iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Yea, I don't think it's UB (compiler defined, perhaps), but leads to tricky semantics :).

000

But the keys are equivalent, right? At least via hash and the equality traits. That's a requirement for it to be the same key (value). Are you changing something in the key upon which equality doesn't depend?

100

Also, whole-body emergence is still physicalist emergence, just with a wider boundary. The content of our conscious experience is clearly shaped by our body, the mainstream working view is that consciousness depends on and arises from neural activity.

100

Also, the clinical dissociations point the other way. For example, high spinal cord injury and locked-in syndrome remove most bodily input and output, yet people stay fully conscious. Brainstem or thalamocortical damage, or anesthetics, abolish it. The brain looks necessary in a way muscles aren't.

200

I agree that the body matters. Interoception, inflammation, and gut signaling clearly shape mood, emotion, and sense of self. However, "demonstrates" overstates it. Influencing the contents of experience isn't the same as constituting consciousness.

210

Thanks for the info. That is useful to know!

000

I'm much more in favor of weighting "good" exposition in submissions than a blanket per-month cap. Of course, evaluating that (especially at scale), is hard. So it's not clear how to filter based on the quality of the exposition of the paper (or the quality of the paper itself).

100

There are. There are plenty of people who use AI as e.g. massively overpowered spell checkers. There is a range of "uses" of AI and they are not all the same nor are their impacts on the final product all the same. Either way...

100

Let's just hope that we figure out how to actually solve the problem in a long-term way 🤞

000

I mean, you can disagree, of course. But I don't think it does. I've certainly had students with 3 conference papers ready at the same time, and my lab definitely does not paper-max. This is *especially* true if their limit applies to "updates" (they haven't specified).

100

In a journal centric world (bio), a single author is unlikely to have 3 papers “ready” at once. In CS, in a conference heavy culture with maybe 2-3 conferences a year, a student may have truly bursty completion. I’d rather they be able to preprint that work when they submit, rather than delay it.

Perhaps both. For example, I think separating mainly human from mainly non human submissions is a better approach. Rate limiting can help stem the bleed though. But I think it must be done in a way that doesn’t punish the way things are done in one field more than the other.

Yes. I agree that this is MUCH less bad in the contex of how bio publications work. My biggest concern is if "updates" count against the limits. This the makes it difficult to keep preprints updates as one submits to subsequent conferences.

000

I don't see arXiv having an account here. I would actually like to know how updates of existing preprints are counted.

100

But I think this blunt instrument is a bad fit to handle that. OTOH, as I said in another thread, I'd dislike this much less if it was a 12/year (or even 6/year) cap rather than a 2/month cap. The cadence is at odds with how things operate in conference heavy fields.

100

A lot :). He does a lot of theory. He has many preprints that are a core idea, written up well, to get out for others to use and implement. This discourages those types of submissions, which I find valuable. IMO, the problem is tons of low quality submissions. That IS a problem!

210

Preprints are often submitted concurrently with conference submission. In a field with very few large conferences, this yields a bursty cadence. It's not the pubs per year, it's that it's assumed to be uniform over the whole year. 12/year (or even 6) is *far* better than 2/month.

000

Also, I don't see in the blog how they plan to handle updates to existing papers. Are those "free"?

No. But CS submissions are super bursty. My field has only 2 large conferences each year. And often, papers that are really good but miss one get recycled for the next. So they may have saved up 3 papers for a conference.

310

Also, I fear it won't be a "short-term" solution.

010

That's better than authors, but still a problem. What will authors like Travis Gagie or Gonzalo Navarro do when it's string algorithms conference season. Should they just not preprint their work? Should we move to blogs to disseminate results until they can fit in a submission cap limit?

What are they trying to limit? AI submissions? Then attack that directly. This is particularly a relevant topic to me as I'm now arguing for preprint overlays as an alternative to traditional (non professional society) journals for peer reviewed conference proceeding. Timed caps break that.

400

Longer term, I think we have to realize that we can't keep pretending that there exist numbers like number of papers, or citations, or h-index, or some other nonsense that are reasonable proxies for the "productivity" and "impact" of a scientist or researcher.

I don't agree this is a pragmatic response. What about arXiv overlays for conferences? One of our only real alternatives to the journal racket (when not run by professional societies). Many labs have >2 students. I think from the perspective of the CS model, this response is irresponsible.

210

This is a *bad* response. This is precisely how they usher in the end of the incredibly special thing they started. It is very disheartening to see this.

231

"It will one day be admitted with shame that it might have been in error to say that AIDS is bad, but not quite as bad as condoms are bad, or as immoral in the same way." --Cristopher Hitchens

000

I find its rust to be much better than its C++, all things considered.

100

I mean. It's not beautiful, but I find that its Rust is often not so bad. Perhaps that's because Rust has some very strong idioms that somewhat flatten variation?

100

COMBINE-lab - The skeptic’s guide to generative AI assisted coding

1000% : despite the pace of change, a main concern of mine is still the "widening gap" caveat I made in my post back in February combine-lab.github.io/blog/2026/02.... I think there is a very real risk that the better the models get, the larger the difference in how much previous experience matters.

combine-lab.github.io

COMBINE-lab develops algorithms, data structures, and software for high-throughput genomics.

042

Exactly. What would otherwise take weeks to iterate now takes minutes. I think that years of manually driving into walls (and seeing the subtlest of strange bugs) has prepared me to be sufficiently paranoid. Armed with that paranoia, the ability to iterate (and fix) fast is like a super power.

130

What a wild time to be developing new methods. The friction between having an idea and having a competent implementation of that idea (as long as you check the work!) has been brought down to almost 0. It's still kind of astonishing to see.

340

Childhood Cancer Data Lab @cancerdatalab.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

Opus 5.5: This library looks excellent, but the API isn't a good fit. I'll implement Meyers' bitpacked DP myself (30 seconds pass). It's only 3x faster than the alternative, let me add banding & SIMD (30 more seconds). We beat the competition by 13.5x on runtime. We'll return to optimization later.

280

Reposted by Rob Patro

Our Director, Jaclyn Taroni, is giving two talks on the Single-cell Pediatric Cancer Atlas (ScPCA) this month, each for a different audience. 🧵

121

Gemini 4 Argon: our next era of frontier intelligence

blog.google/innovation-a... "Large Scale Codebase Migrations and Optimizations: Argon agents are working on migrating C/C++ codebases to Rust across Google—scaling from tens of thousands of lines ... up to 800K+ lines for the Fuchsia OS Zircon kernel." You love to see it!

blog.google

Announcing Gemini 4 Argon, our frontier model for real-world coding, enterprise knowledge work, and cyber defense, rolling out soon.

0101

As a millennial, I can absolutely say that for US, it's "this is your brain on drugs".

Yes. The problem with having a written policy that differs from what one actually does is, unfortunately, a microcosm of the US right now. My federal government is an illigitimate mess. I don't want the same of my reddit communities 😭.

010

From the bioinformatics community on Reddit

Yes: under "advertising" www.reddit.com/r/bioinforma.... But that's the stated not the actual policy. In reality it's a neat blanket ban on methods. I posted about @curiouscoding.nl's tool (not a coauthor/contributor) and rejected. People post recent papers that aren't theirs; removed. It's dumb.

reddit.com

Explore this post and more from the bioinformatics community

100

The mod decided it (IMO arbitrarily). The policy is also not enforced uniformly. Nonetheless, the mods point people at the meager bioinformaticstools as the proper place for such posts. IMO, this eliminates the most useful category of posts from r/bioinformatics

100