Normal or not that's how it is. The incentives are not there and the network effects close the casket...
Is it regrettable? Idk. Definitely not unique to software though once you look and appliances, cars etc - they are not optimized for the things I prefer they would have been.
It does not pay into EU budget - it contributes to and participates in specific programs and projects. The treaties are rather sectoral agreements which are always under the threat of swiss direct democracy. Bilaterals III has not yet been approved neither by the referendum nor the parliament - while it will likely pass the opposition is every significant.
I was thinking that I actually use grocery shopping as a recovery activity. I could cut it out but don't feel the need that much. It's not that I feel I'd do something incredible instead (which requires energy and/or recovery time of its own)...
Bought a travel click by Braun a few years bact to put next to me when I work. The quality is abysmal, the hour arm is half to a full hour ahead after I used for a while. And it costs like 30 bucks I guess one just pays for the brand name while the product is the same quality as no-name ones on aliexpress for a tenth of the price.
What you really pay for in a Braun is the silent mechanical movement, no tick-tock to keep you awake at night. But while the movement is still allegedly made in Germany, the quality has gone downhill, as you point out. I had some Kienzle and Braun clocks in the 90s that were extremely good, but the new ones made under license, not so much.
He always striked as genuinely nice person generously sharing knowledge insights etc and not caring particularly about money and status. The difference with the loudest tech bros who now dominate the field is staggering.
The trials process is the moat. There's already founders using AI to treat their cancers, and it's all about skipping trials and jumping straight to "I consent, I'll fund it, let's try it". The general public might get access to this in 10 years, but employees at AI companies will have access much much sooner.
I don't necessarily see a problem with it: if people want to try experimental therapy on themselves and can fund it, then as long as it's expensive, let them - that speeds up research. The problem with allowing anyone to opt out of safety trials is that it then creates pressure from doctors and family members to try, and then it becomes non-consensual in practice.
Yeah it's more like personalized therapy - often the only hope for rare diseases.
While AI has definitely helped quite a bit I am wondering how much all this research and treatments cost. Not sure the current health systems could sustain this for _everyone affected_. If ai enables it all the better.
At least in Sid's case, it went from the oncologist saying "I have no more drugs I would recommend, no trials available" (slide 7) to "I currently have no evidence of disease" (slide 18). I don't know beyond that or beyond Sid's case - or a similar story of an Australian who treated a cancer tumour their dog had with a similar AI / personalized vaccine process.
My understanding of what Sid's describing is that you do RNA sequencing, a whole genome sequencing, feed that into frontier AI (if it will still let you), and somewhere along the way give the information the AI finds to people who can use it make a personalized mRNA vaccine, specifically for you and your cancer.
Another link here about Sid's case, it explains it didn't go through trials: "made possible through a compassionate use allowance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)".
Trudging into the technicalities of the example still doesn't undo the question of "What is the point of mathematics? To find answers or to be a hobby?"
It's tempting to say "both", but that misses that AI is now forcing us to pick one.
What if the point of mathematics is to be mature enough to study and teach math to help humans understand it, without the ego stroke of being the first to solve a problem? Bad communicators are upset that a robot is better than they are solving problems.
reply