Zach Hensel

There's a cost to maintaining privacy; the information is valuable. I bet most think it's worth it, though.

Yup; I figure there will be pushback and a demand for European-type privacy regulations. Just need to figure out how to enforce them, which rarely happens in Europe.

Selfie age verification without an ID already a thing; depending only on benevolence of companies and/or existence and enforcement of privacy laws to not link to your identity.

Until pretty recently this was still eerily accurate to me; running text through a bunch of random translations and eventually back to English with near unrecognizable text and still getting the same results was interesting; wonder if a modern approach would perform similarly...

Here's the mid-2000s version of a not very different task (predict authors from scientific paper text): jane.biosemantics.org/index.php

And the paper: academic.oup.com/bioinformati...

I guess, on net, democratizing fast online identifiability is perhaps better than having people mostly be unaware that that capability is available to many companies (and presumably governments that don't sell the data graphs).

Someone should let Kevin Durant's PR team know that this means it's also possible to fabricate someone's pseudonymous language

Ditto for improvising a plan to get ships moving again. Would’ve been announced on day 1 had they planned this out.

Predicting protein-protein interactions (PPIs) at proteome scale can take months with co-folding models due to the massive all-vs-all comparisons required.

We are excited to announce FlashPPI, a contrastive learning framework that predicts proteome wide physical interfaces in minutes. 1/🧵

Hopefully people figuring out how to regulate AI don't agree with Google/DeepMind people to build a regulatory moat hamstringing competitors.

Everything announced since AF-multimer was a sales pitch for the next set of multibillion dollar exclusivity deals. Openness of AF2/AF-multimer quickly proved how valuable the state-of-the-art model can be; makes sense to pivot at that point.

actual prompt shown 🤷 but don't worry I fixed it

no problem here's a perfectly appropriate one

Post civil war, Nixon pardon, and Oliver North the celebrity, etc says we we’ll always decide to move on

Since this crew is all about transparency, let’s see the peer review history for previous submissions…

Authors claim they added a sensitivity test with a lag, presumably in response to peer review elsewhere since it wasn’t in the preprint. But weirdly they only consider a 7-day lag.

At 8 days and beyond, the effect is significant 👀

Take for instance this article in the first issue of the journal he founded — publichealth.realclearjournals.org/research-art... — on top of being unrandomized, they simply measured the wrong thing (didn’t account for lag between exposure and eventually reporting a case).

What, N=30 to determine specificity when the unadjusted positivity was 1.5% wasn't enough for you? 🤯

This came out of nowhere. What a lame reflex.

Don't need a control group to see that JB's baseless assumption about your proposed research proves there's bias in medicine.

Very weird format to have people go back and forth about this without just asking you for clarification.

Looks like there's an audience that's now bigger for Netflix and the rest of WB abandons it.

So I am happy to hear that @frontiersin.bsky.social is taking issues with the paper seriously: methods falsification and plagiarism. I hope @uoregon.bsky.social takes it seriously as well.

More details @pubpeer.com

pubpeer.com/publications...

This paper was what Harvey Risch @yalesph.bsky.social used to advise Sen. Johnson that Moderna engineered SARS-CoV-2 to cause “turbo cancer” — here’s what Risch is up to now: www.wired.com/story/risch-...

They also covered this for some reason. A conspiracy theorist that the lab leak crowd mostly wants to go away because too much of his conspiracy theories take place in the USA.

I guess sneaking it into a peer reviewed kinda journal made it necessary for them to cover? Hopefully that’s the only reason they also mention Sachs and Harrison which is even worse.

This guy made a big deal about Drosten presenting his cherry picked conspiracy theory zenodo.org/records/1538...

Public Inspection: Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance Programs: Nationwide Temporary Moratoria on Enrollment of Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies Supplie... Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance Programs: Nationwide Temporary Moratoria on Enrollment of Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies Supplier Medical Supply Co...

Ah I see in that thread people think it’s a moratorium on new patients; it’s a moratorium on new suppliers www.federalregister.gov/public-inspe...

If existing suppliers are full of frauds it’s a weird fix to not allow new suppliers?

Seems like they’re just falling behind out of incompetence?

Curious how many people actually think this way and how many people just pretend to because it’s effective anti medicine rhetoric in a short attention span media environment.

After how many halvings does it cease to be “a” beer?

They invited presentations from two people with way crazier ideas than the defuse distraction 😂

One of them got quite excited that Drosten was presenting his work to the group and apparently isn’t familiar with rope-a-dope.