> That being said, the data speaks a fairly simple truth. TensorFlow is, as of now, the most widespread deep learning framework. It gets almost twice as many qu

> That being said, the data speaks a fairly simple truth. TensorFlow is, as of now, the most widespread deep learning framework. It gets almost twice as many questions on StackOverflow every month as PyTorch does. I don’t like how easy to measure things are conflated to mean more important things. SO traffic shouldn’t mean something is more widespread without some more information. Maybe PyTorch has great documentation and doesn’t need as many questions. Or maybe PyTorch users are on slack or irc for their questions. SO is a good sign that a tool is being used generally, but I don’t think should be used to compare. I think counts if SO are nominal and not even ordinal for purposes of a technology’s use. I’m not sure how to actually evaluate products. Maybe downloads? Or publications? Or referencing projects, although this is hard as there are many non-OSS projects that can’t be counted. Anyway, this seems to irk me since people will equate “n people tweeted” with meaning something other than “n people tweeted.” Like somehow something being measureable makes it mean something.