Soap box moment: Trying to not get my hopes up but the healthcare system is total shit, AND insurance won’t even cover the Autism evaluation. It at least will cover ADHD. It’s profit over people, you will NEVER get the care you need. 🥺
Interviewing Riley Goodside on the science of prompting Interconnects interview #6. o1, chain of thought, evaluation, and the future of prompting.
Listen now | Interconnects interview #6. o1, chain of thought, evaluation, and the future of prompting.
For Tuesday's Law & Mental Health Series, I'll discuss how irrelevant info can leak into our judgments in forensic eval's. Opens w/ study drama of pathologists considering race & relationships in homicide v. accident decisions! #PsychLawhsc-unm.zoom.us/webinar/regi...
It takes any evaluation of any interview with Vance to see he's a fucking idiot with views that only out-of-touch creeps and bigots align with. Walz is possibly the most ordinary and moderate candidate I've ever seen for a VP the contrast is ridiculous
You could not end up with that fear by being self-reflective, understanding your limits, and knowing that your knowledge and skills are particular to your chosen subset. There are absolutely healthy ways to be and feel competent, but it requires honest self-evaluation, so still not Musk.
A good summary of the fact that judging art to be bad just because it's "formulaic" or "standardised" is a relatively recent development. [I began as a medievalist, so my idea of what's "recent" may be a little different from many other people's]
![the verdict that, in the context of art, ‘standardized’ must mean ‘bad’ is by no means self-evident, as a glance at the history of artistic evaluation makes clear. During important epochs of art, it was considered crucial that artists recognize and adhere to certain standards [...]. This attitude is also reflected in the existence of explicitly formulated rules—some dating back to antiquity—that specify the right way to produce certain literary genres (tragedy, satire, elegy, etc.) [...]. Until the mid-eighteenth century, and in some cases beyond, artistic primacy was not accorded to the revolutionary innovator but to the person who could perfectly master the existing guidelines and bring these to life through their own inventiveness, transformational ability, and natural talent [...]. This conception would not change until the Romantic period, which brought with it a decisive shift toward criteria of ingenuity, norm-breaking, originality, innovation, and subjectivity](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:ikadhhfrxdg37gwzniqglnxn/bafkreicp5inh4xg3b2psjqjitsp2c5jtfqpwc23kii3upehggqv4pjafli@jpeg)
Comparative evaluation of soil DNA extraction kits for long read metagenomic sequencing www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/jour...#jcampubs
For randomized evaluation, we need: An ethical way to randomize people to arms (remember: publication impacts careers) YEARS of follow up and measurement, starting from when a research IDEA happens Ways to deal with some very, very weird situations. Good news and bad news there.
Postoperative mortality and complications in patients with and without pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection: a service evaluation of 24 million linked records using OpenSAFELY @CMc_PhD @alwynkotzee @justin_kua @dermotmcguckin
I'm almost booked for the rest of the year! I have space for a small manuscript or sample in mid November and then that's it for 2024. Dm or email me if interested in any developmental or line editing, manuscript evaluation, etc
Alt: GIF from Winry from FMAB being cheerful and happy. She's moving her arms in an excited way.