ampdepolymerase

Having an effect is different from being able to sell a product based on that effect. For regulated fields like pharmacy, the FDA regulatory approval test requires proving efficacy against a placebo. A doctor may (under certain specific circumstances) treat a patient using a placebo (because medicine's aim is to do whatever that is necessary to alleviate the problem or reduce suffering, it is different from pure biological natural sciences/pharmacy where inferences must be backed up by scientific theory and validated by empirical evidence) but it does not necessarily mean that a placebo can be sold/marketed as a cure.

I recommend Sutton and Barto

http://www.incompleteideas.net/book/the-book-2nd.html

In light of how the previous Mozilla CEO was forced out over private contributions to non-profits, do you see Sublime becoming more relevant given the current trend of deplatforming? Do you implement any policies or information assurance protocols that would e.g. prevent differential analysis or deanonymization your contributors by reporters/media? I think people would be more than happy that you charge a small fee for your services if stronger guarantees of privacy can be assured.

A search feature would be really helpful to see where your favorite book ranks.

You can include such features if you are an OEM vendor e.g. Samsung can install their own app store as root and give access to all the above features.

A lot of the 'alternative' app stores are either for piracy or for heavily fringe content (think NSFW) or open source only like F-droid. There are also app stores that are region specific e.g. east asia or Russian-speaking. It is difficult to find international, mainstream general purpose app stores.

This is how Go's assembler works.

Only fasting currently has any scientific support as a method to inhibit cancer growth.

https://osher.ucsf.edu/patient-care/integrative-medicine-res...

Applied genetics. The mapping from gene to phenotype is not, shall we say, injective. Bring in the complexity of epigenetics, biochemistry and you have a complex mess. Biological systems are tremendous black boxes with many second and third order effects that cannot be efficiently simulated and modelled (you can get pretty good approximations within a very narrow scope with supercomputers but those tend to have little practical use outside of basic scientific research).

Another use case would be for pharmaceutical research, there are a number of companies already in the ML -> drug pipeline space but GPT has brought new insight to the table.

I am glad that this is on the frontpage. I distinctly recall that Hacker News does not believe in the existence of open source biomedical engineering.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22578216

No they are not. It is an absolute disgrace to the other sciences if you put stuff like The Selfish Gene in the same class as Spivak. Do you want people to go around telling CS beginners that Hackers and Painters is an introductory CS textbook? Or to tell a student of complexity theory that the best way to study NP-completeness is through reading Gödel, Escher, Bach?

Half of the books here are pop science books, they are not textbooks.

What do you do now? Any links to your old research? Sounds quite interesting. If you have the chance, get into computational biology, it is getting quite popular right now.

The strange paradox is that the people who advocate for "peaceful slavery bad, dangerous freedom good" are all-in for deregulation when it comes to guns, psychedelics, and marijuana but you don't hear from them at all when it comes to orphan pharmaceuticals and human drug trials. If you have time to leave giant spoon sculptures around to express displeasure at pharmaceutical corporations, then you also have time to push for legislative change when it comes to right to try.

Here we go again :) Let's see if HN will crucify me for daring to compare a PCR machine to a slow cooker.

Also, look up OpenTrons. Lab automation is not glamorous work. There is no huge consumer market like 3D printers and drones to help push the price down. Even on the evangelism side, there has yet to be an "EEVBlog for biotechnology" (the closest are Thought Emporium and Josiah Zayner's channel). Perhaps this pandemic would change things. 80% of the expensive stuff are mostly imaging or spectrometry related. Most of the remain 20% are expensive because they are niche and proprietary, not necessarily because they are hard. There is no printer driver moment (Stallman et al.) to catalyze any mass change because, well, the entire society that brought up the poor postdoc using the printer sees nothing wrong in biomedical research being expensive and gatekept and that postdoc him/herself is a product of that system, otherwise he/she won't have made postdoc. A lot of things are niche and expensive, just ask those who had to work on video protocols like AV1. Yet they are available for free. There are a ton of biotechnology that requires, to use a gaming slang, "grinding", but are a magnitude easier than good video compression, instead they are all extremely out of reach for the casual practitioner. Just google "basal cell media". It is bread and butter of many labs but cost more than caviar. Think of bio instrumentation being like obscure fintech time series databases. They are not necessarily more difficult to build or engineer than anything else but are simply constrained by demand hence ridiculous pricing.

As for legitimacy of hackerspaces, I will frame it through your lens (from your username I am guessing that you are a quant). The FDA is essentially the SEC of anything biomed related. However it is not a true free market in the sense that anyone can enter. Hence legitimacy is a problem. The equivalent of FINRA accreditation is a PhD and/or medical school. Small independent traders are very much not a thing when it comes to biotech (which is what the various movements mentioned in the article is trying to change). Also people like Josiah Zayner are very unpopular because they upset the usual narrative about biohackers being unaccredited "they know not what they do" and merely attention-seeking stunt people.

If you want some reading resources that are hacker friendly, try this O'Reilly book:

http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920033783.do

It sounds easy in theory but most people hate the idea of messing with biology, believing that it should be regulated and professionalised as much as possible. Even on this very forum, the mere suggestion that a PCR machine (basically a glorified slow cooker) can be built with off the shelf parts is enough to invite a flood of downvotes - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22578216

The lack of easy commercialisation of biotechnology and regulatory capture in the name of "move fast break things and people die" has resulted in very poor understanding of biochemistry among the general population (most advocates and detractors of vaccines cannot explain how they work or don't work at the chemical level, one of the reasons for the whole Thiomersal controversy). The top minds who do go into this field often do so for the sake of medical school, where the number of places are limited by politics and gatekeeping rather than any practical meritocratic reason. The lack of money and opportunity is a fundamental problem. Currently large numbers of the general population have a damn good understanding of how computers work, thanks in part due to web dev bootcamps and the rise of FAANG driving the industry. The same cannot be said for biology or even organic chemistry. Bill Gates has famously said that he would study biology if he was to go back to school again, but in the current environment it would be doubtful any unicorn-level of fast financial gains/reward can be achieved in biotechnology. He will most likely end up as one of the numerous healthcare workers whose ultimate reward after each day of dealing with a pandemic is orchestrated clapping instead of spearheading vaccine research through his foundation (assuming of course he had not already switched to working as a McKinsey consultant given his family connections). Global pharmaceutical and healthcare research is still currently led by the United States; FDA-approval being the universal standard. Sure there are a couple EU-only projects and some attempts in Asia too, but the world's biotech research and development still operates fundamentally within the system of American capitalism. The dearth of opportunities due to politics, regulatory capture, and general lack of appreciation of biology is as much a tragedy as lack of health insurance. Most people would immediately identify with or quote the various media talking points when it comes to healthcare pricing, but hardly anyone would question why there are such tremendous gatekeeping and lack of competition.

I will also link to my previous comment on this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22471482

Giving up in the face of ignorance is not good policy so I will continue my advocacy of more open biology and medical education even if my comments succumb to the ego of software engineer hordes.

Mediocrity is not praise.

By your logic, the creators of PageRank should have chased after the tenureship rat race like every upstanding academic instead of trying to commercialise.

Where did the rest of the 100million go?

There is no reason computer science needs to be steeped in academia. The only reason why it is so popular in the first place is because it is so practical and applied. Easy to profit from. If you worship your ivory towers, feel free to become a mathematician.

The paper is not very relevant, SwiftUI is not WinForm style absolute positioning.

You are on forum for software engineers. They are hardly cheap.

Why is GTK going back to constraint based layouts after Apple is going in the opposite direction?

I hope so. Because otherwise you are not learning real mathematics, just rote memorization. It is not good because that is the mathematical equivalent of a code monkey.

You are not really learning how to make proofs though, you are learning how to make specifications. There is an important difference. It is one thing to "prove by induction that this loop will end" and another completely to write a specification for the compiler to find a proof for you. It comes down to the fundamental concept of computability. You won't learn true proving if you don't at least attempt to work through e.g. Cantor or Epsilon-Deltas.

I missed the acquisition, this is a tragedy for open source but I suppose it is great for the Deis team.

Is https://flynn.io/ still alive?

Glad to see Deis still alive. The developer tools/cloud devops field doesn't pay but it is important to have smaller players like Deis and Flynn around otherwise we would all be forced to suck from the teats of the AWS-GOOG-MSFT oligopoly.

The actual title is quite misleading given current events. Supply Chains Vs Supply Networks should be concatenated to the current title after a colon.

An even more interesting exercise would be to implement a DDR5 driver circuit for the 1 bit of RAM. Typical DDR5 interfaces take hundreds to thousands lines of Verilot/VHDL so quite a few transistors will be needed.

There is also OneDev: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22081419