Hi James, The elevator pitch has to be 90 degrees, no? Otherwise it would travel horizontally as well. Or, perhaps, we should petition these types of elevators to be added to building codes for large, multi-entrance buildings? Best, Nukri
On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 10:08 AM James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov> wrote: > For you, Eleanor? Of course! I look forward to it. > > But do you have an "elevator pitch"? > > I feel that a lively exchange of short messages conveys ideas much more > efficiently and effectively than an annual exchange of hyper-dense > documents. > > Cheers, > > -James Holton > MAD Scientist > > On 4/1/2024 6:27 AM, Eleanor Dodson wrote: > > It. Will probably take me a. Full year to draft the. Application - is > that too slow? > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 at 09:22, Frank Von Delft < > 0000bcb385fe5582-dmarc-requ...@jiscmail.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Oh dear, your prime number oversupply crashed the crypto Ponzi scheme >> market. Will you accept $10e2 proposals now? >> >> Sent from tiny silly touch screen >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov> >> *Sent:* Monday, 1 April 2024 08:01 >> *To:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK >> *Subject:* [ccp4bb] request for applications >> >> Hey Everyone, >> >> It may sound like an incredibly boring thing that there has never been a >> formal mathematical proof that finding the prime factors of very large >> numbers doesn't have a more efficient algorithm than simply trying every >> single one of them. Nevertheless, to this day, encryption keys and >> indeed blockchain-based cryptocurrencies hinge upon how computationally >> hard it is to find these large prime factors. And yet, no one has ever >> proven that there is not a more efficient way. >> >> It occurred to me recently that cryptocurrencies (blockchains) are >> nothing more than a sequence of numbers, and Large Language Models >> fundamentally take a sequence of "words" and predict the next one in the >> series. So, they seem naturally suited to the task of finding a more >> efficient way. I spent some of my free time trying my hand at this. >> There were some twists and turns along the way, but as of today it seems >> to be working. Predictions are now coming pretty fast. By the end of >> April 1, I expect to have ~ $1e12 USD on current ledgers. This may have >> certain socioeconomic ramifications, but that is not what I want to >> discuss here. What I want to discuss is how to use this new source of >> scientific funding! >> >> My question for the BB is: what would YOU do if you had $1e12 USD for >> your science? No non-scientific proposals please. There are plenty of >> other forums for those. This BB is about biological structural science, >> so please stay on-topic. OK? And now: suggestions! >> >> I am particularly interested in projects that can only be done with a >> large, cooperative $1e12 USD, but not by 10e6 independent and unrelated >> $100e3 projects. The Apollo moon missions, for example cost $300e9 >> (adjusted USD). On a smaller scale, re-doing the whole PDB from cloning >> and expression to crystallization and structure solution would only cost >> about $500e6 USD. That would finally give us a good database of >> crystallization conditions for training an AI to tell you, given a >> sequence, what the crystallization conditions (if any) will be. That >> might take a lot of computing power, but there is plenty left over to >> buy 10 zettaflops of computing power (and the solar panels needed to >> power it). Or, if we really want to just divide it up, that would be >> $10e6 for each of the ~1e5 people on this planet who fit into the >> category of "biological scientist". That's not just PIs, but postdocs, >> grad students, techs. Everybody. >> >> I'm sure this will solve a lot of problems, but not all of them. And, I >> like to get ahead of things. So, what are the non-financial problems >> that will remain? I think these are the most important problems in >> science: the intellectual and technological hurdles that money can't >> overcome. I'm hoping this will be an opportunity for all of us to focus >> on those. I know we're all not used to thinking on this scale, but, at >> least for today, let's give it a try! >> >> Looking forward to your applications, >> >> -James Holton >> MAD Scientist >> >> ######################################################################## >> >> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: >> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 >> >> This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a >> mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are >> available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov> >> *Sent:* Monday, 1 April 2024 08:01 >> *To:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK >> *Subject:* [ccp4bb] request for applications >> >> Hey Everyone, >> >> It may sound like an incredibly boring thing that there has never been a >> formal mathematical proof that finding the prime factors of very large >> numbers doesn't have a more efficient algorithm than simply trying every >> single one of them. Nevertheless, to this day, encryption keys and >> indeed blockchain-based cryptocurrencies hinge upon how computationally >> hard it is to find these large prime factors. And yet, no one has ever >> proven that there is not a more efficient way. >> >> It occurred to me recently that cryptocurrencies (blockchains) are >> nothing more than a sequence of numbers, and Large Language Models >> fundamentally take a sequence of "words" and predict the next one in the >> series. So, they seem naturally suited to the task of finding a more >> efficient way. I spent some of my free time trying my hand at this. >> There were some twists and turns along the way, but as of today it seems >> to be working. Predictions are now coming pretty fast. By the end of >> April 1, I expect to have ~ $1e12 USD on current ledgers. This may have >> certain socioeconomic ramifications, but that is not what I want to >> discuss here. What I want to discuss is how to use this new source of >> scientific funding! >> >> My question for the BB is: what would YOU do if you had $1e12 USD for >> your science? No non-scientific proposals please. There are plenty of >> other forums for those. This BB is about biological structural science, >> so please stay on-topic. OK? And now: suggestions! >> >> I am particularly interested in projects that can only be done with a >> large, cooperative $1e12 USD, but not by 10e6 independent and unrelated >> $100e3 projects. The Apollo moon missions, for example cost $300e9 >> (adjusted USD). On a smaller scale, re-doing the whole PDB from cloning >> and expression to crystallization and structure solution would only cost >> about $500e6 USD. That would finally give us a good database of >> crystallization conditions for training an AI to tell you, given a >> sequence, what the crystallization conditions (if any) will be. That >> might take a lot of computing power, but there is plenty left over to >> buy 10 zettaflops of computing power (and the solar panels needed to >> power it). Or, if we really want to just divide it up, that would be >> $10e6 for each of the ~1e5 people on this planet who fit into the >> category of "biological scientist". That's not just PIs, but postdocs, >> grad students, techs. Everybody. >> >> I'm sure this will solve a lot of problems, but not all of them. And, I >> like to get ahead of things. So, what are the non-financial problems >> that will remain? I think these are the most important problems in >> science: the intellectual and technological hurdles that money can't >> overcome. I'm hoping this will be an opportunity for all of us to focus >> on those. I know we're all not used to thinking on this scale, but, at >> least for today, let's give it a try! >> >> Looking forward to your applications, >> >> -James Holton >> MAD Scientist >> >> ######################################################################## >> >> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: >> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 >> >> This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a >> mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are >> available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: >> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 >> > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
