You know, even a medical guide to biohacking that
ACTUALLY
CONSIDERED
EXPECTED
VALUE
would be an amazingly useful and unique thing. Almost all doctors have been lobotomized by a deontological culture of liability-avoidance and ape-status-game-credentialism, so we don't actually get this from them. Instead, they parrot things like
"you shouldn't do that because it's not FDA approved"
even though 'intervention x would help person y achieve goal z' and 'intervention x is or is not permitted by the FDA for purposes S' are very nearly independent claims
"unofficial suppliers aren't necessarily giving you exactly the thing they're advertising"
as if that were not something that could be *analyzed* as a factor in the risk-reward calculation!
"you have to focus on optimizing your sleep/exercise/mental health/etc. naturally before trying intervention x"
which is usually a manifestly meaningless diversion, and, simultaneously, a bar that can and will be set arbitrarily high in order to attribute all deficits in performance to personal failures. ("before you start pumping yourself full of artificial chemicals like quetiapine, you have to try actually making efforts to recognize when you're getting lost in one of your little fantasies" ... "you must not be actually trying, because you're still having the problem" ...)
"you don't need to take supplements, just eat a balanced diet"
as though it were deontologically necessary to never swallow a pill for something that could plausibly done in some other manner; as though there were actual agreement on what 'a balanced diet' even IS, as though there were one pattern that fit everyone, as though spending $24.99 a month for a benign insurance policy that covers 90% of possible blind spots is a pointless activity.
The fact that medical sources are so often skeptical of multivitamins for this reason is more or less a perfect demonstration of the fact that their purpose is *not to improve lives*, but to enforce normative constraints on the human form which merely happen to correlate with improvement for people who aren't too far off the bell curve. Ignore the FDA, take more supplements, more drugs, more steroids, more peptides.
Will some people be hurt by doing this that wouldn't have been otherwise? Yes, obviously and inevitably. But you know what else hurts? THE CONDITIONS THAT THESE THINGS HELP TREAT. Only, when so many more people suffer and die early because of inabilities caused by fatigue or brain fog, complications from being overweight, etc., that *could've been helped* in such ways, we say it's 'their fault' -- a personal failure not a policy failure. It's just the short-sighted sociopathic normativity that lies at the foundation of all current public health discourse and policy.
I wish I had the money to fund such an EV-based guide to the space of medical interventions -- though maybe there is some sort of way to get an LLM to do it well, some sort of effective prompting method or harness. (But, for instance, it would have to be something other than Claude).
@paulg@taoistshitposts same here, the most outrageous thing is that I lived in Venezuela where it's 30-50 °C, and I was still prohibited entrance to some banks and the local county hall for wearing shorts, and sometimes sandals too
or both, many markdown parsers, like pandoc, they just leave HTML tags untouched when you are exporting markdown to HTML
So you can write HTML inside markdown files, and get the benefits of both approaches
E.g. https://t.co/tyEtrhRyo7
@kumailht@paulg This is highly dependant on the state of the market
I think a much better framing is that most people are honest and therefore honest markets tend to be more saturated than dishonest ones, but, this only applies to saturated markets, unsaturated markets, like startups, it's even
@JuanRequesens hay un balance entre las políticas para favorecer el crecimiento económico y el estado de bienestar.
todos sabemos q balancear totalmente hacia un extremo ni es bueno, pero tampoco logramos estar de acuerdo (es subjetivo) cuál es el punto donde ambos tienen un buen balance
i somewhat disagree
I think those arguments apply to consolidated markets where innovation is low.
It's unclear how those arguments apply to emerging markets, I am not saying it is wrong, but it has big holes and assumptions, essentially is at least very incomplete
I said this I forgot to who but I said it
BigTech will eventually come for all apps / startups / companies because they can fill the niches now that before could not because they were too small
Those niches is where entrepeneurs hung out, nice parts of the market people could build a little SaaS with $100K/y to even $100M/y, notjing like the $100B/y revenue BigTech was doing, but worth it
With AI now BigTech can fill those niches + they are the ones training and owning the best models, and keeping the best models for themselves they can outcompete anyone who doesn't own them (everyone except other BigTech)
End game for their survival is simply trying to take every business, it's just capitalism
This completely changes the prospect for entrepreneurs as there won't be much left, because BigTech is financially incentivized to have to take everything
Because if they don't, their competitor will!
https://t.co/tuHz5Ddw8t
@theo I started with termux+ssh+tmux(with mouse enabled), but I am now using my own orchestration layer through WhatsApp, inspired by your t3code video
It's heavily vibecoded with rough edges, but works for me
if only it were ""politically correct"" to do so years ago, we'd have had a much better outcome under the democratic party than what we are currently getting.
But we have learned the hard way this is a golden opportunity, no one even dreamed it was possible to become a US colony
I think people misunderstand Trump.
He doesn't want to expand the US.
He wants colonies.
And my prediction is that in less than 12 months it's "OK" to say it publicly. They might use a more modern term instead of colonies.
Why do i believe this?
Eg Venezuela – whoever is in power, doesnt matter, as long as the Oil goes through American companies and them money is spend on American companies. They will keep whoever can flow the oil in power. Otherwise they would already talk about elections.
Eg Greenland – this will be an economic trading path like the Malacca Strait. Not to speak of local (or shore/sea) resources. At the moment he talks about Security in context of Greenland, but he talked about Drugs regarding Venezuela before. Assume he's lying or he thinks of trade guarantees as security (see Panama).
Why?
There is a non-zero chance that the USD isn't a reserve currency anymore in 10 years. Esp given current policies, but even without thanks to BRICS and EURO.
What then? Their whole government debt lives of the fact that they are the world's currency for trade and the most hyped-up stock market.
What's the world afterwards?
They won't be able to rebuild manufacturing quick enough and they don't know how to do policy to get there (see default tarifs)
One answer could be resource extraction and trade control over vassals and (all but in name) colonies.
"It's not about colonies its about trade" – colonies were primarily for trade. Get cheap local resources, sell complex products. Ensure you control trading companies and destroy all local competition to them. (see eg EIC in India, or most of Europe in Africa, or US in Philippines)
And of course you also want it as military staging ground – that's how you project control into that region and its neighbors.
I'm Boris and I created Claude Code. Lots of people have asked how I use Claude Code, so I wanted to show off my setup a bit.
My setup might be surprisingly vanilla! Claude Code works great out of the box, so I personally don't customize it much. There is no one correct way to use Claude Code: we intentionally build it in a way that you can use it, customize it, and hack it however you like. Each person on the Claude Code team uses it very differently.
So, here goes.
Conmovida que tanta gente se preocupe por el petróleo de mi país pero no por los 1000 presos políticos torturados en el Helicoide y por los 8 millones de desplazados alrededor del mundo. Gracias 🤡
@karpathy@swapnilkk1987@goakhmad Agree, my mind turns off unconsciously and can't even remember what happened
This also happens with unrealistic action scenes, and sometimes along the bullshit something important happens, like someone gets shot, and I miss it because my mind just stopped parsing the scene 🫤
Real Analysis Lecture 2 is up.
https://t.co/M9J3VbPNn9
We went over Newton’s computation of Pi, both because it’s super cool (first and foremost), and also because it’s a quintessential calculation encompassing everything that’s “wrong” with plain old Calculus, needing rigorous justification:
- What does it mean for a sequence of real numbers a₀, a₁, a₂, ... to converge?
- What does it mean for a series (that is, sequence of partial sums of some sequence) a₀ + a₁ + a₂ + ··· to converge, and can we sum these numbers in any order we like?
- What does it mean for a series involving a variable, like a power series a₀ + a₁x + a₂x² + ··· to converge, and if it does, what kind of function does it converge to?
- When can we interchange limits with integrals, like integrating term by term, ∫(a₀ + a₁x + a₂x² + ...)dx ··· ?=? ∫ a₀ dx + ∫ a₁x dx + ∫ a₂x² dx + ···?
These are all exactly the kinds of questions that Real Analysis answers, but I find most presentations of these vital issues unmotivated. Hopefully the Newton example brings them to life...