HarryHirsch

It's not? Elsevier finally relented when universities could finally cancel their subscriptions because librarians could direct people to Sci-Hub.

Those days are gone, like the old web. Not sure, if the DIY movement can put enough pressure on the drug cartel to drop prices. Then again, university librarians had been complaining about Elsevier since the 1990's, but nothing got done until Sci-Hub appeared. That's the hammer argument against Crito.

That said, one wishes that you hadn't dragged abortion in, they use it to derail the discussion around universal medical care. Hey, you can't afford the dentist, but at least we fight for abortion.

I know people who cook their own medicine, but they are trained as chemists or microbiologists and have access to lab facilities. If Joe Sixpack stated doing his own, it'd look like so: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/26/world/americas/mexican-ca...

We know that niche stuff like Daraprim or trientine is easy to produce because it used to be cheap before the financializers got there. I'm not yet convinced that the solution is to cook your own, one should lean on the government to have a national facility.

Math education in large tracts of the country is not good, more so in areas plagued by rural and urban poverty, but that's no excuse to continue in the same way at college. It's sadly common that incoming students have no clue what a proof is and that mathematics isn't plugging numbers into formulas, but there's no excuse continuing that at college level, especially when it's an elite college.

But the kid who wrote the article disagrees, she demands spoonfeeding. Give me my economics degree, but it mustn't have math in it!

But here - everyone seems to be amused that the fellow is dead. Doesn't bide well for social cohesiveness.

The background is a new faculty member actually teaching at university level. We know that proofs and reading are required. They do not.

The short answer is: it's for load balancing, it can't be avoided.

Could this be a backhanded compliment, since this generation's focus on the consumer in its interpretation of antitrust law has brought us monopolists like Google, Amazon and Microsoft?

Not sure one should take his word for guidance.

You can't say that given <conditions>, 1-phenylpropane rearranges to 1,2-diphenylpropane, you cannot pull whole atoms out of thin air for an indefinite amount of time. No human would make such a mistake, but AI does, and what's worse, it is impossible to talk the AI out of its strange reasoning.

The parent poster posted a paper where an AI guesses the Hamiltonian (nice, but with iterative methods you at least get an idea of the error associated with your numbers, not sure how far anyone should trust AI's there), maybe methods that do guesswork on topological networks would help. But I haven't seen those yet.

LLM's do not have that concept, and you'll notice very quickly if you ask chemistry questions. Atoms appear twice, and the LLM just won't notice. The approach has to be changed for AI to be useful in the physical sciences.

It's not a great surprise that one would find TB in cross-border migrants, but it's an indictment of the system that the disease continues to spread over here.

Next up: lepra, also caused by a mycobacterium

If running a Chinese SOE well means a promotion in the party apparatus, then that would give some real competition, but US capitalism is delivering only for the billionaire class.

A member of the Somalian community instrumentalizing anti-black and anti-Muslim feelings to boost the standing of his own group, and the Code of Conduct fails to protect academic freedom. Well done!

I'm ready to believe in a conspiracy theory around codes of conduct, actually.

You ask it about Hölderlin, and quality drops off, because Hölderlin is not that well studied in the Anglo-American sphere, the majority of Hölderlin studies is in German. It's odd that it cannot translate what it ingested in German and bring it back up in English.

And when you ask it about chemistry ChatGPT is totally lost because it has no idea about concepts, even though the concepts are explained in the textbooks it has read. Until there is a breakthrough that allows AI models to gain understanding all these models are plainly useless.

One can tell - any graduate student in any of the sciences has read way less than ChatGPT but their understanding is infinitely better.