feraloink

This is better than the Magic 8-ball. I DO like the visuals after clicking the Magic 8-ball though!

Using the term "licensed providers" about anything related to healthcare, medical insurance, or HIPAA is going to be confusing if you're defining it differently.

Nice find! These are the values of those fundamental constants https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/constants_table.pdf as linked to by Black though in Baez UC website (and properly given attribution by Baez).

>The slightest hint of generative AI usage is fast becoming a kiss of death in creative circles. It's turning into a purity test.

I'm not commenting to be contentious or antagonistic. Problems with reproducibility have been rampant in numerous fields for the past 15 years, for a variety of reasons. That's part of what makes the problem so difficult to address and remediate.

This was a particularly important retraction, as the original paper was about how social science research done right could be highly reproducible. When I poked around the article history on Pubmed a bit, I found the following:

>Clarification 17 October 2024: This article has been amended to clarify Berna Devezer’s field of study and to emphasize that not all of the authors of the original study signed the response to the retraction.

>Clarification 23 October 2024: This article has been changed to emphasize the range of issues flagged in a preprint about the retracted paper and the source of the statement that 86% of replication efforts were successful.

The first caveat on 17 Oct 2024 doesn't seem significant. The second one might be (difficult to tell with minimal info!) but I don't have access to the full content. (I can only read the original paper in Nature and the "non clarified" retraction notice.) Might you know anything about the 2nd clarification?

Decent post and good points: I've observed similarly about myself over time... even an interval of as little as six months. I write something and leave it in draft, or deliberately postpone doing or saying something to make sure I still feel the same way, after letting time pass. (This isn't with things I need to do, nor procrastinating.) I like it as an alternative to being impulsive.

How is the post an example of mindfulness? I'm not sure I know what mindfulness is.

I would think this would be sufficient which the USDA already does.

>... the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, which conducts research on crop yields, invasive species, plant genetics and other agricultural issues. The USDA instructed employees to stop agency researchers from collaborating on or publishing papers with scientists from “countries of concern,” including China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia and Venezuela.

There have been incidents in academia of researchers accepting funds from the US government for projects and also accepting money from foreign governments but not disclosing it. Or even lying about it when asked. I think the USDA situation is different.

EDIT for my bad grammar

I know, right? Look at this, what Liv Ullman said. https://deadline.com/2026/01/norwegian-star-liv-ullmann-comm... I don’t understand what Liz Ullmann means here. The Nobel people said the prize can’t be revoked, shared, or transferred so it is just the gold medal that María Corina Machado gave to Trump. It is a very nice medal to have! But it isn’t anything to get upset about if she chooses to give her medal to someone. Norway isn’t going to invade the USA to get it back.

>“I’m Norwegian, we give a Nobel Prize to somebody who deserved it and suddenly that Nobel Prize is going to somebody else. It’s so strange, so strange and that’s why I’m happy specifically now that we have laws that say that if you misuse the Nobel Prize we take it away from you. Somebody in power in the United States may be disappointed. He will lose it… I am happy.”

Isn't her last name Machado not Rodriguez? Who is Rodriguez?

This is wonderful: APL is there! And a visual APL keyboard too.

In https://satcom.sysnet.ucsd.edu/ Has The Issue Been Fixed section:

>we re-scanned with their permission and were able to verify a remedy had been deployed: T-Mobile, WalMart, and KPU.

The fact that critical infrastructure (e.g. utility companies using satellite links for remote-operated SCADA) was exposed is really scary too.

Exactly! It says this as one of the 3 reasons for DOIs not found on the error page:

>The DOI has not been activated yet.

The landing page has a Q&A. This is the relevant part of the response to the question, "Why aren't all GEO satellite links encrypted?"

>Encryption imposes additional overhead to an already limited bandwidth, decryption hardware may exceed the power budget of remote, off-grid receivers, and satellite terminal vendors can charge additional license fees for enabling link-layer encryption. In addition, encryption makes it harder to troubleshoot network issues and can degrade the reliability of emergency services.

So, the only suggestion that there would be greater heat/energy if they did encryption by default is the part about decryption (receiver) hardware having limited power budgets in some cases. There's more than what I copy-and-pasted above, but the overall message is that lots of organizations haven't wanted to pay the direct costs of enabling encryption... although they should.

EDIT: Link to Q&A https://satcom.sysnet.ucsd.edu/#qanda

My most disliked nothing language term is 'reimagining' something.

EDIT: If it isn't too late, you might want to correct the title of your HN submission to "Please just tell me what you do".

Yes, it has created 15 of them. Meanwhile, today's breaking market news is that C3 AI quarterly earnings are out, and the stock price is down 30% https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/11/c3-ai-stock-ceo-thomas-siebe...

I am feeling jealous rather than moralizing at the moment.

At first I thought, same-old same-old, but I changed my mind halfway through. I like how the author, Elke, identifies the underlying similarities between e/acc and the AGI doomers. (By AGI doomers, I'm referring to many Less Wrong folks, NOT earnest people who worry about whether AI will cause 20% unemployment or if it is hype and they're being played).

I think pmarca may have had a change of heart about being on the e/acc side, but he certainly is associated with funding lots of AI startups, so that may be more relevant.

Also, after the SBF_FTX fiasco and association with effective altruism, I'm not sure if EA should be so strongly linked to the doomers as Elke does. This and my vague recall of what Andreessen says on Twitter are minor points. Elke wrote an insightful, clever post about AGI (and even AI without attaining AGI) as a form of eschatology.

P.S. My next stop will be to look for the 1999 book she mentioned for an earlier view of tech eschatology.

The example, "Misapplication of LLMs can negatively impact productivity" was a real shocker to me. I guess I'm still too naive, but I never imagined anyone would try to do that. No surprise it didn't work out, and sad that he seems to be ready to give up on coding entirely now.

Even for non-believers in such things as alien bases, this is a good post. I say that because of the extent to which many public, i.e. free, Google services seem to have degraded.

In this case, we don't know if it is due to imposed secrecy by blurring, or due to Google Earth degrading in quality overall. Observations of the decaying quality of Google Search are quite common now.

(The video could have explained it better by focusing more on then and now images, but hey, I know that my Youtube explainer videos leave even more to be desired than this one. The message was conveyed effectively and that's what counts).

I found a good post with photos of Google Earth, pre-blurring from L.A. Almanac https://www.laalmanac.com/mysterious/my722.php It says that the spot has been referred to as Sycamore Knoll. I'd heard that name before but never knew what it was.

I saw Treasury Secretary Scott Bissent (spelling?) being interviewed on CNN about Elon a few days ago. (Elon shoved Bissent in the hallway at the White House cause he was mad about something and then he called Bissent a moron.)

Bissent told CNN that Elon completed his DOGE thing and was now needed by the shareholders of his many companies. Bissent was succinct and polite. Whomever posted the CNN video snippet said that maybe now we know who gave Elon a black eye that day.

EDIT: I just read your .is linky to article. Glad they quoted Bissent.

Very heavy-handed paywall. Only let me read one sentence. Linky please?

EDIT: I worry about gen AI but I also worry that Fortune Magazine and exploitative click baiters will try to capitalize on my worry and fears. I need to read the full article. If you don't have the means to provide access, I can get it myself. Thank you for posting this; I didn't mean to be demanding.

More seriously now, the Zurich researchers were very creepy. I'm reading the article further and saw that they stalked some of the past history of redditors first before trying to influence them in r/change my views or whatever it is called.

I wouldn't want to be a guinea pig for that purpose.

I wonder if other groups are using AI to post on HN too?

(Seems less likely than on reddit... TBQH)

USPS is United States Postal Service. They didn't deliver the package once it was received in Australia.

Or does Australia's postal service have the initials USPS too? Not being a pedant, just don't know. (Aside: UK entirely privatized their postal service which is sad given history and doesn't seem to be working out so well.)

Probably would be entirely acceptable if one applied for and received a permit for them.

>can be imported legally by contacting the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office for a permit first.

Not sure who is responsible for confirming whether he had a permit: oversees seller or shipping company, or customs/import upon receipt in Australia.

Guardian article says, "he ordered the items from a US-based science website and they were delivered to his parents’ home.... Nuclear materials can be imported legally by contacting the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office for a permit first."

So maybe all of this fuss was due to not having applied and received a permit?

The article only said that his solicitor (lawyer?) described the quantities as being so small they were safe enough to eat.

I read some more about it (Guardian) https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/apr/11/scien... and entirely agree with you that the border force over-reacted, and could have spent the money and resources more effectively than by pursuing this.

Also, via Guardian, this attitude is demeaning and depressing:

>"At a sentence hearing in March, the lawyer described Lidden as a “science nerd” who committed the offences out of pure naivety. “It was a manifestation of self-soothing retreating into collection; it could have been anything but in this case he latched on to the collection of the periodic table,”

Thank you. I only read the second, more recent article, not realizing that their was a prior one.

Case seems ridiculous. Judge's ruling, despite no penalty, is embarrassing because he doesn't seem to understand the lack of danger of such small amounts, AND made gratuitous public statement about Lidden's mental health.

Woah, this doesn't sound like over-reaction but the reporting doesn't give enough details to know:

>While his actions were criminal, the judge concluded that Lidden had mental health issues and displayed no malicious intent.... The delivery of the materials – which included a quantity of plutonium, depleted uranium, lutetium, thorium and radium...

Seems weird that the judge said Lidden had mental health "issues". Who knows how severe or debilitating the so-called mental health issues are? Not sure how the judge can make that decision on his own, about Lidden's mental health excusing him for doing something "criminal", although one wonders too how well the 1987 nuclear non-proliferation law was written, and if it was even applicable given small amounts Lidden possessed.

Key question is Lidden's purchase amounts of plutonium, depleted uranium, lutetium, thorium, and radium for his home periodic table display. (I totally understand the motivation for wanting to do that! I would love to have every element, even a tiny bit, for that reason too.)

Plutonium seems most concerning. It doesn't exist in nature but Pu-239 is the by-product of Uranium-238 used for fuel by nuclear reactors. (Not certain about isotype numbers.) Lidden bought depleted uranium, so that's more okay... I guess. (Don't know what its half life is even after "depletion".) Pu-239 and Pu-240 half-lives are thousands of years. Due to the radioactive alpha decay of plutonium, it is warm to the touch!

I wonder if he even had real plutonium, because even the non-weapons grade costs at least US$4,000 per gram.

Final thought: Chemical toxicity of (undepleted) uranium U-238 is comparable to its radioactive toxicity. Chemical toxicity of plutonium Pu-239, Pu-240 etc. is minor compared with its radioactive toxicity. By chemical toxicity, they're referring to the tendency for plutonium to spontaneously combust if exposed to moisture, or in hot humid weather. It can even catch on fire when submerged in water.

EDIT: Reduce verbiage

I really like the visual of that big round teal orb surrounded by a magenta ring. It appears at the beginning and then again a little later on. Plot setting (rescue mission ...or something else TBD) is good. Only issues I had were

1. the asymmetrical cursor shape; could have been due to my own fine motor control inadequacy

2. rear thrusters had little or no power, making it very difficult to navigate and get in position to fire.

Music was too quiet at first, I thought, as I kind of liked it. Then I realized that was a good decision, so that it didn't become a distraction when I was trying to concentrate later on. Yes, I saw the volume controls and all that, but I think the default loudness settings are good as is.

Not sure what the six folders are for, at the very beginning?

IANAL so I'm likely missing something, but I don't understand why the person representing Google said they had won half the case, given that:

>Google violated the Sherman Act by monopolizing and unlawfully tying two parts of the ad tech stack together, specifically DFP and AdX, and that Google is guilty of abuse of monopoly power in publisher-side adtech

AND

>In a separate antitrust case, another federal judge last year found that Google illegally monopolized the general internet search market.

Also, I think the article said that the judge for this most recent case, the Sherman Act violations, would discuss remedies on Thursday. But today is Thursday. Do you think they meant next week?