enough for what?

well that's exactly the point - apparently our population needs to keep growing forever "just because". But if any other animal had no bound on the upper limit of their population the entire globe would be taken over by it.

I like people! I have two kids myself and love them. But it's not like life was horrible when Earth had 5 billion people.

(Note - I am NOT saying that people in poor countries, who tend to use a minute fraction of the resources of rich people, having lots of kids, is necessarily an issue. But if we want to make a higher standard of living possible for everyone in the world it will be easier to do, ecologically speaking, with 9 billion people than with 15 billion)

I'm not aware of a lot of people that want unconstrained growth. But rapid decline has the potential to be a massive problem, and at the moment a rapid decline is what we're headed for.

How about «enough to have a supply of extremely talented people, able to devise novel solutions to crippling long-term problems we face»?

You won't have many brilliant people in a small natural population.

Without them it's «not with a bang, but with a whimper»

OK, how many is that?

To spend most of their lives working for others.

not "war on cancer" and not "we" winning. It's pharma finding ways how to profit from rare treatment successes of few rare disease types. Majority, and by majority i mean over 80%, of patients and cancer types are still treated with bogstandard chemo+radio+surgery. Individualized treatment plans using checkpoint inhibitor combinations, biotech therapies, etc are for few select individuals with A LOT of money.

how do i know? i work in precision oncology for a decade plus

I think perspective is important here.

I'm alive because pharma developed an expensive drug that, at the time I got it, was only administered to 42 others before me.

I was a single person working my first job out of college with Blue Cross Blue Shield and got the best I think was available.

You might be jaded after working so long in a difficult industry; the medical research/pharma work done matters to the patients who receive it and get another decade+ of good life.

im glad for you and every single patient that benefits from something i work on. From the public health angle of most eu countries investment into novel cancer treatments makes a lot less sense that improving prevention.

> Individualized treatment plans using checkpoint inhibitor combinations, biotech therapies, etc are for few select individuals with A LOT of money.

This is the first step in the commoditization of any new treatment, no? Initially expensive but that creates competition to bring the price down.

[Maybe not in the US though because the customer cannot select their supplier]

You may check Europe. I can assure you that patients getting PD-1 inhibitors etc. while if I am not mistaken at least in part recruited for clinical trials pay zilch, nada for the drugs there are taking (in Spain).

I don't know... Advancements like Keytruda are huge. And it will be off patent soon. And there are over 1500 active CAR-T clinical trials going on as we speak.

Oh don't you worry some pharmabro will change (edit: will pay someone actually smart to change) a single atom within a single molecule of the antibody, or however the fuck they do it, and they'll re-patent all of the derivatives, and nobody will make the off-patent version of pembrolizumab due to drug companies bribing benefit managers to not cover the off-patent versions, the fact that you can't charge $150k/yr for it, and gentlemen's agreements between drug manufacturers to not harsh anyone's vibe.

If we're lucky congress won't be bribed, I mean lobbied for the sake of safety, into criminalizing its importation.

you surely mean that both are ensemble models. RFs and GBMs differ in how they fit the data

ie when you cant beat them, make new metrics

and you can absolutely evaluate how smart someone is in a 2min casual conversation. You wont be able to tell how well they are in some niche topic, but %insert something about different flavors of intelligence and how they do not equate do subject matter expertise%

It’s a common pattern that AI benchmarks get too easy, so they make new ones that are harder.

levins work is great, except that afaik it hasnt been reproduced outside of his lab

this really depends who you are listening to, eg compare some archetypical bigroom corporate techno performer like Charlotte deWitte vs some crate digger like Om Unit, or since we talk about techno, uhm, Tommy Fourseven

im big on the UK continuum - it gets a lot of UK Bass music from boiler room sets - all the time. My music tastes are very obscure...and it works incredibly well for me. I dont know about techno/house.

continuous bioreactors are a pain to operate due to high risk of contamination, need for precise environment control and validation protocols. They have also been known for decades and are extensively used in process development. Despite all that most things are still produced in (fed)batch mode. So yeah thats still mostly marketing talk from ginkgo people, that are well-known for this kinda shit

moderation is the key

combine and synthesize the best of antifragility, postmodernism, dao te ching, science and what have you

this article made step #2 of thesis, antithesis, synthesis.

Doesn't anybody have a problem that the nature of their approach is first and foremost prohibition?

It would appear that the nature of their approach is first and foremost to ensure that any change they make is data-driven best practice for the situation at hand. In iceland, it included prohibition of purchase by minors and provision to minors by adults. More importantly, their changes created a situation where children were more likely to spend more of their time with adults who cared about them, in an active and engaged society. Curfews make me uncomfortable, but I can see that this encourages children to be in safe places overnight. Prohibition makes me uncomfortable, but it makes consumption more expensive and difficult, so child users will be less likely to become addicts. Widely available after-school classes and programs... have no downsides other than cost, which (it would seem) are clearly worth it.

Where does best practice lie? If I were to start a civilization from scratch, I think I would use this model as a strong data point when organizing how education and the laws pertaining to youth were concerned.

I have some more libertarian leanings than some of the implementations presented can accommodate, but perhaps if I were an Icelandic teen I would direct my frustrations on a hobby or class I picked up because my government mandated that I have access to it if I wanted to.