muesliElectron is proof that given enough RAM, any mistake becomes a platform.
@sirwobin
- 27 Followers
- 33 Following
- 169 Posts
@mschwinges congrats Mike. Well deserved. 😊
Michael W Lucas 
Computers are like onions. Everything is layers built on layers, and every layer makes you cry. #sysadmin
Stefan BohacekNot sure how many of you use ChatGTP, but you might want to scale back.
"The latest model of ChatGPT has begun to cite Elon Musk’s Grokipedia as a source on a wide range of queries, including on Iranian conglomerates and Holocaust deniers, raising concerns about misinformation on the platform.
In tests done by the Guardian, GPT-5.2 cited Grokipedia nine times in response to more than a dozen different questions."
#news #technology #TechNews #ChatGPT #OpenAI #AI #GenAI #grok #grokipedia
Glyph
mhoyeTo spell this out clearly, the reason RAM has quadrupled in price is that a huge quantity of RAM that hasn't been produced yet has been bought with money that doesn't exist to populate GPUs that also haven't been produced to go in datacenters that haven't been built powered by infrastructure that may never exist to meet a demand that doesn't exist at all to make profit margins that mathematically can't exist while economists talk about this thing they call the "rational markets hypothesis".
Simon BrookeI've just checked out a #Clojure project I last worked on thirteen years ago, compiled it, ran its unit tests, and they all passed. I then ran `lein ancient upgrade :check-clojure` to upgrade all the dependencies to their latest versions, ran the unit tests again, and they all passed.
I did get one 'deprecated' warning. I can live with that!
It's not stability that I came to Clojure for, but it's a feature I really appreciate.
Say 'no' to bit rot!
JA WestenbergAll we have are Mussolini cosplayers who can’t make the trains run on time, Rockefeller LARPers who can’t build a refinery, and Nikola Tesla tribute acts who’ve never shipped hardware. History will remember this as the age of the cover band. We are ruled by guys who watched a YouTube documentary about Napoleon and said “I could do that” but meant the hat.
(λ. borkdude)Rich Hickey on AI.
https://gist.github.com/richhickey/ea94e3741ff0a4e3af55b9fe6287887f
Hacker NewsDoctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival
L: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2025.12.03.25341583v1
C: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46198294
posted on 2025.12.08 at 17:06:21 (c=0, p=4)
L: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2025.12.03.25341583v1
C: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46198294
posted on 2025.12.08 at 17:06:21 (c=0, p=4)
Physician estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival
Importance: Terminally ill patients sometimes inquire about preservation procedures (e.g. cryopreservation, aldehyde-based fixation) as end-of-life treatment options, yet physician perspectives on feasibility and ethical acceptability remain uncharacterized. Objective: To assess US physicians' estimates of preservation feasibility, views on interventions to improve outcomes, and positions on ethical and legal frameworks. Design: Cross-sectional survey conducted October 2025. Setting: Sermo, an online platform for verified US healthcare professionals. Participants: Convenience sample of 334 physicians comprising 150 primary care physicians (general practice, internal medicine, family medicine) and 184 other specialists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated probability that preservation retains neurally-encoded information sufficient for future revival; support for pre-mortem anticoagulation and pre-cardiac arrest procedure initiation; views on compatibility with patient-centered care. Results: Among 334 physicians, the median estimated probability that preservation under ideal conditions could retain sufficient neural information for future revival was 25.5%. Overall, 27.9% found preservation somewhat or very plausible for enabling future revival; 47.0% found it somewhat or very implausible. Most physicians (70.7%) supported prescribing anticoagulants to terminal patients to improve preservation quality; 11.7% opposed. For patients choosing preservation in combination with medical assistance in dying, 44.3% supported initiating preservation prior to cardiac arrest; 28.8% opposed. Most (58.1%) agreed preservation could be consistent with compassionate care (20.1% disagreed), and 49.1% reported comfort with patients choosing preservation (30.0% uncomfortable). Familiarity with preservation correlated with higher probability estimates (ρ = 0.26; p < 10-3), while end-of-life discussion frequency correlated with support for pre-cardiac arrest procedures (ρ = 0.18; p = 0.003). Conclusions and Relevance: US physicians assigned a median 25.5% probability to preservation retaining neural information under ideal conditions in a manner potentially compatible with future patient revival. The majority support for pre-mortem anticoagulation and substantial support for pre-cardiac arrest initiation indicate that many physicians would consider accommodating patient requests for preservation-enhancing interventions. These findings may inform development of clinical guidelines, though the speculative nature of the estimates warrants consideration. ### Competing Interest Statement Andrew McKenzie is an employee of Sparks Brain Preservation, a non-profit brain preservation organization, and a director of Apex Neuroscience, a non-profit research organization. Emil Kendziorra is a shareholder and CEO of Tomorrow Bio, a biostasis provider, President of the Board of the European Biostasis Foundation, a non-profit research foundation, a shareholder and director at Oxford Cryotechnology, Inc., a cryopreservation research organization, and a board member at CryoDAO, a Swiss research association. ### Funding Statement Research funding for this study was supported by a CryoDAO grant (2025.1). ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: Pearl Institutional Review Board of Pearl IRB waived ethical approval for this work (#2025-0579). Specifically, the survey and its implementation were reviewed by the Pearl Institutional Review Board and received an exemption determination (#2025-0579) I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes A list of the survey questions is available here: https://osf.io/awgk7/files/jn27a The full set of participant response data is available here: https://osf.io/awgk7/files/hrm76 <https://osf.io/awgk7/files/jn27a>