When I read the article, I assumed that it was written by a guy first - when I saved it to my favorites I noticed that Lara is a woman.
I do work most of my time in my home office, yet I do spend also some time in virtual meetings. The things Lara describes are even more important if you are not present in person, from my point of view. Harder to sense some of those feelings and emotions if you are not in the same room, but possible.
Not the OP but I believe they are referring to the idea that if longevity research causes lifetime extension to be possible, then some folks think they can then avoid age-based death entirely. I think that the crux of the argument is that once we find "THE reason" why we age and if we can halt/end that process then we have beaten senescence.
I personally think this view is too simplistic about how our bodies work and overly optimistic that we a) won't hit other limiting factors that aren't hit today by ~100 and b) that interventions to stop senescence won't have unexpected side effects.
I forget where I’ve read it (I feel like slatestarcodex or gwern or one of those folks) but basically our bodies are constantly fighting megaloviruses (various forms of herpes) and we’d inevitably lose the battle if we lived to 120 or so.
escape velocity in this context means that you stay at least one step ahead of dying, through medical advances, to the point that the first immortal human (at least one who will not die of old age) may have already been born.
it was a catch-all phrase, you muppet. we do know "old age" isn't a real disease, we do know about immortal jellyfish. we do know about strategies for engineered negligible senescence. it's not the gotcha you think you had.
I've designed the server and its embedded backgammon engine to use very few resources, so it's all able to run on a dual core VPS that I am already using for my numerous other projects. Everything needed, including Postgres, currently uses less than 256 megabytes of memory and negligible CPU.
As it grows, I intend to follow in Lichess' footsteps by offering a paid supporter badge without locking any functionality behind a paywall. Because the server is lightweight, just a few paid supporters should be able to offset the costs for many free users.
I worked in a SaaS company selling an A/B Testing app where I saw a lot of tests and their outcomes from different clients.
Of course there are the low hanging fruits, which scored the clear success. Most of the tests although were not a clear success, but just a slightly better conversion rate.
Multiple tests applied after each other slowly increased the overall value. If taken the advice not to implement the changes of the small success, the overall amount would not have changed.
Indeed. It's almost like the original article is clickbait :) The problem is that we have a term for what he's describing already - diminishing returns. For some of these "mediocre successes" you may find that your business is already down the optimization curve on some choices, but, having done a test and found a signal to improve, why not?
After all, pretty much all of writing, music, product design, prototyping, etc. is iterative. It's a purely investor mindset that would have you think that small optimizations do not pay back. Having that mindset in creating something is a great way to give up after one draft of a good idea.
"Just slightly better", if you can have confidence that it's not a mirage, is a success and should be taken as such. I don't think that's inconsistent with the article, which is more about the danger of allowing a gap between success and failure which, if you land in it, leaves you with no clear direction to go in.
So long as only 10% or less of your incremental successes are mirages, and so long as the downside of shipping a mirage is only a small incremental harm, then shipping 9 success and 1 harm should still get you an overall ~78% win vs just shipping the 9 successes (assuming the bad result is an equivalently negative result to the good ones).
How much are you willing to spend to reduce the downside risk, and how many “good” experiments are you willing to throw away in the process?
Interesting read! I got a Toyota bus and the infotainment system sucks. As someone else wrote here, Bluetooth support is deadly slow and as soon as you stop the car the system will also shut down. It’s like someone created this system without considering real life scenarios, like being on a phone call, listening to a podcast or just listening to music.
But since you can also interact with the car, like turning on and off drive assistant systems, I would not dare to hack my car. How about insurance, when there is an accident?
>> How about insurance, when there is an accident?
The insurance company would need to demonstrate that you've had an accident because of your modification. Just them being present doesn't invalidate anything.
However, in the real world, you can bet that they would try - you'd probably win in the court of law, but it's a risk.
Do you really think any insurance "expert" would look for that?
From my experience unless the car has some kind of self driving stuff they just check with a mechanic the state of the car to see if it is totalled or can be repaired. Unless there are wires going out of the car there is no reason they would even check the os of the dashboard console[1]
[1] I refuse to use infotainment word, it is so unappropriate.
They don't need to look for a hack, just its trace.
If the accident is any serious, both insurance companies will routinely buy the info sent by default to the maker by that model; In particular speed and location info.
If the info is suspiciously absent (because somebody hacked their car to stop sending it), the insurance companies will enter in red-alert mode, and will find how to get themselves out of the problem.
Sent info can be used against you, but also could benefit your insurance company to win the case. Is not always white or black. The main goal of insurance companies will be to protect themselves, but the secondary goal will be to protect you, the client, from potentially serious legal consequences. If both insurance companies are the same, they could team against the vehicle with less clear data.
>>Do you really think any insurance "expert" would look for that?
"Probably not". Probably is the key word here. I've seen insurance companies go to absolutely ridiculous lengths to deny a claim, so I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.
Not sure if there are a lot of different producers in europe, but I know that it’s not much easier to use the boards in german gyms. Have seen a couple of them so far. The interesting thing happening here is that the boards stay in place but they get new interfaces to use them with smartphone apps.
I doubt Crown Castle and American Tower will be much affected, it might reduce some new rural deployments, but other contracts like Firstnet also increased requirements for rural buildout, so it's not going away. Indoors isn't going to be covered by satellite beams.
I do work most of my time in my home office, yet I do spend also some time in virtual meetings. The things Lara describes are even more important if you are not present in person, from my point of view. Harder to sense some of those feelings and emotions if you are not in the same room, but possible.
reply