Aromasin

It makes me yearn for what we lost. I remember when the Internet was all like this page, and it was bloody wonderful. I hope we get to a point where hosting becomes functionally free, and the brain rotting advertisement spam becomes a thing of the past.

I recently moved from a private dentist to a NHS-funded one in the UK. They're quite hard to get into usually, but I tormented the reception staff with weekly calls until "a spot opened up".

I had a series of work done at my previous, private, dentist. He told me a had a bunch of issues with my teeth, that might include a root canal at some point in the new future, and work needed as my wisdom teeth start to come through.

I had my first check-up with the new dentist; "Your teeth are in very good condition, I have no idea why they suggested you might need a root canal". Every follow-up has been with a different dentist, and none of them have recommended treatment of any kind. It's utterly bizarre. I've never gone this long without a need for treatment of some kind. I wasn't aware of how much profiteering goes on until moving to something that is a public-service rather than a for-profit practice.

You could say the same of the aristocracy of Europe over the last few hundred years, but that has effedtively crumbled. There's remnants of "old money" families that were upper-class, but for the most part the merchant class took control of the system that held them down. It took many generations, but the blue blooded dynasties are a dying breed.

Arguably India has the class system tied to the prevailing religion, but religion too has faded with modernity. Systems have a habit of breaking under strain and time.

An interesting talk I heard at a conference once, that I can neither remember the speaker for or speak to their legitimacy, suggested that we might have some lower form of intelligence encoded into our language. They posed the idea that we have enough unique words, and combination of words, that it starts to have reason unto itself similar to how our neurons and their connection breed intelligence. The idea was that we as humans have baked intelligence into our own speech patterns. It seemed a little to abstract for me, but potentially goes a little way to explaining how a statistical averaging algorithm with some randomness, at scale, starts to look like it very occasionally has a genuinely novel thought.

Man, I remember carrying a veal calf in a wheelbarrow away from it's grieving mother (who ended up distressed for days) when I was 16 doing some Summer farm work. It messed me up for weeks, and I still somehow went back to drinking dairy. Thankfully I've sworn off all animal products now, but the knowing cruelty of it I suppressed for a long time.

Note that by leaving them by the front door I don't mean abstain. I relent that it is necessary for communication now we don't use letters or have landlines, but I need to actively walk to the front door if I wish to do that. Notifications are something I check when I leave the house in the morning, or briefly after the gym in the car perhaps, rather than being all I do for the majority of the time I sit in the house. The act of it being at the entrance and allowed no further is enough.

What else am I to do when waiting for my chip simulations to run? Be present with my colleagues? There are limits.

In the same vein as this article, the best thing I've ever done might just be leaving my phone by the front door when I get home, and getting rid of our TV. All I do is read books, paint, fix-up the house, tend to the garden, play boardgames, and generally do things that require me to be present when at home with my wife and child, rather than in someone else's version of the world.

We go stir crazy at home now, a sensation I have forgotten since my childhood, and feel almost obliged to go out to do things lest we go crazy from boredom. It's wonderful, and I can't recommend it enough.

Short term buyer habits don't necessarily track technological progress - they tend to be resistent, then inertia is broken and consumers buy en-mass. Companies need to brunt to cost of innovation until the cost benefit analysis makes sense for consumers. Mobile phones were a passing fad for niche power users until companies threw so much money at them so they weren't, and we became reliant on carrying one. Same can be said for thousands of other products. Nobody used them until suddenly we all were.

We're seeing a moores-law-like improvement in electric cars and their power densities. If the American car manufacturers don't want to be a part of that progress, it's on them, but Asia and Europe will continue to innovate in that area and the US will be playing catch up because they're servicing what consumers want now, not what they will probably want in the future.

The "whistle-to-whistle ban" was always poor legislation. By its own terms it only suppresses TV betting adverts in a defined window and lapses at 9pm, and it never touched the categories that actually make up most of the advertising we see; shirts, hoardings, and structural branding, etc. It was an utterly pointless measure that serves to achieve not a single one of it's initial goals.

The authors report explicitly state that the system's resolution does not match clinical CT or MRI. The elevational resolution is 15–25mm, meaning each slice is effectively a thick 2D section rather than the fine isotropic 3D volume MRI provides. MRI also delivers far richer soft-tissue contrast; this device produces only three contrast types (reflectivity, speed of sound, attenuation), and because it uses a low 1MHz frequency, the reflection images come primarily from tissue boundaries rather than from internal tissue texture.

I could see this being valuable for adipose tissue mapping or fatty-liver monitoring at a large scale, as the machines would be significantly cheaper, but this isn't some revolutionary magic bullet like the Twitter post is insinuating.

For context I'm in engineering consultancy, so by no means an expert but I probably have enough experience to be on the other side of the Kruger curve dip.

Passive sonar in the naval sense means listening only, not emitting. Do you mean imaging that relies solely on acoustic energy already present and emitted by the body? If so, then generally no. You have two types of "passive" imaging. First would be hardware-passive, as in MR elastography (most common), where the patient wears a transducer pad, and vibration is actively generated by a driver. You've then got algorithmically-passive, which is more analogue to passive sonar, reconstructing tissue stiffness from ambient broadband vibration without the emitted probing pulse, but that is very much entirely academic. I guess the question would be, why is it worth pursuing when you have something like optical coherence elastography (OCE) for non-invasive profiling. Doing it using noisy ultrasound method becomes redundant. There are other methods, but the outcome is the same.

Generally (this is true for all systems, not just humans) you need to induce energy into it to more effectively measure it's output. Think of it like a bell - if I want to hear the note it produces, it's much easier to hear what this is if I ring it with a hammer. Granted, it will be "passively" resonating to a point where, with a sensitive enough sensor, I could probably pick up the output without the hammer - but that is a pointless problem to solve. I could hit a bell with a soft hammer a million times over without causing damage to it. The lifetime of the person hitting it with a hammer is far shorter than the accumulative damage to the bell before it breaks. The same is true for humans. You could effectively run a very low-energy, 60Hz vibration through a person (which is how the pads work) for multiple lifetimes before it would cause significant damage, so there comes little point in solving that problem. As such, true "passive" imaging is functionally pointless if your outcome is "safely image a patient". You're overengineering your solution to solve a problem that is only relevant if your patient was planning on living for 1000+ years.

I help engineers design traditional scanners (Philips, GE, Siemens, etc). To be frank, this statement stinks like utter pig shit.

Some PE bro preaching miracles about a technology that I am sure they are in some way invested in making profit from does not convince me of it's legitimacy. My base instincts, from the unfortunate experience of working daily with PE bros, tell me the opposite in fact. It gives déjà vu of the Theranos hysteria.

The one thing British people do preen about with regards to technology is cars, but I think that has more to do with the cultural influence of Top Gear than it does the history.