tadala

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   Everyone wants to use less compute to fit more in, but (obviously?) the solution will be to use more compute and fit less. Attention isn't (topologically) attentive enough. All these RNN-lite approaches are doomed, beyond saving costs,
2. 2.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   Is this a popular view? I think mathematicians can be odd, but usually they communicate quite well. I think as far as popularization of their fields go, mathematics is probably doing the best out of the lot: numberphile, 3blue1brown etc.
3. 3.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   You could fill a form and request them not to train; they usually approved it fairly quickly, but did not advertise it well enough!
4. 4.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   Shocking comment. Do you think the scientific method is inbuilt in our DNA or something? Where do you think it all comes from?
5. 5.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   On the other hand, the other response to OP's comment is a perfect display of what he means. A lot of tech bro hubris/idiocy.
6. 6.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   Not within mathematics, where it is the entire sport, and which is the point of contention.
7. 7.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   Ah the nature vs nurture debate, we meet again! Give me a Neural Net in its first epoch and I shall mold it into anything!
8. 8.▲
   by tadala 2y ago

   Not a typo but an incorrect use of that word.