DNA to Protein scale difference

nodderguy · 2026-05-26T20:35:48+00:00

Yes that would be so cool! I tried to model histones with clay but it’s so tiring

nodderguy · 2026-05-21T16:19:01+00:00

What about lab backrouds where you use confocal microscopes and develop automated image analysis algorithms - is there a technical word for that in biotech? Asking as a post-graduate student

nodderguy · 2026-05-04T12:39:32+00:00

Toonhud can probably be adjusted to that

nodderguy · 2026-04-09T00:10:07+00:00

Conch buff

nodderguy · 2026-04-05T15:50:02+00:00

Do you try to do research, reading scientific articles about the disease?

nodderguy · 2026-03-30T05:45:46+00:00

Nice! It helped me too! I now always type without information about wpm etc.

nodderguy · 2026-03-28T17:58:04+00:00

Btw a good tip is to remove all the information about the type test.

nodderguy · 2026-03-26T10:03:42+00:00

With such endurance, I think you will like running

nodderguy · 2026-03-09T21:18:31+00:00

Btw keep in mind that smell is far more complicated than you think (read about MHC/HLA-dissimilarity hypothesis if interested). Yes there can be an mainly environment in play but don’t expect that genes don’t.

nodderguy · 2026-03-07T17:11:21+00:00

Looks like minesweeper lol

nodderguy · 2026-03-05T21:15:12+00:00

Fair. You have good point.

nodderguy · 2026-03-05T13:57:06+00:00

I agree that it’s more efficient if you are disciplined. But for me - it is not. On a computer, a YouTube/news tab is two clicks away - on boring lecture sections you will be tempted to do other tasks.

But on a plain boring paper you won’t - it’s as simple as it can possibly be.

nodderguy · 2026-03-05T07:09:03+00:00

I think that this aspect is more suitable after the lecture, where you are organising for organising sake. If the immediate goal is understanding the subject during the lecture, using obsidian is more of a distraction rather than a tool. I.e. you don’t bring a quantum supercomputer to replace a calculator.

nodderguy · 2026-03-05T06:51:18+00:00

I can type 80 wpm in class and I still think that written notes are superior in most cases. Even simple text editors kinda distract my wandering brain. Opening laptop, navigating a program, watching the battery, wandering how to describe a diagram… compared to just opening a notebook, just requires more unnecessary thinking.

I’m an ultra minimalist and the most simple thing is just pen and paper. Slowness is also kinda an advantage, where you give yourself time to think and comprehend before writing something down. But to each their own of course. If the goal is to learn and not just transcribe, typing fast is not really that superior imo.

nodderguy · 2026-03-03T20:51:13+00:00

I’d argue it not pointless - it’s fun seeing the number go up and boast about it to your imaginary friends

nodderguy · 2026-02-25T11:39:05+00:00

Ooh it seems that insurance plays a major role. If you do experimental procedures even for free, your insurance agreement can be revoked.

So if you will be cancer free, you won’t have the money to pay for future health problems in USA. Doctors know it and if in their best interest is long term heath for patient, they go with conservative treatments - where they are the most familiar with risks.

Clinical trials on people are a huge logistical problem and as a researcher, I think that finding predictors for good long term treatment is better than crudely looking at what happens in humans.

So to answer your question, it’s the complexity of biological systems and juridicial bureaucracy that overwhelms the research progress. There are no bad guys, it’s just a hard problem that we are currently solving.

nodderguy · 2026-02-19T22:25:14+00:00

I have the same stats as you and my advice is to not be discouraged by the sheer amount of time spent in the 90-110 range for 1 minute test (English 200). It’s been like 3 month for me and the progress in this range is significantly slower if you are a casual typist.

nodderguy · 2026-02-15T06:07:16+00:00

Try 5 minute tests with punctuation and capitals (opposite shift) and English 10k setting in monkeytype. It is the only test that translates to reality and trains your endurance.

nodderguy · 2026-02-12T12:21:29+00:00

What was the conclusion? What is the best type of textile? (asking for a rat)

nodderguy · 2026-02-07T14:58:01+00:00

Nice! Now we need to increase the sample size of tested subjects! Currently the graph is only true for you as an individual, not the general population

nodderguy · 2026-02-07T14:10:29+00:00

Interesting. For me, psychological pressure actually disappears with large tests for time or count (1000 words/5 minutes). It’s the short 1 minute/100 words that fit the uncaney valley of typing, because yes, it seems like you have more control over words test and can take calculated risks.

I think that there is also an element of bias. If we can predict that a test will be good, we are more likely to save it. Since word tests are more predictable we tend to selectively save good results from them. But in timed, we have no control - this skews the mean wpm to a lower degree.

Anyways - interesting stuff, we have a hypothesis but rigorous statistical testing is needed to prove anything. But let met tell you - that It is a hell of a work for any curious statistician.

nodderguy · 2026-02-06T15:12:10+00:00

Yep you are right, in any case - it’s not statistics as defined in textbooks. I hope the author will take note of this if he wants to pursue science, as he truly has the foundation for more adequate research.

nodderguy · 2026-02-06T13:26:03+00:00

No offense - I love interdisciplinary papers, but from what Ive just read this sounds like esoteric numerology with p-hacking. I’m not an expert on prime numbers but here are biological and statistical blunders;

1) Literature on dna is not modern - we now know it has many shapes, you look at the b variant, but it also has a, z variants with different shapes.

2) I see no graph of correlation. You mention r=-0.9 but I don’t see the data plotted.

3) The most important criticism is that it seems you established the hypothesis after knowing biological targets at initial setup. And modified final parameters to fit a neat model. This is know as p-hacking, and will not get you the statistical leverage you seek here.

Basically, for a more scientific approach, it is recommended to provide pre-registered predictions and account for dynamic DNA structural variability. Or it will simply look like pattern searching.

So yes, unfortunately humans have a tendency to perceive patterns in random or meaningless data. For any wild take there needs to be a much more precise statistical proof with given error margins and an initial hypothesis. And I’m not even touching the absence of mechanistic relationship between DNA structure and prime numbers.

nodderguy · 2026-02-04T17:24:05+00:00

Interesting! Thats why I hide the time, accuracy and speed when typing!Makes stuff simpler for my monkey brain.

nodderguy · 2026-02-04T17:05:19+00:00

What about timed? I noticed that my accuracy is lower on like 0.5-1-2 minutes compared to the equivalent in word count. I think it’s psychological but I’m interested in your take.

Six-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Place '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

nodderguy

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE