Just because it's possible doesn't mean it is clearly the answer. Is a transformer model truly likely to require less compute than current methods? We can't even run models like Veo 3 on consumer hardware at their current level of quality.
Exactly this. Lots of bus depots all around NYC. Several across Staten Island alone.
My uncle worked at the MTA for his entire career as a bus mechanic. My favorite story was when a rep from a company selling "green" buses was visiting. Rep said "These buses never break! You guys might be out of work." and then asked "So when do the buses stop running for the day?"
He was less confident in the reliability of his product when he learned the buses in NYC don't stop.
Yes, but in practice regulatory agencies can be fairly non-communicative with the companies that they regulate.
I work in the dietary supplements industry, and while people love to call the space unregulated, it's moreso that regulations remain unenforced. So much so that companies often have to ask the FDA for clarification around ambiguous regulations. And the FDA is often keen on not responding. You often find out because the FDA's decided to enforce a rule, one that the industry will have asked for clarification about countless times beforehand.
If regulatory agencies have ample opportunity to clarify ambiguous regulations, they should be doing so. They should not leave it ambiguous until somebody gets hit with a fine. That does not serve public interest.
Completely agree here. My company interviews for and hires based on soft skills.
Yeah, certain hard skills help. I don't want to teach you excel or basic computer skills.
But we work in data analytics/marketing and my coworkers consist of people like a theater major, an anthropologist, someone that previously negotiated govt contracts for Lockheed, a sommelier, and more. Yeah, we hire mostly at entry level, but our team is highly capable because they were hired based on curiosity, critical thinking skills, etc and taught by the people who possess hard skills
This was my thought as well. Why are we assuming they'd even have access to many preserved audio recordings knowing that they destroyed all computers? The Butlerisn Jihad was thousands of years before the events of the movie.
One of the only, if not the only, persons at my company without a degree. On the fast track to director, and currently in senior management. I'm not downplaying degrees, but not all fields need one.
You still gotta eat big. You can pin HGH if you really want to gain weight, but understand that it doesn't discriminate in what kind of soft tissue it grows.
Chelated supplements are, generally, more bioavailable than their oxidized counterparts because they are bound to nutrients for which you have transporters. Like amino acids, for instance.
Supplements are absolutely regulated. To say otherwise is just ignorant of the law. Those regulations are not well enforced. That is the fault of the US justice department and Congress. The FDA is under-equipped in the way of funding to enforce regulations. And they're dependent on the justice department to actually follow through on enforcement. The justice department is only really interested in enforcement action where harm has occurred.
Amazon can do better, but why are we exclusively placing the onus on them to enforce federal law? Why is the FDA not going after the brands making and selling this shit?
As someone who has made a career consulting for supplement companies selling on Amazon, this does not surprise me. When Amazon first instituted testing requirements for supplements (something that already exists under federal law) they required all sellers to provide testing for all of their products. Failure to do so resulted in removal of your products from the marketplace.
Since then, two things have changed. Certain supplement categories have additional testing requirements outside of what is expected by the FDA. Companies have to prove the absence of certain illegal ingredients. But, Amazon has switched to random testing requirements. In the last 3 years, Amazon has not asked a single one of my clients to provide any COAs. I have seen other brands have to provide some, but the requirements are very limited. It is for this reason, unsurprising that illegal products are making it into customer hands.
It is my understanding that the individual who drove the campaign to get COAs, GMP certificates, etc for all supplement listings is no longer with Amazon, and nobody has filled that role since. That should be changed.
But Amazon has always been aggressive over enforcement of marketing claims, and some claims will always instantly flag a COA requirement. Sellers use careful wording to avoid these flags. The solution is to make a COA required for the creation of these listings.
I mean, let's take this one further. Most supplement companies are just marketing companies. They don't formulate the product, they don't manufacture the ingredients, and they don't even blend the powder. They make a brand. But, the FDA doesn't care. As a brand receiving product from a manufacturer, you are still required to test it. The manufacturer is also required to test the raw materials as well as the finished product. Yet, most companies I speak to are not testing product received. They rely solely on the manufacturer testing.
So we should be requiring these brands to do their due diligence. Show me the COA you are supposed to have for every lot you send in. It's already required by the FDA.
As is always the case with supplements, regulation is not the issue. It's enforcement
>"Additionally there's just so much about gut health that we operate largely out of ignorance on."
Looking at you, probiotics. Actually, I was really impressed at how far we've come in probiotics after attending supply side west. Lots of focus on how to target specific outcomes through supplementation of specific bacterial strains. But still, there's a lot we do not know
That's a backfire. You're right in that a muffler can diminish the volume of a backfire, and that it is caused by combustion in the exhaust.
But the incomplete ignition of fuel can occur in both stock and modified vehicles. My car is completely unmodified, but can very easily have a low quiet popping noise during downshifts. With e removal of my muffler, it would be quite loud.
A modified engine can do this to a much greater extent, depending on the modifications. Some do so intentionally with what is known as a "burble tune", which is quite annoying in my opinion. It is inspired by rally cars that would intentionally inject fuel during the exhaust stroke and fire the spark plugs to keep exhaust driven turbines spinning even when under deceleration.
In the case of gasoline cars, there are mechanisms for controlling intake air, recirculating exhaust gas, and filtering emissions directly out of the exhaust gases. All of these impact carbon emissions.
These defeat devices allow drivers to modify some or all of these attributes in favor of gaining engine performance.