gtr32x
Joined 14 years ago
Joined 14 years ago
The trade off is simply cost. The cost remains in the LLM scene with regards to speed of execution and token cost.
It just seems to be that this is some terrible engineering done on Boeing's end of not fully understanding the critical situation here.
Generally two failures: 1. a lack of redundancy in a mission critical sensor 2. a blind trust on MCAS's priority over pilots
Also, it does seem like Boeing dropped the ball here to not build further redundancy here.
My naive take of each of their arguments, which are seemingly obvious but nonetheless profound:
Sutton: advancement in computation capacity > specifically devised methods
Brooks: building specific tools help in solving the problem
You see, neither of them are wrong. However, what Brooks is arguing for is essentially - hey, we invented paper, but we have no computer yet, let's make some line paper and graph paper to increase our productivity, hooray! Then what Sutton is saying is, dude, show me how your method will continue to be productive when computers are invented.
I do also want to propose my takeaway from these pieces though. From Brooks I take that building tools/methods is essential to local optimization and tools/methods can be extended to fit new global advancements. And to Sutton's point, we are in a state of ever progression by the extension of the essence of Moore's Law.