joel_liu
Joined 18 years ago
Karma
295
Submissions
76
Member since
Mar 11
I am cofounder of diigo.com and I like people in hacker news!
View on Hacker NewsRecent submissions
Comment · 4 months ago
The "non-random errors" point buried a few replies down deserves to be the headline, not a footnote. With Illumina, 10x coverage genuinely washes out errors because they're closer to independent per-read noise. With Nanopore, errors cluster at specific motifs (homopolymers, certain k-mers) due to how the pore physically reads the strand — so the same systematic mistake shows up across most of your reads at that position, and naive majority-vote consensus won't fix it. You need a basecaller/consensus model trained to correct for those specific failure modes (which is exactly what the current-gen Guppy/Dorado models try to do), not just "more depth." That distinction matters a lot for a home setup: coverage is cheap, but knowing where your specific errors are systematic vs. random is what determines whether "buy more reads" actually gets you to clinical-grade accuracy or just gives you a very confident wrong answer.
Comment · 9 months ago
Thanks for sharing this timestamp - Levin's retrospective on bioelectricity research is compelling. What fascinates me most is how his work challenges the gene-centric view of development. The experiments showing bioelectric patterns can override genetic instructions (like inducing eye formation in non-eye tissue) reveal a whole layer of morphogenetic information we're just beginning to understand.
Comment · 9 months ago
This case is a significant real-world validation of Lockdown Mode's effectiveness against state-level forensic capabilities. What's particularly noteworthy is that CART (the FBI's Computer Analysis Response Team) couldn't extract the device - not that they partially succeeded or got metadata. This suggests that even with physical access and federal resources, the combination of a powered-on device in Lockdown Mode created an insurmountable barrier.
For journalists covering sensitive topics, this demonstrates that Lockdown Mode isn't just theoretical protection against nation-state spyware - it's also practical defense against domestic forensic tools. The trade-off in usability (disabled JIT, limited iMessage features, etc.) seems worth it for anyone handling confidential sources.
The interesting question now is whether this will accelerate efforts to legally compel password disclosure, since the technical extraction route appears blocked.y
Comment · 2 years ago
Roast Every word LOL.
Comment · 2 years ago
Thanks for trying it!
Comment · 2 years ago
I am waiting for response :-)
Comment · 2 years ago
Sider 4.0 introduces group AI chat to reduce hallucination by comparing answers from different AIs like ChatGPT, GPT-4.0, Claude, Bard in a group. You can also chat with webpage, image, PDF in every tab without switch tabs between ChatGPT and the current tab.
Comment · 7 years ago
Forced-IP-transfer is a double-edged sword
The perspective from media: "Forced IP transfer policies" is very unfair because it helps Chinese companies to get an unfair advantage. It's bad for foreign companies and good for Chinese economies.
The perspective from many entrepreneurs in China: "Forced IP transfer policies" is very unfair because it helps the foreign companies get an unfair advantage. It's bad for Chinese private companies and economies.
Here is the explanation from the entrepreneurs' perspective:
1) The most "forced IP transfer" happened in the Chinese-foreign partnership companies.
2) However, the partnership is between state-owned companies and foreign companies.
3) Most of the state-owned companies are very inefficient. The system makes people lazy and corruptive.
4) The partnership companies did get some technologies, often the older technologies. However, they also get benefits from the state, very cheap land, subsidies, etc.
5)From the perspective of local entrepreneurs: Benefits from state + Foreign tech and brand makes the already-strong foreign companies even stronger. They get double advantages. It's very hard to compete with them. To local entrepreneurs, the Chinese state-owned companies + Foreign companies partnership model kills many local private companies unfairly.
6) From the technologies side, the state-owned companies get some older technologies, but since the state-owned companies have their own issues like lazy, corruption. They didn't get a tech edge in the competition. The transferred technologies outdated very fast.
One example is the Auto industry. Most auto brands from the US is very successful in China, for example, Buick is not very successful in the US, but the overall sales in China exceeded 10M! Ford is also very successful in China https://thenewswheel.com/ford-sales-in-china-surpass-1-milli...
Did the "transferred technologies make them less successful"? It's really hard to say.
There is some "forced IP transfer" in some sectors, but the impact to the overall economies may or may not positive because it makes the local private companies in a very disadvantaged position. It's really a double-edged sword.