I’m happy with what’s happening.

It never made sense to me that just because you drew a shitty picture of a mouse, somehow I’m no longer allowed to do that.

That also makes your comment unreadable, no idea what the definition of any word in your comment means anymore.

Can’t use a dictionary, those bastards try to get us to adopt their definitions.

This is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

Inability to communicate isn't what we observe because as I already stated, meaning is shared. Dictionaries are one way shared meaning can be developed, as are textbooks, software source codes, circuits, documentation, and any other artifact which links the observable with language. All of that being collectively labeled culture. The mass of which I analogized with inertia so as to avoid oversimplifications like yours.

My point is that one person's definition does not a culture, make. And that adoption of new word definitions is inherently a group cultural activity which requires time, effort, and the willingness of the group to participate. People must be convinced the change is an improvement on some axis. Dictation of a definition from on high is as likely to result in the word meaning the exact opposite in popular usage as not. Your comment seems to miss any understanding or acknowledgement that a language is a living thing, owned by the people who speak it, and useful for speaking about the things which matter most to them. That credible dictionaries generally don't accept words or definitions until widespread use can be demonstrated.

It seems like some of us really want human language to work like rule-based computer languages. Or think they already do. But all human languages come free with a human in the loop, not a rules engine.

Wait. They studied twins, removed accidents etc. But wouldn’t this lead to overestimation of heritability due to shared environment?

FTA: “We use mathematical modeling and analyses of twin cohorts raised together and apart”

So, take one cohort of twins raised together and see how well their life spans correlate.

Take another cohort of twins separated at or near birth and do the same.

Then, do some math magic with both to estimate heritability.

Yes but those aren’t random samples. Children not raised with their birth parents had different circumstances. As did children who got split up, and families adopting children is also a selection bias.

This is incorrect. Twin studies typically compare MZ twin similarity against (same sex, usually) DZ twin similarity. Assuming that there is nothing special about MZs for the trait (e.g. in this case if MZ twins lived longer by virtue of being MZ twins), you can estimate heritability free of shared environments.

The obvious problem you run into with twins raised apart is that there in fact aren't many twins who are raised apart.

From tfa

> We estimated uncorrected heritability (uncorrected for extrinsic mortality) (materials and methods) in three independent ways: (i) MZ twins reared apart (n = 150), (ii) DZ twins reared apart (n = 371), and (iii) MZ versus DZ twins reared together (196 MZ, 325 DZ)

This is from _one_ of the datasets they examined, but there were also two others. n=150 twins reared apart in their small category, or n=520 twins reared apart total is the lower bound of data they had, and even that is not too shabby imo

I don't have an opinion to offer here other than the intrinsic limitations of studies that depend on twins raised apart (that there aren't many of them). It's an unusual instance of a stat where the obvious concern with the premise is underappreciated rather than overappreciated. I've got nothing on MZ/DZ controls.

ah I see, you're commenting on the general difficulty, not necessarily saying this study's results are bad due to the limitation. My apologies, I don't think we disagree.

Yeah I’d take this study with a spoon of salt. As with many human studies, it’s hard to control for all factors.

Not non existent, but rare. And again the presumption was correct, the text was put through an LLM.

But that’s because of the water content of pineapple, so now we’re back at water..

Although pineapple flavoured floor heating does sound delicious.

Nice.

Do pfas next.

Affinity. GIMP. Just to name two.

Those were made long before LLMs, I was specifically asking for photoshop altenatives vibecoded in last 5 months.

Ah my bad, I misunderstood you then.

500 lines? Single files in that repo already have more than 500 lines.

I think it was just to get managers and product owners excited, so they get their companies to buy azure compute for AI.