The author left out the most important detail:

- Before being ready to leave, make sure you either have, or will have, another opportunity or no need for an employer. VERY often (especially in tech!) employers/managers will have employees, not for their labor, but for vanity, to build a pyramid to themselves, or for image reasons. Such people will immediately send you packing for complaining about non-productivity. Your perception of your superior's alignment can easily be wrong.

Given that precondition... I agree with the premise.

Thank you for sharing this important detail!

Yes, I have done it 10 years ago: I've left a job because of burnout without another opportunity. After that, I've panicked for 6 months without a job. Never again: I promised myself to never leave a job if I was without energy.

The last time this guy was president people were locked inside and schools didn't work. A reasonable prior is that this airline thing (which did affect me) isn't the end.

People love to have opinions about how technologies should develop, but time and again, market realities are what guide their development. People easily get emotional about life extension, and it grabs a lot of attention because of that, but all those feelings don't measure up to the impossible to extrapolate tertiary effects of any technology which transforms lives, life extension definitely being one.

I'd argue that it's pretty clear that lipitor is partially to blame for our present gerontocracy muddle, but the issue there is that lipitor transfers mortality from the heart to many other conditions, some of which impair thinking. Life extension isn't a monolith, nor are the mechanisms of cellular age in animals. It's a blanket for 1000s of possible technologies. Productive conversations about it would be nuanced, and related to details about a particular technology, which these conversations never seem to rise to the level of. Definitely not this piece or fukuyama's either.

I come to HN for nuance.

The US likes to pretend free markets are our principle, but we have completely destroyed every notion of a free two-sided market on healthcare. That's the simple explanation for our outcome.

I am glad to see people focusing on this.

If this tool could parse drug patents and draw molecular structures with associated data, I know we would pay 200k/yr+ for that service, and there's a market for it.

In my own field, there's an incredibly important application to parse patents and scientific papers, but this would require specific image=>text models in order to get the required information out with high fidelity. Do you guys have plans to enable user supplied workflows where perhaps image patches can be sent to bespoke encoders, or finetunes?

You can use the https://github.com/iterative/datachain mentioned by @dmpetrov to predict and draw (in SaaS) a molecular structure. Not only can you predict, but you can also - enrich the PDF data with external PDB data, - calculate and evaluate sequence and structure-based predictions made by multiple custom models, - and optimize time and resources.

I created some simple examples in this area a few months ago. Feel free to email me at mikhail@iterative.ai if you're interested in sharing my findings.

Today's large vision models like GPT-4o can parse the content heavy papers pretty well (and respect their structures).

Yah basically it allows you to send PDFs as image patches into GPT-4o model that workflow can be easily built.

Feel free to send me an email richard@roe-ai.com, happy to evaluate your case and try to save that 200K :p

When you say parse - do you mean for prior art or to generate ideas?

I think by parse it means more like document understanding

This from the company I had to call all my banks to refuse charges from because they harbor rampant fraud.

Human beings are naturally envious and covetous creatures. Everyone loves to talk about other people's love lives, and maintains strong opinions about how they should be, while paradoxically relating to the fact that love makes fools of us all.

Meanwhile journalists rest more and more on sexual politics to elicit interest in a public who is very tired of what they have to say.

How about we build stuff, and let people worry about their own love lives?

If people would actually _measure_ the outcomes of peer review instead of talking about it, I think it would meet a swift end.

Empirically, I find no improvement in reproducibility between arxiv and journals. The costs are incredibly high too.

Like many things in our world peer review is a short lived extrapolation which doesn't resemble it's origins but is regarded as immutable gospel. It matters most if what you need is the respect of academics.

Sure, this may be the perspective of an individual suffering from a mental dependence on a dangerous mind-altering substance, but it deserves equal consideration. (/sarcasm)

Unfortunately, I don't think it's this type of visible but marginal nonsense which perpetuates the SF drug economy. There are simply a lot of people making money on the blight. Private equity funds have piled into methadone treatment, even though other treatments are more evidence-based. No matter the customers are penniless wretches, the government is billed astronomical sums to perpetuate their suffering. These are some of the highest profit margin balance sheets I've ever seen. A public which lacks the stomach to account for whether remediations are evidence-based, collaborates with the cartels to keep the whole thing spinning and shambling.

Walk into any hospital waiting room, and count the dollars disappear to "treat" the dopesickness of a victim. Like the rest of the US healthcare system, it's a galactic obvious grift enabled by regulatory capture, operating in plain sight.