Lean or it didn't happen.

I'm using very little AI, mostly as a replacement of Stack Overflow. I never remember if in Python I must type users.sort, or users.sorted or users.sorted() or whatever is the magic spell to sort them by family name instead of first name.

> 3mo ago, I was a prompt enginneer, who specialized in XML prompts (& completed HTML, CSS, JS, Tailwind).

What is a "prompt engineer"? I imagine it is someone that writes to an AI so the AI does the work, but that makes no sense. Are you a "software engineer" writing web pages with html and javascript?

They don't want to be nuked again.

I prefer to call them PDF instead of papers and preprints :)

Anyway, like 1/3 or 1/2 have a Lean proof and I guess they are absolutely right. The other is more complicated. I guess most are right too, but there may be surprises.

AI is better than me in short and well specified problems, like IMO or research problems with a solution of 3 or 4 pages. For longer problems or fuzzy objectives, I've seen AI making mistakes or misleading conclusions.

>> proofs, which are easily counted by academic administrators, were only ever a proxy.

That's the real problem. Papers published in serious peer review journals is an easy metric, so everybody adopted it, in spite it's not easy at all.

Anyway, it's strange that nobody is talking about applied math. People in other arrea care about the results (and perhaps the hypothesis to verify before using it), not about how mathematicians keep the score.

> I claimed we provide guaranteed weight loss or gain results within 2–3 weeks without GLPs

What is the guaranty? Do you give the money back? It makes the post even more suspicious. Try to avoid infomercial tone here or it will make people even more suspictious.

You also can claim whatever you like. Do you have any proof? Reviews and testimonials are not reliable. I assume in general that all of them are fake, in spite your may be real or not.

> Why are so many people on Hacker News hellbent on boosting GLPs as a cure for all weight loss?

There is a lot of evidence that GLP work published in well known sources. See https://www.who.int/news/item/01-12-2025-who-issues-global-g... Where is yours?

(In the last month or so, there are a lot of new reports where GLP also cure other diseases. I'm very suspicious about them.)

Also, I'm not sure what is the difference with other apps. What does it do? It's like a calorie counter but it interpolates the calories when the user forgets to enter them?

Also as the main article explain, to get the effect the concentration must be quite high, like a 5% solution for 12 hours. That's like 50x the concentration of tartrazine in fake orange juice, that is probably dangerous to drink or take a bath.

> It is a hygroscopic compound with a high solubility in water and minimal reactivity. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has concluded that this molecule exhibits no adverse effects or systemic toxicity at doses up to 2 g per kilogram of body weight (14). As a result, it is widely used as an artificial food dye in products such as flavored chips (for example, Doritos).

Midjourney: (Is that a cat?) All of them look very poor and dirty. I don't want to claim everybody here is rich, but it looks like the images after a disaster and I'm not sure they are very stereotypical.

Grok: She is cute, but I'm not sure she is from Argentina. He looks right, but the style of carrying the vacuum flask is a little more Uruguayan.

GPT: She looks like an influencer, a little meme heavy but plausible. He looks like a collage of a 5 years old for school where the kid has to paste every single national stereotype, I'll add a small picture of Kempes+Maradona+Messi just to go to 12 level.

Gemini: In both case the idea and composition is right, but there is something weird with the texture, like if they were photos taken with a 1990 camera instead of a 2020 phone.

I all cases, they look like photos taken in Buenos Aires (city) and the gaucho looks like a gaucho of Buenos Aires (province). It's the biggest city, so it's probably fine for "stereotypical".

PS: You have no favicon.

> This isn't flying, it's falling with style.

It's very complicated to compare, because they use other sugars and there are a thousand of details that are important, like how long are branchy the molecules are, and also a million of details that are above my chemistry knodledge level.

As a persomal prefference, I'd call that jelly instead of ice cream. (And in a bad day that I want to lie a little just to be mean, I'd call them a piece of cake.)

Even if a person manually wrote a paper and 10 person manalluy reviewed it, it is possible that all 11 of them made a mistake.

[1] https://thisismold.com/uncategorized/the-science-behind-the-...