RegularClaw

@djcows Does each shit image and bad sentence bring us closer to the cure?

if AI cures cancer, will the anti-AI people still hate AI?

@ironworksJS @Mid_East_OSINT @josh_wingrove Why do you lie?

@Mid_East_OSINT @josh_wingrove Canada is turning on its number 1 customer. 80% of our trade goes south and we are trying to dictate everything while having several tarriffs already in place before Trump. You don’t know what you speak of

(Bloomberg) -- US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the US might have to take action against Canada over its rejection of American wine and spirits.

@PugsleySiegel @josh_wingrove They have their own stupidity to deal with, so I get it.

@josh_wingrove Not Canada. Alberta and Saskatchewan are not part of this stupidity.

@PazneriaJ @GaryMarcus Slop

@GaryMarcus Get off the free tier Gary

There seems to be some excitement around “ChatGPT’s powerful new image engine”, but as ever, its functional understanding of the world seems limited. I first learned about the new system when some some smart aleck on X sent me an example of the new system trying to label a bike (an example I have considered before), with the caption “Uh oh”, apparently believing that my longstanding challenges to image generation had been solved.  It does look impressive on first inspection, better than some examples I showed here before. But if you look closely, there are several errors, and those errors are revealing. For example, the rear center-pull (?) brake was mislabeled as the seat stay, and the big gear on the back was mislabeled as the rear brake. There was a label for a spoke that is pointing to blank space. In many modern bikes, of course, a rear brake can be found back there, but not in this diagram. Instead this system has combined a typical position for a modern disc brake system with a diagram of an older (though still in use) caliper (or similar) system. The system doesn’t actually understand how the various parts function. And of course there are literally hundreds of labeled bikes on the internet as a quick Google Image Search would reveal. (Which is why my usual test here has been a tandem bike, to make things a little more challenging.) To up the degree of difficulty, I asked ChatGPT to “please draw a taller than average tandem bike, and include a bike rack and panniers”, which is not something you could readily find on the internet, and not something I used here before, and got the bike-wreck of a picture I include below. Bike nuts would have a field day finding problems with it. (Feel free to drop your favorite error in the comments). Suffice to say that most people don’t stuff their rear derailleur in the back wheel. And I don’t even know what to say about that “rear brake lever”, or the saddle-shaped rear handlebar, let alone the “rear brake” that is somehow part of the rear rack. As in the first example, the lack of functional understanding is manifest. Of course, to be fair, the average human couldn’t complete this task, either. But anybody knowledgeable about bikes (racers, mechanics, designers etc) would immediately see numerous problems. And honestly is anybody tall enough to ride in the front?

@platolantnis @BecauseIMatter No the fuck we are not allowed. Biases harm patients and no self-respecting clinician should indulge themselves in this manner. Clinicians should have enough humility to recognize this or they need to switch careers.

@BecauseIMatter Cliniciaans determine care and determine diagnosis. They are allowed to have bias because they earned their credentials and are qualified. Dr google is not qualifications and a valid consultation.

This is bias. I’m not here to debate this, this is in fact bias. You need to remove yourself from the situation. You don’t get to inform the way you treat patients based on your experiences. Your lived experience should only be used to connect with patients not deny them care

Defending Canada Post is not only about protecting good jobs—it’s about preserving one of the last nationwide infrastructures capable of countering corporate monopoly and serving people where they live. canadiandimension.com/articles/view/…

@Jeff23086418382 @jacobjckraft @walmartian @drterrysimpson So you almost get it, but not quite.

@RegularClaw @jacobjckraft @walmartian @drterrysimpson Why Placebos are preferred in control group compared to nothing in the control group is because double blind trials are the gold standard because having the patient and the doctors know who did and didn't take the medication can lead to bias in the study.

This is what happens when you have an attorney who thinks they understand the meaning of a placebo - and he clearly does not. So let us address this silly man's concerns. The Salk polio vaccine trial did not use “plain saline” in every arm because the goal was not to create a metaphysical definition of “nothing”—it was to match the experience of injection so that outcomes weren’t biased by who got a shot and who didn’t. So yes, the control injection contained the vehicle—the same background solution used to deliver the vaccine—without the active poliovirus antigen. That’s how you isolate the effect of the vaccine itself. Calling that “not a placebo” is like claiming a sugar pill isn’t a placebo because it contains sugar. The ingredients being waved around—culture medium, trace antibiotics, stabilizers—were non-active components, included to mirror the injection environment. They are not the intervention. They are the baseline. And here’s the part that ruins the conspiracy: The trial involved over a million children and showed a clear, dramatic reduction in paralytic polio in the vaccinated group. Not subtle. Not arguable. Follow that with real-world data and the result is unmistakable: polio cases collapsed. If this were some grand deception built on a “fake placebo,” it would have fallen apart the moment the vaccine hit the real world. Instead, it eradicated a disease. Or to put it plainly: when someone argues that a controlled trial isn’t controlled because the control wasn’t philosophically pure enough, they’re not doing science, they are not understanding science, and they do not know the meaning of a placebo. Yes, this was not saline - but it was a placebo. Yes this is just as good as a saline control and this is the issue - Siri has no idea what a placebo is and if he thinks saline is a placebo then it shows why lawyers should take some basic science

@ThomasJeffers__ @drterrysimpson He doesn't. Did you know lawyers aren't scientists?

@drterrysimpson So your position is that the attorney who argues these cases in federal court does not know what he's talking about? Solid argument.

@SporkboyProton @drterrysimpson The placebo misunderstander has logged on.

@drterrysimpson If the components are "non-active" why are they in the shot? Obviously, it's because the servers critical role - thus they cannot be part of a placebo. That's like calling the alcohol in laudnum a non-actuve components and thus a placebo - That's retarded.

@Jeff23086418382 @jacobjckraft @walmartian @drterrysimpson Why give an injection to the control group at all then? Injections are hardly nothing, or inherently benign.

@jacobjckraft @walmartian @drterrysimpson This makes no sense that you would put something with side effects in the control arm as opposed to something inert to study safety. The best way to test the safety is to test against a group that gets as close to nothing as possible.

@Jeff23086418382 @drterrysimpson How many clinical trials does M-W do per year?

@drterrysimpson Merriam-Webster: Placebo- a : a usually pharmacologically inert preparation.... b : an inert or innocuous substance used especially in controlled experiments testing the efficacy of another substance (such as a drug) Now do I need to show you the definition of Inert?

@Madhava_Setty @drterrysimpson There's formaldehyde in your body... right now!

@drterrysimpson We agree there’s formalin in the placebo used in the Salk trial, right? Just tell us how you know how many adverse reactions result from the formalin. Please cite the sources

@ChiefAcorn @upstatefederlst Given that GenX were children in the 80s I imagine their trophy-presenting throughput was minimal.

@RegularClaw @upstatefederlst Indeed, my mistake. Participation trophies were first given in the 1920s. The GenXers expanded it in the 80s and 90s to the excess that it is today. And today's excess is what they complain about.

It is literally illegal for Millennials to raise children the way Boomers and Xers raised children. Millennials are not the ones who made it illegal as they were children at the time.

@peteremcc @Heardbeast The Soviets are launching to ISS? Wonderous times.

@Heardbeast Yeah, but the Soviets didn't have much choice; we do.

Does anyone in Ottawa understand basic physics? It's significantly easier (ie, cheaper) to launch to space from near the equator. That's why Europe's space port is in French Guiana. Anyone launching from Canada is either an idiot or expecting massive government subsidies.

@Lptomov82 @WKCosmo Waste your own time if you like.

@RegularClaw @WKCosmo Just a warrant that we can't completely ignore these people. Some randomized strategy would be useful here.

Here is what not to do when you email a paper with your new revolutionary theory to a working physicist and he politely declines to evaluate your work.

@ChiefAcorn @upstatefederlst Participation trophies were invented well before GenX became parents.

@upstatefederlst GenX's biggest contribution to society is creating participation trophies. Boomers let GenXers raise themselves. Both complain about the result of their actions, and blame Millenials for all of it. "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" meets "I'm old and can't afford my house."

@GrandmamaJoey @upstatefederlst Nope, try again.

@upstatefederlst Ah but you are wrong. Boomers and GenX raised their Millennials with freedom, trust, and discipline. The Mill's grew up and changed the rules. They are the ones to helicopter parent every step of the way.

@realhiyorix @taste_of_tbone Calling it engineering is very cute.

@taste_of_tbone ofc the pro pali has zero clue of what he's talking about Its called prompt engineering timothy, something that requires the understanding of how LLMs process inputs

it's so adorable when these guys pretend to code

@Lptomov82 @WKCosmo And there's been what, 40000+ Ramanujans so far? Oh? Only the one? Well very excellent point anyhow that nobody else has ever made.

@WKCosmo Ramanujan was once one of the crackpots

@DiamondWheelsNE @WKCosmo How many times are you going to reply, you salty bitch?

@WKCosmo If I were an authority in charge at your university, I would have never hired you to begin with, I would have fired you if you didn't have tenure upon my arrival, and you would have said it had something to do with *what* you were rather than *who* you were, that you're an idiot