soraki_soladead
Joined 8 years ago
Karma
358
Submissions
100
Member since
Aug 6
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 month ago
the problem isn't the workers. plenty of "white american guys" with a "don't tread on me" culture share this goal. scapegoating "hordes of foreign tech workers or hiring asians broadly" ignores that the SV culture rewards this.
> so the goal for most of them is to make 300k base and 300k stock per year. fuck the consequences.
"What could be more American than that?" — Wadsworth, Clue (1985)
Comment · 2 months ago
except that's not true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act
> On October 23, 2001, U.S. representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) introduced House bill H.R. 3162, which incorporated provisions from a previously-sponsored House bill, and a Senate bill introduced earlier in the month.[5] The next day, October 24, the Act passed the House by a vote of 357–66,[6] with Democrats comprising the overwhelming majority of "no"-votes.
> The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006, and was signed by President Bush on March 9 and 10 of that year.
Comment · 4 months ago
The latent representations of the data are like points on a surface. That surface is the manifold. We don't typically have the full manifold and can only sample points from it by embedding data into it.
Worth noting a different manifold "exists" after each transformation (e.g. layer). You only sample from the same manifold when you apply the same transformation(s).
Comment · 4 months ago
I might be misunderstanding your point but this conflates the distinguishing features of each. you mention expansion but autoencoders canonically compress their inputs. autoencoders have an explicit encoder and decoder. most transformers we interact with these days (LLMs) are decoder only. the manifold isn't typically something the model is applied to directly. we apply the function/model to the latent representations. those are what live on the manifold.
Comment · 4 months ago
This is awesome! Can someone in this field comment on the implications of sidestepping the cytoskeleton?
Comment · 4 months ago
Possibly because SIGGRAPH is coming up and these were papers submitted to that conference.
Comment · 4 months ago
The original NCA is probably a helpful intro:
https://distill.pub/2020/growing-ca/
Comment · 5 months ago
I think you're misremembering or misunderstanding Picard's argument. It isn't a tangent. Here's the transcript[0].
TL;DR Picard's initial arguments are pretty weak, even admitting that Riker as opposing counsel almost had him convinced. During a recess Picard talks to Guinan where she alludes to the future subjugation of many Datas which Picard connects to slavery. Back in the courtroom Picard calls Maddox as a hostile witness and gets him to define sentience--intelligence, self-awareness, consciousness--then walks him into conceding Data meets the first two. Picard's closing boils down to, "we don't know if he meets the third--you can call Data a toaster and rule he is property--_but what if you're wrong_". The judge rules on the basis of erroring on the side of caution due to that uncertainty. It's really a great scene.
We're not there yet, obviously. No LLM brings Data's level of awareness but it's as relevant a story as ever because it isn't really about AI but othering for the purpose of subjugation.
Comment · 5 months ago
The post links another that goes into the theory a little:
https://shahriyarshahrabi.medium.com/in-the-valley-of-gods-s...
Apparently a combination of Mie and Rayleigh scattering.
Comment · 6 months ago
I'm not saying you're wrong but then why do a big website and branding push. If they had someone in mind they'd bury it on a regular job posting.
They specify early to mid career. Imo they're anticipating a ton of applications and bounding it makes reviewing them tractable.
Comment · 6 months ago
> There is also no pride.
Is the pride not in solving the users' problems?
> nobody talks about it, treats it with interest, or pays above market rate to work on it.
Definitely needs a citation for this one. For so many products the user isn't paying for standout design. They're paying for insight, leverage, velocity, convenience, whatever. The market definitely supports this by paying above market salaries.
Good design can be a useful differentiator but it isn't the only way for a tool or product to "spark joy" and often _fancy_ design (not good design) is used as a crutch for a subpar product.
Comment · 6 months ago
Context: https://xkcd.com/1053/
Then, if you're like me and read this years ago, play around with the Light Mode dropdown which was new to me. :)
Comment · 6 months ago
We don't know however "It would take so long" is an anthropomorphic assumption of time scale.
Comment · 7 months ago
Why would we settle for anything less than discontinuing both?
[email protected]