drewbuschhorn

Nice, it's much more clear to a layman like me! (Not the gp)

You should throw in some diarization, there's some pretty effective libraries that don't need pertraining on the voice separation in python.

I run a small Dwarf Fortress podcast, and I didn't like the transcription options when we started a few years ago, so I wrote some python glue to do diarization (separate out speakers) and transcription using a torchaudio project, and either whisper or openai depending on how I'm feeling that day. Works surprisingly well, with timestamps and clean-up:

https://github.com/drewbuschhorn/a_strange_mood_podcast_tran...

vs

https://astrangemoodpodcast.com/2023/01/17/episode-1-is-dwar...

>The communists won the culture war.

You then cite Skousen's talking points as if those were the "communists" actual goals and not his fever dreams.

The JBS lost, "communists" or "progressive orthodoxies" (conflating the two shows your priors) didnt win.

If you cite Skousen as proof of anything, you've made a real mistake.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society

They're the seed of QAnon.

That looks really great! In my attempt to do something similar ( https://github.com/drewbuschhorn/DoctorMoon ) I kept having issues from the various publisher's apis not playing nice with each other. How are you guys shimming around that for general science?

Have you considered flagging paths for publications that get retracted? I've always thought that a 'this paper you're using has three retracted parent papers,' would be valuable.

Excited to see where you guys go with this!

The company owns the wires and radio bands. Maybe by a funny coincidence using alternative blockchains and working remotely for other companies creates an 'unfair to the other users' drain on bandwidth.

But you could choose to leave your apartment to get lunch, do some shopping, or leave during non-work hours?

I'm not saying there won't be an effect, but having an effect it's why you pass a law. But 8 months in, and the landscape doesn't seem radically altered.

If anything, major players deciding not to compete in a market is good to my mind, as a means of increasing a diversity of business styles. Laws like this make businesses pay for the actual cost of thier hidden externalities.

I feel like we had this exact same argument over GDPR, but no horror stories have descended about Mom and Pop operations run out of business but the evil Brusselcrats.

I'm a liberal partisan, so fwiw, but I don't think in a professional setting you ever try to wrestle something out of someone's hands. This is all uncharted territory in the White House press room, but when I've seen a similar situation in science conferences, they usually stand in front of the person who won't yield the mic and ask for it back until the mic gets cuts.

But the WH had to double down and say that JA "placing hands on" on the intern, which is close to a specific legal phrase related to assault and battery charges, unless they were saying he was: trying to find the intern, confirm her into his church, or provide faith healing services.

Makes you wonder why they haven't, despite controlling all three branches of government.

I'd love to see Republican senators voting to fund an antifa 24/7 channel. I mean, they can't even get behind Sesame Street so I'm sure that wouldn't be a problem.

Also kind of goes without saying, but the statues wouldn't have had 800 watt New Yorker flashbulbs on them. Between natural shadow on the 3d sculpture, weathering from the various dirty light sources, it probably blended into a decent melange of colors.

It really doesn't, https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/canadian-lawmakers-p... if you want primary and secondary sources.

Basically it just says you can't actively discriminate against someone because of gender identity. Which had been the defacto law for a long time.

I think the issue was that people who thought that bundling malware was ok, are still employed there.

Good try, Jeff Bezos. We know it's you.

I think you're (unintentionally) equivocating on value vs quality. The grandparent comment used "quality" in the colloquial sense for value as best I read it. I doubt that anyone running a company thinks that having thier name next to gory images makes people think the skill of the shoe stitching (quality in your meaning?) is worse, but that it reduces the alignment of the pnumbra between the company and the individual reducing the value of company's brand / ability to sell products to the consumer.

That's just factually incorrect. Celebrity endorsements are actually more powerful now than in the past, I'm assuming because youtube style celebrity makes it seem more like the persona the celebrity presents is an actual person, or just more exposure though those explanations are just my handwave. https://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/nielsenglobal/apac/docs/...

Someone's random article from a non-ranked journal, but looks like it's got some decent reference papers http://www.jimsjournal.org/13%20Yi%20Ching%20Tsai.pdf

Isn't that the cost of using a public good? I might not like that the municipality cleans waste out of the water (not having it could lead to allergies, right?) or traffic lights (because what if I have to get somewhere fast in an emergency?), but that's the price I pay for living on the grid.

I've never understood this view. Do you think all the other educated people who look at this issue are thinking "haha, more doop in the water to poison everyone!"?

I personally always choose the highest fluoride toothpaste I can, because the benefits of reduced tooth issues make up for a (if you believe this paper and their pointillism graph) 1.2 pt iq drop.

It always makes me sad how many people think that just because some group is making a decision that affects them, that group is out to get them.

And, before someone says it, no, I'm not opposed to these studies being done occasionally for the sake of conventional wisdom being wrong, but people shouldn't try to make hay off a non-effect.

So we've gone from you can't, to you won't, to you almost certainly won't. I completely agree, I'm just saying the 1% possibility is something you have to live with.

Do I misunderstand this section: "Without prejudice to any available administrative or non-judicial remedy, including the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 77, each data subject shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy where he or she considers that his or her rights under this Regulation have been infringed as a result of the processing of his or her personal data in non-compliance with this Regulation." That sounds like you can be sued by any subject on their whim?

The op seems to be motivated more by politics than the reality of this as I understand it. The "reasonable" qualifier in most of it, while it will need to be litigated, does a lot to assuage my concerns about overreach from it.

Could you be sued to the poor house from it? Maybe. But that's the risk of operating a business in the US every single day.

I feel stupid saying this, but it was explained to me as being like light through a filter, like for spider man, Parker was always going to get powers (all things being equal) but because the trigger was spider related the powers \ way he manifests them are "spider colored", like light through a keyhole, different keyhole, different image, but same light source.

With regard to the X-Men, I think they imply the "present day" is a Cambrian explosion, that then settles down in the far future into the most useful powers becoming common if less godlike levels: immortality, psi, telekinesis, and any other boring wish fulfillment.

I said, "if that's representative of the day to day work, I'm probably not a great fit for the position," and got up to walk out. They asked me stay and talk about some of my github projects, so we had a nice talk for a few minutes and then I left.

I'd gotten an offer earlier that morning, so I was a little more self-assured than I would have been otherwise.

I got asked a project Euler question at an interview for a crud job. I'm sure it's simple if you break it down, but there are plenty of other fish in the sea. If you ask me a question that starts: "let n be ...", I'm out.

An integer partition of a number n is a way of writing n as a sum of positive integers.

Partitions that differ only in the order of their summands are considered the same. A partition of n into distinct parts is a partition of n in which every part occurs at most once.

The partitions of 5 into distinct parts are: 5, 4+1 and 3+2.

Let f(n) be the maximum product of the parts of any such partition of n into distinct parts and let m(n) be the number of elements of any such partition of n with that product.

So f(5)=6 and m(5)=2.

For n=10 the partition with the largest product is 10=2+3+5, which gives f(10)=30 and m(10)=3. And their product, f(10)·m(10) = 30·3 = 90

It can be verified that ∑f(n)·m(n) for 1 ≤ n ≤ 100 = 1683550844462.

Find ∑f(n)·m(n) for 1 ≤ n ≤ 1014. Give your answer modulo 982451653, the 50 millionth prime.

I had something like what you're describing as I was developing mild sleep apnea. Starting using those nasal separator strips religiously and got back to having consistently deep "dreamless" sleep ... but no lucid dreams.

Just to be clear, the liberal activist community didn't start the bathroom fight. That was something that hadn't been an issue before that conservatives turned into one for easy "they're coming for your children" points.

If you can beat the HB and Ostwald processes, I say go for it. I think the idea behind carbon capture from serious people is: 1. That it should be solar powered / low energy 2. Catalyst cheap as dirt, so that 3. CO2 in the air is free, so you'd basically have the plant start up costs and then the rest is free money. Also envy of the plants for making it look easy.

Anybody saying it would make a dent on the global CO2 consumption is just spouting grant proposal talk, for the entropic reasons everyone else is talking about on this thread, or else is a crazy geoengineering nut.

That being said, if you dig into it, most groups that publish papers on the subject do it as an interesting sideline / something to grab some low hanging attention. It's really just checked out as a side effect of other things, like being able to functionalize hard to move chemical groups.

One of my Fe compounds could capture CO2 gas and convert it into oxalic acid ( H2O + 2CO2 =cat=> H2(CO2)2 + 1/2O2 ) ... almost a whole 50 cycles before it got poisoned by its own O2 production (the compound burst into flames in air, btw). But it could also functionalize one of the lowest energy N bonds known, and in a selective fashion. It was floated as a means for a two step synthesis of some kidney drug, but ... the bursting into flame thing.