I think the part that stinks is all the dead skin sticking to the hair and all the skin oils and bacteria accumulating on that mass.

You can do the protein powder first. Just make sure that when you pour in the water, it stays on top of the protein and doesn’t seep through to the bottom. Then flip the bottle over, shake it (without flipping) until all the powder unsticks from the bottom, then proceed to shake normally.

Alternatively, fill the bottle with about an inch of water, add the powder, then fill the rest of the way with water and shake normally.

The problem with water first is that you can’t stick the scoop into the bottle and protein powder flies off everywhere.

It’s important for sure. It just so happens to also be one of those things that are very easy to verify but hard to do, which is what makes it perfect for automation.

The other nice thing about letting AI do naming is that these are names that are very statistically likely given the context. That means it’s more likely to be understood by others. If I come up with something myself, it might make sense to me, but it might not to someone else reading the code. I think this is especially important when you’re working in your own little bubble and don’t get many eyes on your code.

Much faster to skim the contents of an article than a video.

Probably not. But have you considered one male authority figure and a cohort of female underlings?

If you’re still interested in this, CVPR recently made the rule explicit for the upcoming conference.

If they do not serve in another capacity for the organization of CVPR 2025, all authors are obliged to act as reviewers

https://cvpr.thecvf.com/Conferences/2025/CVPRChanges

I’m working on making robots do useful things. I think that’s fairly easy for most people to understand.

Well, if that’s how it worked before, they must’ve changed it. I installed it last night without paying and it never blocked me.

Are you talking about DeArrow? The website gives you the option to pay or just download without paying.

Rules for thee, but not for me

I’ve heard a lot about the Rwandan genocide, but this is my first time hearing of OP’s thing. It’s more interesting to read about something novel, which is probably why you see more of this being shared.

Or “I thought you guys might find this interesting”

Wherever I see weird things in a dream and I’m lucid enough to notice, I just panic thinking that something’s wrong with my brain, followed by doing anything I can to get to a hospital.

Not just the mental strain of syntax, but also variable naming, which I find to be a much bigger hurdle. Copilot will nearly always give you a “good enough” name so you can just move on to solve the actual problem. You can always come back to rename it if necessary.

So what are these sentient dots? I keep seeing them everywhere, but no one else around me does. This is the first time I’ve seen anyone else acknowledge their existence.

Ah, yes. I just wasn’t clear on whether you wanted to know more about the publication venues or about the value of publishers or something else.

In AI, we normally publish in conferences rather than journals. Some of the big ones are

• Neurips
• ICML
• ICLR
• AAAI

There is a new journal I know of (TMLR) that’s becoming a bit more popular in these circles, but I believe they rely solely on volunteers to review rather than asking those who submit papers.

Links to what?

I don’t know about other fields, but we did do this for AI. It’s all community-run, papers are freely available for everyone to read, and the cost of submission in a peer-reviewed venue is to review other papers. The publishers don’t actually provide anything of value except name recognition and being “reputable”, which they maintain through momentum.

Academic Authors: $0

FAKE NEWS

This should be in the negatives. We have to pay to get papers published in these traditional journals.