dnautics

42 ms·

871.
by dnautics 5y ago
i believe there are strange corner cases around x87, but that may have changed since IEE754 got revised last year
872.
by dnautics 5y ago
If you're going to compare that way (and I contend you shouldn't) at least normalize by programmer hours, or take into account growth.
873.
by dnautics 5y ago
Seriously, comparing by timeline like that is an unfair comparison. You should probably kick a few dollars into the zig foundation as penance for having made it publically. ;)
874.
by dnautics 5y ago
I can't put my finger on it. I love ruby, but often times digging deeper into Ruby source code, I would hit a point where I would think, "oh God, I give up, this is magic". Comparing it to elixir, my daily driver, is like n
875.
by dnautics 5y ago
It's important to consider that for zig at this stage , "not having valid documentation" is expected. At some point not having valid docs will become considered to be unacceptable. Forcing people to read the code puts press
876.
by dnautics 5y ago
Nah, I think it is fine. The problems are almost all (the author's) problems with zig's philosophy of "when to do things you need for a 1.0". Author mostly wants docs, guides, error messages, and package manager, which
877.
by dnautics 5y ago
Oh come on now, it's not completely unusable, just "unusable in a ton of important use cases".
878.
by dnautics 5y ago
My guess is that the original paper is artefactual, but there's no reason a priori that an organism couldn't take large classes of ionizing radiation and turn it directly into chemical energy, ionizing radiation, after all, effe
879.
by dnautics 5y ago
just wanted to add more to the history we were constructing! Didn't mean to imply that you implied that it was trotsky's idea .
880.
by dnautics 5y ago
dialectic was in Marx, he actually got it from Hegel. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hegel-dialectics/
881.
by dnautics 5y ago
dialectic + dunders (double underscore, which signifies certain things in python)
882.
by dnautics 5y ago
Wait the guy had an addiction, and the way he lost is money was that he was too busy being obsessed with trading that he lost the ADDRESSES? This makes it seem like cryptocurrency is a better outlet for gambler's addiction than horser
883.
by dnautics 5y ago
I forgot to answer something, rotavirus "appears on the list" is only there because it's a synthetic SARS virus-component expression system that's sitting on a commonly used rotavirus-based expression cassette.
884.
by dnautics 5y ago
whether or not it's serious it does call into question the parent assertion: "Most people are more comfortable with imperative languages"
885.
by dnautics 5y ago
I'm not going to defend any of the statistics in the article.
886.
by dnautics 5y ago
> no single coronavirus Hold on. Let's be precise. Other coronaviruses do have furin cleavage sites. No other coronaviruses have this particular furin cleavage site. > but there is nothing that indicates that this is a nat
887.
by dnautics 5y ago
Unless there is a transposable element between them, Just so concatenations like that are two independent splicing events so you roughly expect a quadratic likelihood reduction (square the rarity)
888.
by dnautics 5y ago
Chemical biology Phd, did work on (non-pathogenic) gain of function research here. 1. We care about a furin cleavage site, because it sticks out like a sore thumb. It doesn't exist in the closest family of coronaviruses to SARS-COV-1
889.
by dnautics 5y ago
Why is the native hiv sequence (which has had a lot of convergence potential since hiv mutates, a lot) different, and why did it convergently evolve instead to the nucleotide sequence of moderna's artificial furin site (designed for hi
890.
by dnautics 5y ago
Double check the query coverage percentage on your searches.
891.
by dnautics 5y ago
we're talking about the odds of the founder event. My guess is odds are about 1 in 3^{5-6} (3-ish wobble options, five to six wobble sites, haven't looked at the sequence to confirm this. Probably someone can do a better analysi
892.
by dnautics 5y ago
alright, do you want a specific answer? My guess is it's somewhere around one in 3^{5-6}-ish, for the singular founder event that establishes and fixes that sequence as the canonical sequence for the furin cleavage site of COVID-19.
893.
by dnautics 5y ago
Alright. I can verify the meaning and significance. I have a PhD in chemical biology, and have done (non-pathogenic) gain of function research. This is the sort of result that I would expect someone to have found if I were given the char
894.
by dnautics 5y ago
Nobody is claiming proof. Don't move the goalposts.
895.
by dnautics 5y ago
the mutation rate simply is not as high as you imagine it to be. If it were, then we would (likely) see more wobbling around the wobble pairs in the cleavage site coding region.
896.
by dnautics 5y ago
if the mutation rate is that high, then why don't we see a ton of sequence variants around the wobble pairs of the furin cleavage site? (Or for any parts of the coronavirus, for that matter?)
897.
by dnautics 5y ago
While viruses do mutate a lot, if the sequence were that labile, then you would expect there to be a lot of divergence around the furin cleavage site. We don't really see that, so the site is stable. So, is there something special ab
898.
by dnautics 5y ago
the HIV-1 protein sequence is the same but not the DNA sequence. The moderna DNA sequence is identical. The odds of HIV-1 mixing with bat coronavirus, and then somehow finding the moderna DNA sequence, while not astronomically low, are pr
899.
by dnautics 5y ago
Just to be clear, this doesn't imply that moderna released the viruses. Patents are publically visible, after all. It suggests that someone was told to insert a furin cleavage site, then went and "stack overflow copy-pasted&qu
900.
by dnautics 5y ago
the mere fact that you call it pop tells me you're not ready

More ›