I think the bigger idea behind this research, which was not mentioned, is the fact that the pointing of the the multiple beams directed by the transducer can not only be used to heat up a specific point inside the body (which in their example was an "ink" that was used for creating 3D structures well below the tissue), but the fact that this could be used for things like removal of plaques, blockages, destruction of fat/lipid cells in vivo... So things like stents and angioplasty's which are currently used to open up clogged arteries in cardiac patients to prevent heart attacks, could be done in vivo, the same way they are describing in the article, but without the need to use an "ink"... So this technology definitely has multiple uses. It could also be used to target plaques in brain tissue embedded deep in the brain to directly remove amyloid plaques to treat dementia, depression, etc patients...Obviously also used to target tumor cells anywhere inside the body without using chemotherapy/radiation.
this reminds me of Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) - a treatment of cancer using X-ray beams.
because a single beam damages both healthy and cancer tissue alike (and goes through entire body like jedi's lightsaber), IMRT creates many many low dosage beams around the body from different angles.
As a result, most of healthy tissue that surrounds tumor gets exposed to a minimum radiation, but cancerous tissue accumulates required x-ray exposure from many small beams.
That is interesting, but where does it come from? It's not in the OP or in the research paper, at least not in the summary, abstract, or conclusion, or in other parts I skimmed.
Even as just a meme, no-hole surgery and the technology that makes it possible may have sufficient potential to perform a valid service to medical research simply by sparking the imagination of students: reduced invasiveness is a time-honoured aim in surgical procedures, so taking it to the next (or ultimate) level does look like it's worth encouraging: a key question to some extent becomes one of language: do we still call it surgery when nothing constituting an incision is involved? Yes, we make a (very small) hole when we inject the 'ink', but injections are never referred to as being surgery. So if no-hole surgery is not a type of surgery, then what the heck kind of thing should we call it?
Has anyone heard or seen it used anywhere? I was in-house when it launched to big fanfare by upper management and the vast majority of the company was tasked to create team projects utilizing Watsonm
Watson was a pre-LLM technology, an evolution of IBM's experience with the expert systems which they believed would rule the roost in AI -- until transformers blew all that away.
i never understood, even 15 years ago, why people still use vmware when so many open source (i.e. virtualbox) systems existed at the time. The fact that Broadcom buys it out and then 10x the price on people is just even more reason to move to open source. As noted in the article, the open source solutions are 2x faster anyway, so they customers can realize a 2x increase in slices per server.
The ones staying with VMware, permanently or near term, are likely using products for which there are not good replacements. The open source alternatives can do what ESXi does sure, but its progressively more difficult to replicate VSAN (including stretched clusters) and NSX-T (with distributed firewalling) without bringing in multiple vendors that will all point at each other when there is a problem.
There are some open source options that come close to what vmware's offerings could do, but virtualbox for sure ain't that. It has an extremely limited feature set compared to other offerings in this space. For example, it is mainly intended to manage VMs on a single host. Most organizations looking at commercial offerings have multiple hosts (or racks, or even datacenters) they want to manage. Apples are much more similar to oranges than vmware is to virtualbox.
I can't speak to your buggy claim since I don't know which feature you are complaining about, and if it's part of the extensions then the "many eyes, shallow bugs" does not apply
I'm not a genius but it seems pretty trivial to take the input from a microphone and pipe it to the output of a speaker, the hardest part probably is the device drivers for the airpods (or any bluetooth ear buds for that matter). It looks like others have already done this in hardware [0] for $84.99 on amazon.com. There is also "Sound Amplifier" app for Apple iPhone [1] that amplifies the surrounding voice near the phone.
It sounds like they also do multiband compression (hearing protection) and multiband transparency/cancelling mixing (adaptive mode) on top of applying EQ (audiogram support) and things like accelerometer and wideband tracking for spatial audio.
There's quite a bit of processing going on on-device.
It’s really not that simple. AirPods settings where you can tune audio for vocal range, balanced tone, brightness or your audiogram - which does much more fine tuning to the sounds you hear than just amplification.
Although I like the article, the author doesnt acknowledge the current way that (I think) most people are utilizing llama.cpp at this point. ollama.com has simplified his work into two lines:
Wait.. there is one binary that executes just fine on half a dozen platforms? What wizardry is this?
edit: Their default LLM worked great on Windows. Fast inference on my 2080ti. You have to pass "-ngl 9999" to offload onto GPU or it runs on CPU. It is multi-modal too.
It looks like Apple's claims were related to the charging of the watch itself... Which brings me to my question of why not use standard USB Type-C charging ports instead of some proprietary charging method? It seems like from the very beginning it is a poor choice, on both parties, to charge a device using a non-standard charging device.
It makes sense to have wearables like watches and smart rings charge via wireless inductive charging, because the physical space of even a USB-C port inside a watch is quite limiting for the electronics that can be placed inside the watch, and physically wouldn't fit inside of a ring.
Wireless inductive charging also allows for a (more) sealed case design, which is helpful for a device that will almost certainly encounter moisture in normal use cases.
I can keep my phone somewhere dry when it's raining, I've never thought to take off my watch when it rains.
you can buy tirzepatide / semaglutide all day long from labs in china for between $4 per injection all the way down to $0.50 per injection depending on quantity and type (prepackaged in vial vs raw powder)
After tirzepatide was taken off the shortage list last week, I notice that there are suddenly a lot more people talking about this route. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Probably exceeds my comfort level, and I'm lucky enough that I can pay the $550/month for name brand if necessary. A lot of people will just have to stop, though, and deal with the consequences.
I like the idea of restricting the time time frame duration of watching movies. I would suggest adding a electric zapper to the couch that when they try to watch movies past a certain time they get zapped at a certain voltage eliciting a negative response.
Do you have boys? I guarantee you all mine would do is run out the clock and then he and his friend would try to push each other’s faces into the electrodes.
