You have some kind of bias in the dataset or the visualization. It's showing places in "Boston" to be south east of the city in a completely different location.
The title asserts there is minimal downside to switching to open models, but the article provides zero evidence that this is true, and the author hasn't even attempted it yet. The end of the article states "I’m hoping it’s going to be minimal".
I wonder if I can get a post to the front page with the title: "There are no real barriers to humans colonizing Mars next month". And at the end, "I'm hoping there are no real challenges."
So what you're saying is this hypothetically disabled person who is physically incapable of driving chose NOT to mention that, but instead chose to provide "I never got my drivers license" as their reason?
And you're asking someone to consider this because I presume you think this is a likely enough scenario to consider?
Don't waste your time responding to people like this. Their post is not much more than a passing thought where they take the headline fully at face value, and therefore are convinced it must be worth something and we should continue to study it. They will never read the paper or have a critical thought of their own.
Now imagine a significant portion of your students are missing the prerequisites.
Do you really think these professors are up in arms about a few students who don't have the prereqs? It obviously must be a large enough proportion to worry about.
It's no longer "if a student somehow makes it into my class", it's "many students are currently making it into my class"
What difference does it make if they heard of it, or how rare displays are vs pen/paper coding? I imagine most everyone at this point has heard of e-paper and e-ink displays, but the author clearly dropped the "e" to make it sound more intriguing.
Would you be asking the same question for a post titled "Drawing with Ink", but it linked you to a page about drawing with an e-ink display? Of course not. It's misleading.
What's funny is that these days if I see a Google product that I'm even remotely interested in, I just immediately write it off because I know it's something they will kill in a very short time frame.
It's just never worth the hassle of buying/using a Google product. Never.
This is the most HN thing ever. Someone works to create an ultimately useless tool because no matter what you find the answer to be, the solution is the same:
-- Attenuate loud noises --
Which is exactly what they ended up doing
> With actual data, I could finally act with some confidence instead of guessing:
> I added proper acoustic panels (the IKEA ones for offices to create meeting areas work surprisingly well)
> I added extra insulation around the bedroom door and the window (silicone, rubber, ...)
Maybe you had trouble re-reading your own comment but I can tell by how you responded here (a cascade of links/references) and a snarky comment ("I can keep going if you'd like") that I'm sure the doctor was glad to be rid of you.
You didn't say the doctor disputed you had a fever. You said the doctor told you the fever wasn't concern until 100.4. Which I'm guessing is your fault for misinterpreting. If you google around, it's very easy to see the fever thresholds.
Here, I'll even paste a summary for you, and I can keep going if you like:
Key Temperature Thresholds
- 100.4°F : The standard definition of a fever.
- 103°F : Contact a healthcare provider
- 104°F : Seek medical attention, particularly if it does not come down with - treatment.
- 105°F : Emergency; seek immediate care.
In one of your own links (clevelandclinic.org), here's an excerpt for you:
When should a fever be treated by a healthcare provider?
In adults, fevers less than 103 degrees F (39.4 degrees C) typically aren’t dangerous and aren’t a cause for concern. If your fever rises above that level, make a call to your healthcare provider for treatment.
I love that you're looking to "spawn some special relationships" but are unwilling to ask for a name/number. There's no app in the world that will stop you from "wishing" you took action in getting some girls number.
I guess "I poured some concrete into a mold and put a power outlet in it" wouldn't be as eye catching of a title.
This is one of those things where someone does something incredibly simple, but dresses it up in pretty language and even some totally irrelevant chemistry equations (because they r so smrt) to make it look like more than it is. Which LLM did you paste the equation from?
And of course those who also have no idea how anything is made are unbelievably impressed. You can tell by the amount of exclamation points in all of the toxically positive reactions. Good work in that respect!
But hey, I guess it's not another vibe coded project with an LLM writeup. Progress.