For proof of work to be fair, you need a robust & secure job that produces results with a uniform distribution of zeros and ones. FHE gives you that, while performing useful computation.
> Hey @VitalikButerin, instead of doing proof of work with useless puzzles, why don't we use that massive GPU compute power to help science with numerical computation? We could wrap the problem using @HomomorphicEnc techniques. Efficiency would improve overtime. ASICs are welcome.
From Wikipedia "A $10 million consumer launch of the product was funded by Washington State agriculture promotion funds through the Washington Apple Commission and other agencies.[5] The two taglines for the apple were "Imagine the Possibilities" and "The Apple of Big Dreams".[1] It is said to be the largest campaign in apple industry history,[16] and included payments to social media influencers and a partnership with a touring children's production of Johnny Appleseed.[17] The term "Cosmic Crisp" is trademarked.[1]"
The guy at my indie Seattle produce stand said that Big Apple is shilling Cosmic Crisp and it's all a scam. Maybe you're one of their underground campaigns?? I'm on to you, BIG APPLE
I’ve got no idea why people eat anything else. Says on Wikipedia that it only got to the public in 2019, so maybe that’s why this older article omitted it.
Because I've never seen that apple. Only once did I see Honeycrisp, and that seems to have been a trial by my supermarket, two weeks later it was gone and never came back.
(I'm living in Germany)
My favorite is Berlepsch, and if I buy in normal stores, Holsteiner Cox, Braeburn or Boskoop.
For what it’s worth, I live in California where both
Honeycrisp and Cosmic Crisp are readily available (among a healthy gamut of other varieties). I LOVE Honeycrisp and it’s my favorite. I have not even bothered to try Cosmic Crisp, because from all I’ve heard it’s not any better than Honeycrisp, but just has a longer shelf life. I have no issues with the shelf life of Honeycrisp and am skeptical that shelf life can be extended without giving up some other quality.
I hope somebody at Microsoft read this. It goes far beyond security vulnerabilities. The Teams Linux client is barely usable. Chromebooks don't even have a client.
Could Microsoft expose an API and allow third party clients to be developed?
At least with the old Lync/Skype clients, you could flip them into UI-suppression mode and drive them with COM, to replace their UI with a custom application, if you wanted to make that investment.
Potentially you could cobble together enough Graph API calls to make a lackluster restricted-feature client, but it would be a mess.
If your .vimrc is minimal, you will have a pretty good time using systems that implement "vim like" text editing. Take Overleaf for example, no vimrc is available, but I'm quite happy with what I got, and sometimes I even forget I'm in the browser.
> If your .vimrc is minimal, you will have a pretty good time using systems that implement "vim like" text editing.
This has not been my experience, fwiw. Everywhere implements "most" of what I do, but I still wind up hitting something in the unimplemented portions pretty frequently.
And fast! I got easily 3 orders of magnitude speedup. I used to load CSVs with pandas and do typical filtering operations... oh boy, some of the stuff would take a hole morning, not to mention the memory usage. I do all that in minutes now.
I'm in the middle of a PhD myself, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
I actually agree with the author, certain fields are just very complex to develop a solid understand without proper mentoring and support you would get as a grad student.
That said, maybe the real issue is not the fact we need two PhDs each, but the question I want to raise, do PhDs need to take 4/5/6 years? (I'm not even considering the cases where people, like myself, do a 2 year master program before the PhD...). Honestly, in my humble opinion, it is not necessary.
Maybe universities could develop "industry focused dual PhD programs" to target specifically crazy folks like us :)
5+ Years PhD programs are completely unnecessary. After quals, you should do some research and write that up. The research may take a year, it may take two, it depends. Write it up and publish it. Do that again, maybe, it depends.
One of many hiccups is in the submitting and review process. It takes ages. Sure, some areas are less, some are more, but three year long submit/review periods are not unheard of. Reviewers want another experiment, another control, they don't get back to you until February even though you submitted in mid-November, you can forget August as a working month, etc. Unless your PI is well connected, getting published takes forever.
I have a paper that has been in reviewer hell for the last seven years, for example. It's nutters.
Indeed. And the dirty secret of this process is that it has little to do with ensuring research quality (although it does usually succeed in filtering out very bad research as a side effect). Its main purpose is to simply make it difficult to publish, so as to preserve the CV value of a publication in a given journal.
At least 3 years. I knew a guy in Manchester who was on his seventh year, the funding ran out so he'd spent the previous three years living in a cupboard in the department.
