ska

Hardly surprising because the idiomatic usage of "open source" predates OSI.

Tomographic reconstruction is in principal pretty straightforward (Radon transform). MRI is much (much), fwiw, though RF not optics.

I don't think wavelength filtering will help you here, as you don't control the input at all. Some sort of splitter in the optical chain might, but you'd be halving your imaging photons with all that entails. Or you can have e.g. a telephoto center and a wide fringe. It's an interesting idea.

Especially in large organizations, you'll typically end up with more interesting/rewarding work if you help define it, than if you wait until something is handed to you.

> Sometimes you can make something appear magical by spending far more time on the effect than anyone would ever think to do.

This is as good a definition of stage magic as anything, I suspect.

Empirically, people can't manage even gamma properly, so imagining device dependent spatial orientation aware xforms seems like a stretch.

> It’s not just being a gullible true believer ...

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” - Upton Sinclair (1930's ?)

And some aren't; it's not a list of "commonly encountered" constants, just a list.

Spend some time doing math and you'll pick up a few without noticing. Somewhat path dependent, but they do crop up.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematical_constants

Totally different typical usage:

RTFA == "you should have actually read the article instead of wasting everyone's time"

TFA == "referring specifically to the [original, in this context] article"

It's really not that simple. But it's fair to say that while a masters can often be a very straightforward training to get you ready for a particular job, you really shouldn't go into a PhD program without a good idea of a) why and b) where you are aiming for afterward. For STEM I would usually add c) someone else is paying for it

AI/ML techniques in medicine have been applied clinically since at least the 90s. Part of the reason you don't see them used ubiquitously is a combination of a) it hasn't worked all that well in many scenarios so far and b) medicine is by nature quite conservative, for a mix of good and not so good reasons.

> but sometimes, "red tape" exists for a reason.

Pretty much always. And a lot of the time, the reason (if not the implementation) was pretty good. But these things almost always grow, and interact, and are very hard to update with changing times. SO you get a mess, and you get friction, but mostly as you note, the friction is viewed as a brake on other undesirable outcomes. So people learn to work with it. I guess there aren't enough incentives for people to clean up/optimize it until well past when it becomes an obvious problem.,,

> Should we build larger codebases just because we _can_?

The history of software production as a profession (as against computer science) is essentially a series of incremental increases in the size and complexity of systems (and teams) that don't fall apart under their own weight. There isn't much evidence we have approached the limit here, so it's a pretty good bet for at least the medium term.

But focusing on system size is perhaps a red herring. There is an almost unfathomably vast pool of potential software systems (or customization of systems) that aren't realized today because they aren't cost effective...

> I suspect "better defaults" won't happen because it's not a continuing problem users have

As the plethora of startup kits and re-configurations show, it's also not something people can agree what the right thing (TM) is.

I’ve tried apples , agree it does less egregious stuff than Spotify but doesn’t really meet the bar for “good” in my experience. This stuff is probably really dependent on what you are looking for I imagine .

Not my experience at all, fwiw.

I think you are kind of both right. When TJ’S started they intentionally wouldn’t sell things like milk and eggs because they couldn’t compete with big chains. The niche they were after were “over educated and under paid”.

So they were famously cheap for things that poor and blue collar families weren’t looking for anyway. UMC goods on a LMC budget, really.

> Are LLMs actually good at music recommendation?

As far as I can tell, the only thing actually any good at music recommendation is (some) humans.

That’s really not true, unless you are really mincing it or making a paste .

The problem is how to get roughly equal sized pieces from cutting an onion. If you cut towards the center the inner pieces are much smaller than the outer.

You have to do (a variant of) one or the other, no?

Almost nobody is “making bank”.

Assuming your compiler implements TCO properly, also.

This is backwards, increased margin would allow exactly that without all of it being covered by increased cogs.

By increased margins? Common enough when your target market is not consumer.

Are you claiming that the delta is entirely covered by the fees payed to manufacturers to add apps, ads, etc?

Readily available at a good premium.

You can sometimes get a great deal on these during liquidation though.

Eliza effect is alive and well, also.

His research group has a long history of trying to tackle these problems. Some interesting reading , even if much of it hasn’t (yet?) panned out .

Definitely not, although most laces I’ve lived they have a superficial at most involvement with single family homes.