've been in a similar scenario (breaking a fall, warding off an incoming projectile) it has been my wrists that broke.
webmaven commented on Magma: A foundation model for multimodal AI agents microsoft.github.io/Magma... · Posted by u/SerCe
For me doing the dishes is a 10-15 minute chore in the sink with some hot water but most people don't seem to object that their dishwasher takes 3 hours to do the same job with superheated steam or whatever. It still saves them the 15 minutes.
Don't forget that the dishwasher also uses less water and the dishes get sterilized by the steam.These features may or may not be important for a particular user.
webmaven commented on Accelerating scientific breakthroughs with an AI co-scientist research.google/blog/acce... · Posted by u/Jimmc414
A med chemist can sit down with a known drug, and generate 50 analogs in LiveDesign in an afternoon. One of those analogs may have less CYP inhibition, or better blood brain barrier penetration, or slightly higher potency or something. Or maybe they use an enumeration method and generate 50k analogs in one afternoon.
But no one is going to bring it to market because it costs millions and millions to synthesize, get through PK, ADMET, mouse, rat and dog tox, clinicals, etc. And the FDA won't approve marginal drugs, they need to be significantly better than the SoC (with some exceptions).
Point is, coming up with new ideas is cheap, easy, and doesn't need help. Synthesizing and testing is expensive and difficult.
But doesn't that mean that ranking the ideas to find the ones most worth testing is a useful problem to solve?
webmaven commented on Accelerating scientific breakthroughs with an AI co-scientist research.google/blog/acce... · Posted by u/Jimmc414
In science, having ideas is not the limiting factor. They're just automating the wrong thing. I want to have ideas and ask the machine to test for me, not the other way around.
If I understand what's been published about this, it isn't just ideation, but also critiquing and ranking them, to select the few most worth pursuing.
Choosing a hypothesis to test is actually a hard problem, and one that a lot of humans do poorly, with significant impact on their subsequent career. From what I have seen as an outsider to academia, many of the people who choose good hypotheses for their dissertation describe it as having been lucky.
webmaven commented on Accelerating scientific breakthroughs with an AI co-scientist research.google/blog/acce... · Posted by u/Jimmc414
> Google's problem that nobody else has a million cores, wouldn't you agree
On the contrary - their advantage. They know it and they can make outlandish claims that no one will disprove
For a while, anyway.
I suppose I'm thinking about transformer architecture rather than strictly GenAI, but the computer science aspects of protein folding and GenAI seem like they overlap significantly.
People are using these models to generate candidate molecules for specific purposes. According to some estimates I've seen, their hit rate is about 50% instead of 25-33%, and doesn't take two years.
All he showed was you can an existing thing running with 20% of staff.