Rahul Siddharthan
LightNews LightNews
rsidd120.bsky.social
Rahul Siddharthan
@rsidd120.bsky.social
770 followers 1.4K following 97 posts
Computational biology at IMSc Chennai. Regulatory genomics, chromatin, evolution, ML and health.
Posts Replies Media Videos
rsidd120.bsky.social
Spotted in Paris. Wish it was a real book (maybe a bande dessinée of the Beatles?)
May 20, 2025 at 5:03 PM
rsidd120.bsky.social
Before taking a week off social media, let me add some points
8. The winners from the chaos and destruction in US defence, security and intelligence departments are Beijing and Moscow
9. Musk has significant business ties with China
10. (repeating 6) Musk was not elected
Scott Adam's list of the worst takes on DOGE which allegedly reveal your business inexperience
February 25, 2025 at 4:52 AM
rsidd120.bsky.social
With all Trump's talk of annexing Canada, I'm surprised this 2004 meme hasn't showed up very much (cf en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusla...)
February 2, 2025 at 5:38 PM
rsidd120.bsky.social
At the restaurant
January 1, 2025 at 3:25 PM
rsidd120.bsky.social
Happy new year, from peaceful Yercaud
Photo of my laptop on my lap, with dog and Yercaud retreat in background
January 1, 2025 at 6:05 AM
rsidd120.bsky.social
I was beginning to worry. So I asked ChatGPT
I asked ChatGPT: Is Bluesky subject to enshittification? It answered: "Enshittification," a term coined by tech critic Cory Doctorow, describes the process by which platforms start out serving users well, then prioritize other stakeholders (like advertisers or investors), ultimately degrading the user experience to maximize profits. Whether Bluesky is subject to this dynamic depends on its structure, incentives, and governance model. [much detail beyond character limit] Conclusion Bluesky's decentralized architecture gives it some inherent defenses against enshittification, but it’s not immune. Long-term success will depend on whether its governance structures resist the pull of profit maximization at users' expense and maintain alignment with its original values.
December 14, 2024 at 6:01 PM
rsidd120.bsky.social
Hardy would have agreed: he "should have expected the very simple point which I wish to make to have been familiar to biologists. However... " (from wiki)
To the Editor of Science: I am reluctant to intrude in a discussion concerning matters of which I have no expert knowledge, and I should have expected the very simple point which I wish to make to have been familiar to biologists. However, some remarks of Mr. Udny Yule, to which Mr. R. C. Punnett has called my attention, suggest that it may still be worth making... Suppose that Aa is a pair of Mendelian characters, A being dominant, and that in any given generation the number of pure dominants (AA), heterozygotes (Aa), and pure recessives (aa) are as p:2q:r. Finally, suppose that the numbers are fairly large, so that mating may be regarded as random, that the sexes are evenly distributed among the three varieties, and that all are equally fertile. A little mathematics of the multiplication-table type is enough to show that in the next generation the numbers will be as (p + q)2:2(p + q)(q + r):(q + r)2, or as p1:2q1:r1, say. The interesting question is: in what circumstances will this distribution be the same as that in the generation before? It is easy to see that the condition for this is q2 = pr. And since q12 = p1r1, whatever the values of p, q, and r may be, the distribution will in any case continue unchanged after the second generation
November 16, 2024 at 2:01 PM