armoredkitten

I generally agree with the logic -- I don't like using spreadsheets for anything complex, or that has the shelf life of more than, say, a month. I can remember my logic for putting together all the complex formulas for a while, but eventually I have to recreate my own logic, reverse engineering everything, and it's frustrating.

But when one of your arguments is "Excel has complicated nested formulas that are difficult to follow" I don't think showing off a Python one-liner as an alternative is the greatest example. That one-liner is doing about five things that could have been separated into steps to show off the relative clarity and flexibility of the approach. It is better...that example just doesn't do a good job showing it.

Yeah this definitely seems like a case of "hey AI, take this mess of incoherent conspiracy-laden rambling points and turn it into something" and the AI had to try and stitch something together that even resembled something making sense. The logic doesn't even hold together.

I stick with the 300 searches plan, and most months I don't hit the limit. That said, part of my strategy is if I'm searching for something that I know will show up readily (say I am trying to find a particular website, I just don't remember if it's .com or .org or whatever), then I use DuckDuckGo instead. Not because it's better, but because it saves one of the 300 searches for something more useful.

what's updoc?

Exactly. The notion of online learning is not new, but that approach cedes a lot of control to unknown forces. From a theoretical standpoint, this paper is interesting, there are definitely interesting questions to explore about how we could make an AI that learns autonomously. But in most production contexts, it's not desirable.

Imagine deploying a software product that changes over time in unknown ways -- could be good changes, could be bad, who knows? This goes beyond even making changes to a live system, it's letting the system react to the stream of data coming in and make changes to itself.

It's much preferable to lock down a model that is working well, release that, and then continue efforts to develop something better behind the scenes. It lets you treat it more like a software product with defined versions, release dates, etc., rather than some evolving organism.

I just copied what it produced -- I kind of wish it hadn't added the lyrics! :D

Building meaningful professional relationships is all about trust and alignment.

We both understand the industry standards and the KPIs required for success. I’m fully committed to this strategic partnership—a level of dedication you won't find with any other service provider.

Transparency is key, so I want to share my vision and ensure our goals are perfectly synced.

My value proposition: - Zero churn rate (Never gonna give you up)

- Consistent delivery on SLAs (Never gonna let you down)

- 100% retention and reliability (Never gonna run around and desert you)

- High employee NPS (Never gonna make you cry)

- Long-term lifecycle management (Never gonna say goodbye)

- Radical candor and integrity (Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you)

Let's connect and scale together! #Leadership #Commitment #Networking #GrowthMindset

I've long wished that "journals" and academic societies would transition from a publishing model to a cultivation model. If everything is available on arXiv, that's great, but it also means the best of the best is mixed in with all the rest.

Journals (in the sense of whoever is on the editorial board) don't need to cease to exist; they just need to transition to "here's our list this month of what the best new articles are on X topic". The paper's already there on arXiv, you could already read it before. But having a group of editors that cultivate a list of good articles (as well as the peer review process that can, in an ideal world, serve to improve a paper) can serve to make sifting through arXiv less overwhelming, and draw attention to papers in particular subfields, subject matter, or whatever other criteria might be relevant.

To me, the wording doesn't necessarily imply causality, but it does imply a repeated-measures design. Something being "associated with an increase in symptoms" is different than something being "associated with higher symptoms"; the former suggests that participants were measured at multiple time points, and there is a factor that could explain that change over time. But reading through the study, it was just a single time point.

Regardless, you're correct that it also shouldn't be taken to imply a causal relationship.

It doesn't stay localized; runoff from farmland is a major issue. In other words, the farm animal poops out a bunch of antiobiotics, then it rains and that poop ends up washing into the river/lake/water table. That's already something that happens with situations like E. coli contamination. Things that happen on the farm don't stay on the farm.

You're talking about superintelligence. AGI is just...an AI that's roughly on par with humans on most things. There's no inherent reason why AGI will lead to ASI.

I don't really feel any sort of "phantom obligation" about RSS feeds. But I can certainly say it rings true in other areas of my life: Steam games, movies and TV shows, podcasts, books...everything is this growing list of things to do, that I keep adding to even as I'm trying to get through what I've already got in the queue. For video games, people often talk about their "backlog", as if it's important that they churn through all the games they've bought.

I have tried to remind myself in the past that literally nobody cares if I am behind on the TV shows I'm wanting to watch. Just me. So...I like the term "phantom obligation". I'll definitely tuck that away in my brain for later use.