RISC-V is a family of instruction sets (which have various chips implementing them). Think "X86-64". It looks like the baochip-1x is using the VexRiscv CPU. The HDL is available here under MIT: https://github.com/SpinalHDL/VexRiscv

Thanks - so that one is MIT licensed. Is that the license for all RISC-V, ie ISA plus actual silicon designs?

To clarify - RISC-V is an architecture, and that is an open specification. However, as an architecture it only specifies things like, what the instructions are and their encodings. It doesn't actually give you a CPU that does anything, just an abstraction of how to describe a CPU to a common standard.

Anyone is permitted to implement a RISC-V CPU, which would then involve coding something up in an RTL. The resulting RTL artifact may be open or closed source depending upon the developer's preference. In the case of the Vexriscv, that particular one implementation is MIT licensed. There are other implementations that also have MIT licenses, but because it is up to the core's implementer to pick a license, not all RISC-V cores are open source.

In fact, some of the most commercially successful RISC-V cores are closed source licensed.

It is much like a game might use a physics engine, or a new language might use the LLVM backend. To overly simplify, a CAD kernel will keep a list of operations (make a cube of this size here, drill a hole of this depth here, round these edges but not those). And combine that into a final volume. These responsibilities only get more and more complex as a part gets more complex - so using a pre-built engine allows CAD software to focus on tools and workflows to translate human instructions into lower-layer kernel geometry: the UI/UX. It also crosses into compatibility, if you use the same Kernel as another CAD it is much simpler to export/import from them. Otherwise you would have to reimplement their kernel (or enough of it), or be stuck exporting triangulated versions of the final volume - sort of like converting an image from vector to raster.

We even use aluminium on "dumb" transformers for power transmission. Dry-type transformers tend to be physically larger because they use air and resin (rather than a tank of oil) to insulate, and so the major downside to aluminium conductors (needing a larger cross-section to carry the same current for the same loss) is no longer a limiting factor performance-wise. In most substations, and extra 20-30% physical size of the transformer is a fine trade-off for cheaper construction.

I think the issue might stem from the fact that (as I read it) the essay is talking about "for the people who are moderate (in the middle of the left/right axis), some are distributed higher on your graph, while some are lower". Which says nothing about "for the people who are distributed higher on the graph, how many are in the middle of the left/right axis". Your graph makes explicit an answer to the second question which the essay avoids. (There is a bit of an implication in the last two paragraphs, but PG is explicit it's only about people he knows).

> A well-actually is when you correct someone about something that’s not relevant to the conversation or tangential to what they’re trying to say.

So, as long as the conversation is about the colour of the sky, (or about green things) you can just answer it.

Well actually, credibility is lost from the entire conversation for everyone if “well actually’s” aren’t allowed.

I missed it on the first read-through but there is a link to the code used to run the simulations in the first appendix.

Homegrown python code (i.e. not a library), very nicely laid out. And would form a good basis for more experiments for anyone interested. I think I'll have a play around later and try and train my intuition.

This Vimcast (http://vimcasts.org/episodes/converting-markdown-to-structur...) recording is an example of a quite complex macro for converting (a specific file's) markdown to HTML. At the beginning of the video you see that they save the macro to the "a" register. You can record macros of similar complexity to each of the other letters of the alphabet, to get some idea of the maximum complexity (though I tend to stick to about 3 or less in a single session).

If anyone is wondering where 2.08 comes from like me. First we consider the case with no GST, where the gross-up multiplier is x1.8868 ($1887). This is the pre-tax earnings at 47% required to get a post-tax benefit of $1000. i.e. $1887 x (1-47%) = $1000. With some algebra and setting the top marginal tax rate to R, and the Gross-up to G: G=1/(1-R). The idea is the Government gets its cut either way, there is no tax benefit (for employees in the highest bracket, and actually a net loss for employees not in that bracket).

If the employer can claim back GST (currently 10%) on the original purchase, the formula for G becomes G=1/(1-R)+(1/11)/R. To account for the extra 10%/110% that the employer can claim back.

I'd argue that the steelman position might be: "Understand the treatment dynamics". Treating a linear-response in the vitamin deficiency case with a binary threshold, and treating the bifurcation point in exponential battles (infection, cancer) as linear are the same class of error (just in opposite directions).

Still as another response noted, almost all of the examples are success stories of medical science, so I don't know if there is a wider point of "medical science/practice is slow to notice these nuances" or if it is just a collection of cool examples of "hey: sometimes doing a single treatment MOAR/multiple treatments simultaneously has a counter-intuative result, isn't that neat."

I've heard "pixels" used generically to refer to the bundle of tracking code from a particular vendor in the marketing department at work. e.g. "Have you enabled the Facebook pixel?" means have you embedded the JavaScript snippet (usually with a fallback 1x1 pixel) that Facebook provides for tracking.