klustregrif

There's some subleties lost in the "just filing paperwork" the regulatory filing reports are big content heavy documents, that need to be generated. But it's not just a job consisting of pasting in lorum ipsum. A lot of intelligence goes into creating those documents, which is why it hasn't been revolutionised by digital templating systems. But there is the very real potential for speeding up the process through AI document editing and reviews to turn 2 weeks of people sequentially doing edits, passing for review back and forth before being able to submit, to perhaps just getting everyone in a room for 2 hours and pointing out everything that needs changing and changing it on the spot. But even then you'll still sometimes have the hook back to the slower processes of having to generate new evidence or find and review evidence that wasn't included. But even a 25% increase in speed will have quite significant impact, so it's not like it has to become a turn key submissions solution to be valuable.

It's like saying "Cisco Developer" even though the company is Cisco Systems

The company is called Generate Biomedicines, and they reference it in short as Generate.

I’m still using Firefox, I was adding the perspective from back in the start of “why didn’t you just move over from IE” like everyone would just move because an alternative existed. Most didn’t and i get it. I am not the norm. I also ran gentoo back then which is not an option for most computer users.

Also being “technically most standard compliant” doesn’t mean anything to the average user who’s just angry that their browser isn’t showing their MySpace page correctly.

Calm down. Not every bit of real perspective on software short of “Firefox is perfect” is an existential criticism of it existing.

Back when Phoenix launched it was not a reliable alternative to IE or Opera, it was more like a sign of protest. You’d use it to tell the world that you didn’t care if most of the internet didn’t work for you, as longs as you where “sticking it to the man”.

I remember developing web pages with the purpose of ensuring they would work in both, so Phoenix was my main driver, but whenever anything was “done” the real work started of also getting it to work in IE, it was always a monumental effort. Sites with buttons for “go here for pheonix/go here for ie” where common. My friends who worked in the windows ecosystem mostly saw Phoenix as some “crazy hipster trend” and didn’t have a care as to if anything they made worked in it or not.

There is more money in selling shovels than you can ever win by having a monopoly on really effective shovels. They don't need to build a competitor to Google there's 300 companies throwing money at them while they build the "next google" and even if they all fail Anthropic still wins.

> then why even have source control?

I know you are joking, but the answer is the same. Because the agents need it, not because any human need it. The Agents quite actively use the history. It's more effective than any comments or separate documentation might be for the agents working on the code.

If someone kidnapped it and you where asked to pay 400$ to get it back. Would you pay the ransom?

Developers using rails are of cause not too satisfied with an answer to their question of “how will rails make my life better in the future?” Being “it won’t, use an AI coding agent and let it write rust for you” but it’s a keynote not a marketing pitch. If would have been silly to do a talk about some minor changes to rails and then open the conference where everyone except artisanal code carvers would talk about exactly how they’ve replaced most of that they used to do by hand carving with AI automation. He’s not talking about some far fetched future he’s talking about that has happened the last year.

Absolutely crazy concept. But looks like they actually threw something decent together. I'd wager the bulk of problems people face with teeth come from poor flossing, this makes it effortless to avoid that.

I've owned water jets, the ones I've had suck. I always end up going back to dental floss. These days string on a plastic holder which I hate because it feels so wasteful to have all that single use plastic, but they are just so effective and I hate the manual wrapping of string, so I accept the wastefulness reluctantly.

This product potentially hits home with what I'd want from an effective waterjet, and it also comes with a brush on top.

The price is high, that's for sure, but I'm guessing they aren't aiming at the average electric tooth brush market, more like a competitor to the oral b io series 9 segment. And sure they are quite a bit above that price point, but they got a lot more of a solution backing the price.

The Traditional View (How it actually works): If an investment fund manages $1000 of your money and charges a $150 management fee while keeping your $1000 completely separate, they made $50 on $150 of sales and have a 33.3% profit margin.

The "Insurance Style" View (If they copied UHG's model): If an investment fund counts your $1000 deposit as their own revenue and treats buying stocks for you as their own cost, they made $50 on $1150 of sales and have a 4.3% profit margin.

The distinction is that the insurance company is not selling you medical services; those are covered by your and other clients' own money. They are selling the service of managing a central fund to reduce risk for the people who are part of it. For them to claim that you were paying them for medical services, they shouldn't just be covering the hospital bills—they should be operating the hospital and buying and selling the drugs themselves. It might feel like they do that, but this is actually done by the healthcare providers and pharmacies, with the costs merely covered by the insurance fund.

Grocery-Bagging Analogy: Imagine you pay a teenager $10 an hour to help bag customers' groceries. In that hour, $2000 worth of groceries get bagged, and your business takes a $100 fee from the store for the service. After paying the teenager, you pocket $90.Do you claim a 90% profit margin on your $100 service fee? Or do you claim that your "costs" were $2010 because you included the value of the customers' groceries, pretending your margin was a measly 4.3% while walking away with almost all the fee?

A very beautiful tribute to her life and memory. My condolences go out to her family.

So your claim is that if there is no correlation between A and B then it proves that there is in fact negative correlation between A and B because there is no correlation?

And so the Dunning Kruger effect becomes true of all things that are uncorrelated?