Multiple sclerosis is so depressing and formidable as a malady that medical science avoids it. One of the front line treatments is an elementary drug for psoriasis developed in the 1930s. At cost it's 4$/kg and from biogen 300$ a capsule.
It's realistic. ST isn't about building huge projects. It's basically an interactive plot tool which is easier to use and more flexible than existing python solutions. 99% of streamlit code is useless in a month, and that's fine.
Actually I don't like the authors long winded explanation. Uni swaps let one spend gas to leverage simple bets on correlation, that's why they are popular. Kelly tells us capital investment is driven by the information rate. This will drive ETH gas's price perpetually upwards, along with ETH. Uni swaps are just a market realization of this. As ETH capacity increases, they will be replaced by an even larger pool of information processing market makers. Making the information/capital relationship physical is the genius of ETH.
I trade volatility for a living. I scrutinize the smallest changes in rates. Of course bad mortgages are not great, however in dollar scale vs. The corporate bond market, they are meaninglessly insignificant. The cdos they are baked into being bought at leverage (again due to low rates) is the problem.
Eh. I think it's more about decades of declining low interest rates. Low rates are only available to american's who can obtain credit, and leads to predation on those who cannot. It's about mortgage availability not housing availability.
Complex numbers encode a specific and essential algebra, which is everywhere in nature. So do quaternions, and so on ad infinitum. Elementary field theories are often simply named by algebraic spaces they span.
Plenty of algebras not thought of as numbers also map onto physical processes usefully. None of this is shocking or new.
I do love the motion of it, despite the preposterous cantilevered wiggle waggle it would have. The algebra of the inverse kinematics must be something else. I wonder how many degenerate rail positions there are for an XYZ...
I love the abstract level on which luminary scientists who still choose to contribute write papers. This is perhaps the best example I've seen. Each section is a distillation of knowledge spanning multiple fields of study and decades of results. This made my day. When humanity is without GH we will truly be weaker.
Corporations engaged in antisocial activities have a long history of feigning self-regulation and ending those efforts if they don't align. (Looking at you pharma / fossil fuels) Imo the meager achievements of these people google has been shedding, indicate that their business purpose was to whitewash google's AI ethics. It seems like they didn't expect that was what their job, and were doing it wrong.
The field of nuclear quantum theory was like a snake swallowing a hippo of funding. People studying electronic structure end up bringing advances back to nuclear theory, because many of the practitioners of advanced nuclear shell structure simply aged away before computers got so powerful. I'm optimistic that there will be more developments... There's several laser accessible transitions known. https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08320
How about actually measuring them by the citation count on their papers (note this is already a minor factor in tenure decisions, after monies brought in :P )
If we weren't paying every mafioso at harvard 200k/yr in summer salary, we could fund a good number of them at subsistence wage. (note: there are also many decent people at harvard...)
Yeah. I think simply making faculty apply for infrastructure and only funding students and no faculty time is the right way to go. Unfortunately this is the opposite of the way that the NSF is being propelled (since panels are dominated by 'eminent scientists' ~= well connected old lazy scientists)
It's true one must advocate for one's self. It's not true that we should choose structures that require more self promotion than productivity. Academia used to be rife with corners where obscure problem solvers could live a decent life. The pressure for grant monies and summer salaries have done away with those corners and it shouldn't be so.
Many faculty getting the most funding are never involved in writing the papers attributed to them. (Source: years spent at the top five universities and my own faculty experience)
Would work simply: fund students directly. If faculty contribute training or ideas students can grant authorship. Faculty/postdocs still peer review papers.
The grant system completely compromises most faculty'$ ability to do anything with their decades of training besides sell themselves. Especially young faculty during their most productive years. The only way to turn this around is to change the way we give credit for scientific achievements, and stop rewarding "I wrote the grant" With authorships. (Im ex faculty)