Ironically, you've picked an example (Artemisinin) which is discussed at some length in the linked article - as an example where TCM success is overstated and not backed up by real-world results!
See P5-6 in section "The implausibility problem" - which points out that in order for the treatment to be effective it had to be refined into a form that is not rapidly eliminated from the body.
That's an extremely silly objection when (a) artemisinin is effective as a standalone drug if you administer it frequently enough, (b) the discovery of artemisinin and its derivatives in malaria treatment was quite literally inspired by TCM, and (c) most natural products are modified prior to use in pharmaceutical industry, and artemisinin is particularly lightly modified. (Just given a simple ester in artesunate's case.)
Why should we take TCM any more seriously than traditional western? Do we still boil bark for a headache? Of course not, especially when it comes with so many tannins you get a stomach ache instead?
When you have thousands of years of people writing down their folk cures, sooner or later somebody will be right.
>Why should we take TCM any more seriously than traditional western?
Wasn't the entire idea behind evidence-based medicine to start putting traditional western treatments to the test and check if they actually work? I think we do take traditional western methods quite seriously, and we should do the same with TCM.
With regard to your bark example, right here in the thread someone points out: "E.g. willow bark was used to treat pain for thousands of years, which led to the discovery of aspirin."
I'm not sure if you intentionally missed my points (because the relation between willow tree bark and aspirin is common knowledge in my experience), or there's just a gap I don't know how to bridge...
But no, at a normal conversational level- most the people around me (American midwest) would wait for the rest of the joke if I said I was going to the apothecary to get something for my headache.
One additional fact to keep in mind - the ability to smell hydrogen cyanide has a genetic component and 1 in 4 people will not be able to smell the "bitter almond" odour [1].
I do wonder how similar the smell of sweet and bitter almonds are, they are apparently different [2].
Without comment on the question of health benefits or harms, I'm curious whether you've had the well water you use tested. Fluoride concentrations in bore-well water varies quite widely, and concentrations higher than fluoridated tap water not uncommon. There are several areas here (in Aus) where fluoride is removed to reach the recommended concentration of 0.5-1.1 ppm. This obviously varies based on location.
One of the coolest revelations to me, just looking at the status page [1] is that the Wii only had 88 MB of RAM - split between 24 MB built in to the SoC and 64 MB of GDDR3.
Given that this is the case, ntpd using 15% of the system memory means it was using about 13 MB of RAM - hardly a huge chunk by today's standards but not small either. I wonder if reducing the number of time servers would improve this much? On my system I can see I'm tracking about 9 servers from the debian pool.
Compare this to the XBox 360 which even at the time had 512 MB, it's really amazing how much they managed to squeeze out of such a tiny chip.
I'm thinking back to my first NetBSD boxes in 1995 which must have run in 4-8MB RAM and ran a mail server, a webmail server I wrote, and multiple users logging in to play MUDs and sit on IRC.
Raspberry Pi's RP2350 microcontroller introduced a multitude of new hardware security features over the RP2040, and included a Hacking Challenge which began at DEF CON to encourage researchers to find bugs. The challenge has been defeated and the chip is indeed vulnerable (in at least one way). This talk will cover the process of discovering this vulnerability, the method of exploiting it, and avenues for deducing more about the relevant low-level hardware behavior.
The RP2350 security architecture involves several interconnected mechanisms which together provide authentication of code running on the chip, protected one-time-programmable storage, fine-grained control of debug features, and so on. An antifuse-based OTP memory serves as the root of trust of the system, and informs the configuration of ARM TrustZone as well as additional attack mitigations such as glitch detectors. Raspberry Pi even constructs an impressive, bespoke Redundancy Coprocessor (RCP), which hardens execution of boot ROM code on the Cortex-M33 cores with stack protection, data validation, and instruction latency randomization.
Since there are many potential incorrect guesses to be made about where problems might lie, here I begin with the most fundamental features of the chip logic, including the reset process. Even small oversights at this level can entirely defeat sophisticated security efforts if higher-level mechanisms place complete trust in seemingly simple hardware operations. I show how cursory research into the design details of IP blocks used in the SoC can help inform an attack, and demonstrate the importance of fully testing new features which are built atop older IP. Ultimately, the significant amount of luck (or lack thereof) involved is a reminder of the need to meticulously understand and validate complex systems.
Encryption is mandated for data at rest and data in transit. There is a provision for encryption of data in use when homomorphic encryption becomes feasible, but the loophole referenced in the title is that it is not required now.
So ChatGPT didn't correctly summarize the text at all, this article does not talk about ethics at all, doesn't talk about potential uses and I would consider the statement about capturing context and incorporating knowledge from a wide range of sources to be a pretty poor summary of the text.
In fact I think that's a great example of exactly what is actually discussed, namely that the context that ChatGPT is able to hold is limited as it's context is held completely in its input. There is never any modification to it's internal state, we're just passing a longer input vector in to the start of the GPT-3 black box. For long inputs the embedding vector becomes more and more sparse and it needs to make more assumptions to fill in it's output.
Worth noting that the material is not conductive or otherwise metallic in any way. In a lot of ways this material is similar to Alumina (Sapphire) which you could also describe as "Transparent Aluminum".
It's also highly brittle, with a fracture toughness of 2 MPa.m1/2 -- which makes it only marginally tougher than borosilicate glass, and broadly equivalent to many brittle ceramics such as silicon carbide.
6061 aluminum has a fracture toughness of roughly 29 MPa.m1/2.
So "transparent aluminum" exhibits fracture behavior that is much more glass-like than aluminum-like.
While your point stands - it's worth pointing out that this bug was NOT caused by an update [1], but seems to have been a long-standing bug in the HTTP3 stack that was triggered due to some external site (including apparently Mozilla's telemetry provider) that changed their stack.
See P5-6 in section "The implausibility problem" - which points out that in order for the treatment to be effective it had to be refined into a form that is not rapidly eliminated from the body.