20 ms·
My usage of “state of the art” was misleading, I apologize. To be more precise I should say “most of the companies offering services in this area are this good
by fwlr 3y ago
My usage of “state of the art” was misleading, I apologize. To be more precise I should say “most of the companies offering services in this area are this good and getting better”. This is not like batteries or carbon nanotubes where research is way ahead of production; it is more like LLMs where commercial offerings are significantly ahead of published research offerings.
- jamiek88 3y agoCan you give some examples of real world successes of this? Because your (several) comments defending this technology boil down to ‘trust me bro, I’ve seen it in the lab’.
- waboremo 3y agoWhy do you think they're "defending this technology" when their comment explicitly highlights how this doesn't go against the activist's core point, only a nitpick of a specific argument about "technical progress"?
- fwlr 3y agoIf I’ve given the impression that I am defending the technology against anything other than claims about its accuracy, I apologize. The fact that I used to work on this technology and now I instead talk about how it harms minorities should give you some idea of how likely I am to defend this technology. Basically you should just imagine there was a media cycle about the dangers of unregulated trains that go 50mph, do not have any brakes, and need to be regulated because they’re running pedestrians over. And you should read my comments like I’m a pedantic trainwatcher saying “actually these trains go 400mph, can stop on a dime, and need to be regulated because they’re running pedestrians over. Source: I used to be a train driver”.