thinkr42

This entirely. You can't eat using "good feelings" / "impact" alone.

Genuine curiosity here and trying to temper my own selective memory : does it seem like skepticism is growing on the AI front in the news recently?

This mostly makes me wonder about the varying definitions of NLP. Most business folks I’ve worked with in this field don’t even know the question to ask or prompt- the implementation details of models like GPT are the easy part.

I've personally encountered this quite a bit circling around tech, in most of the cases I've seen it was due to _deeply seated_ insecurity more than anything else. Usually it corresponds with folks who find themselves in a position that they're a poor fit for but for whatever reason can't move on. They bounced into a position they can't exit and their 'value add' is applying this sort of tactic under the guise of being helpful externally.

Though verbose and somewhat strange at times, one thing I love about SQL is that the query statements read like a set definition from set theory. That declarative nature is pretty powerful IMO, sure there are hiccups but it is a different way of thinking.

Skeptical to say the least, only because I think this person would likely get a Nobel Prize if this was proven to the be the case. Bell's theorem is huge in QM, usually introduced very early in the Quantum track. It'd be awesome if there was a flaw, but the implications go far beyond quantum computing then.

Company "culture" always makes me a little skeptical, particularly when they're used for hiring decisions. I can't help but think it is just another way to discriminate against folks - I mean if you're saying some one isn't a culture fit what are you really saying about them?

I get it if you're telegraphing that you just don't think they'll fit with you team, but having seen a lot of culture interviews in practice, they seem to be more socially acceptable code for "they're not gender conforming in profession, preference or practice", "they're not white", or what have you.

"For the love of God, don't use Feynman lectures to learn physics. That's something you read after you know physics, for relaxation and conceptual stuff..."

Agree with this 100%. To learn math or physics you have to do it, experiment, and all that.

What’s so powerful for me is that my old company’s “brand” is exactly this style

I’ve been in a workplace where we supposedly followed this. It was often used as a veil for passive aggressive toxicity. There was a lot wrong with that place, and this certainly isn’t the cause of it, but I’ve seen this used as a weapon to do some really shady stuff in the workplace.

That is something I hadn’t thought of before

It is remarkable how frequently “unreasonable effectiveness” is thrown around.

I hadn't thought of this to be honest, but I do faintly remember the IT / Dev team using the "not technically feasible" line a bunch whenever Marketing would come through with stuff. Used to get me angry quite a bit and I saw it translate a bunch to lost revenue and increased costs.

I don't know how much of this got sent out of Marsh and up to Sun though.