Rioghasarig

6 ms·

1.
by Rioghasarig 1y ago
I really doubt it's like a "solid junior developer". If it could do the work of a solid junior developer it would be making programming projects 10-100x faster because it can do things several times faster than a person can.
2.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
I think it was deliberate but just as a joke.
3.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
This doesn't seem very helpful at all. First it seems impossibly difficult to execute and probably won't benefit the artists much.
4.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
>Not, if the worker is an engineer or similar. Some engineers built tools that improved building tools Those engineers consented to creating the new tools so that's different
5.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
How is it "technically correct"? It's just plain wrong.
6.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
Clearly pi = 0003.14159...
7.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
> You only see top programmers who started as kids and probably won some Olympiads and programming competitions, and this continued in their 20s and maybe kept their skill up till 30s but that's about it. What do they do after that?
8.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
How in the world is that disingenuous? That's the direct implication.
9.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
> As any generalization this one too is, of course, incorrect. His statement wasn't a generalization to repeating this back does not make sense.
10.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
I mean that's where the term came from, after all.
11.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
I think the description in the article was actually good. In particular, the part where they say: > This is the metaphor used to describe the unpredictability of chaotic systems:tiny uncertainties in the initial conditions of a system gr
12.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
Doesn't change the fact that it's a bad experiment. Anyone familiar with DALL-E would predict this result. He should have taken some time to understand what DALL-E can do and proposed an actually interesting experiment.
13.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
I think it's just a bad experiment. The author must have been truly ignorant about the capabilities and utilities of DALL-E if he thought this experiment would yield interesting results.
14.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
If he didn't deliberately to make DALL-E look bad than he did it out of ignorance of what DALL-E's strengths and weaknesses are. Your evaluation of what is "simple" and what is "more complex" aren't in lin
15.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
Well that's what mathematicians like to do.
16.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
My understanding of this situation is that they found a way to multiply 4x4 matrices that requires fewer multiplications than Strassen's . This implies that that can generalize to a way to multiply n x n matrices with a better theoreti
17.
by Rioghasarig 4y ago
You don't know that.
18.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
This guy was born to be a Nintendo hacker.
19.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
I don't see anything wrong with this situation. People who exhibit profit-seeking behavior (entrepreneurs) can make much more money than people don't exhibit profit-seeking behavior (PhD students). That sounds like a reasonable sy
20.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
> goal post moving You're being silly. The guy is explaining his perspective. He's explaining what he believes and why he believes it. He's not writing a thesis or constructing some logical argument. This isn't a deba
21.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
Even the smartest people can be wrong and it can take an outside perspective for them to realize this. This isn't an example of someone "fileting" another's argument. It's an example of two professionals have a conv
22.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
> His official IQ of 230 remains the highest officially measured IQ in the world. Terrence Tao doesn't have an official IQ. People like to make up numbers for smart people's IQs.
23.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
That's a pretty bold model for human cognition. It's not something you can just assume.
24.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
This article is missing so much. He keeps saying F# is the best but doesn't describe anything about the language. He discussed the criteria he was using but didn't say anything about how F# excels in these criteria. It feels more
25.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
Nah, man. This "we all did this" is just not true. Power is not equally distributed among people. A few people in charge of oil and gas companies have more power to affect the state of affairs than thousands of normal people. So,
26.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
Yes I was asserting that algorithms are by definition deterministic. But I guess you can technically consider non-deterministic algorithms but those aren't really relevant here. Computers don't behave non-deterministically. Every
27.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
I guess you're right. But I was trying to defend Valmar's statement which I still think is basically right in this context. Computers can't really implement non-deterministic algorithms.
28.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
Yeah the issue seems to be the concept of a "word" not being precisely defined. But I don't think that's a problem. I'd be concerned if the numbers were dramatically different but they're pretty close so there
29.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
>> To give an example, what if the algorithm is to generate the correct algorithm? That's not a description of an algorithm. You've stated a "problem". An algorithm, by definition, is an actual deterministic proced
30.
by Rioghasarig 5y ago
> This is the philosophical justification for why a (Turing) machine can calculate anything a human can (in fact, the same argument shows that a Turing machine can reproduce the behaviour of any physical system). I don't think this

More ›