j-g-faustus

  Initial conclusions indicate an error in production that
  placed pressure on plates contained within battery cells.   
  That in turn brought negative and positive poles into 
  contact, triggering excessive heat. Samsung however  
  stressed that it needed to carry out a more thorough 
  analysis to determine “the exact cause” of battery damage.

Gray code [1] does it for integers: Any two consecutive values are one bit-flip apart.

Instructions could perhaps be encoded similarly: Say an n-bit gray code represents an instruction. Each instruction has an n-bit ID, IDs are spread evenly over the space of n-bit values, and each instruction code resolves to the ID with the smallest Hamming distance [2].

Then most bitflips would yield essentially the same program, as long as the number of instructions is small compared to the number of n-bit values.

Our CPUs wouldn't run that directly, but I think it should be possible to construct simple bytecode instruction sets where practically any permutation of bits gives a syntactically valid program, and where bit sequences with a small Hamming distance in most cases resolve to similar programs.

There's no consensus yet, but there is a bunch of interesting research going on. Most of the theories I've seen fall in two broad categories:

- An issue with the mitochondria, the energy production in the cells, that for some reason produce just a fraction of the energy they normally produce. So the fatigue is a result of insufficient energy production. I'm partial to this class of theories, since it seems to match so well with my experience. I particularly like the one I saw just a few days ago, explaining CFS/ME as a kind of evolutionary hibernation where the cells shut down in response to a real or imagininary threat, in the hope of outlasting the threat rather than fighting it [1].

- An issue with the immune system, which for some reason remains hyperactive even when there is nothing to fight as far as anyone can tell. So the fatigue is a result of the immune system consuming an inordinate amount of energy, just like if you were having the flu. According to these theories it might be an autoimmune disease where the immune system is effectively fighting ghosts [2], or the immune system might be busy with an actual threat that the standard tests don't pick up [3].

I don't know if both groups of theories can be true at the same time - e.g. if one is a cause and the other is an effect, or maybe they are both effects - or whether we're talking about different subsets of patients with different underlying causes.

Unlike my sibling post, I think it's a genuine condition. I agree that the current diagnostic criteria basically boil down to "unreasonably fatigued and we don't know why". But I've met a number of other people with the same diagnosis, and there are too many similarities for us to be just an arbitrary collection of tired people. Maybe there are two or three distinct subgroups with different underlying causes, maybe there are a handful that has been misdiagnosed. But I'm sure there's something there.

For recovery, we don't know yet. A number of things have worked for a number of different people, some people eventually get better on their own. Long term and in general, we will hopefully know more in a few years.

Or suppose a neighborhood kid is angry at you, have figured out how to hack the system, but haven't yet figured out the difference between "that'll teach them a lesson" and "this might actually kill them".

Or, hypothetically, if system hacks don't require a physical connection, it's wide open for anyone anywhere in the world to replicate something like the file encryption extortion scam[1]: Break into as many cars as you can. Send them a mail saying that you hacked their car. They can take the chance of figuring out what you did on their own, or pay you money to revert it. The scam might work just as well for cars you didn't break into, as long as the owners believe it's a credible threat.

The point isn't necessarily that these scenarios are more likely than in the physical world. The point is that many people have a fair idea how the physical world works, while they have only vague notions about "hacking" in the virtual world. We know that there are new threats, but we don't yet know what they are, so these new threats will be inherently scarier than the threats we already know about. (The devil you know, etc.)

So I guess we're just seeing a conflation of cinema, TV and computing, at least when it comes to displays and resolutions, so the marketing terminology is conflating too.

Especially since 4k is an exisiting standard, I'm willing to give them a pass for keeping the naming convention. (Although the 4k TV standard, which most 4k monitors will be using, is slightly different: It's the cinema standard cropped to a 16:9 aspect ratio.)

But suppose I had a Kickstarter for a car on the same premises: "A revolutionary car powered by sunlight and water - fill up with water every now and then, and it will run forever". No further details. Would you buy?

I think it's a very small percentage of the world that would know off the bat why "sun and water" could work for a spacecraft, but not for a car.

I think some more detail on the physics behind it, aimed slightly below say Physics 101 level, would help to convince more people to contribute. It makes it simpler to distinguish this from "crystals can change your life" or "lose X pounds of weight in Y days" style marketing, which promise the moon but don't explain how their miracle is supposed to work.

They do give an explanation in their link[0], but I think having a summarized version on the Kickstarter page itself would help donations. (To be clear, this is a comment on the marketing, not on the physics or feasability.)