3 ms·

It does not exists (yet maybe) Blink is an individual and does not represent a company (aka not google, not eleuther, not <insert VC company>, etc) So he had

It does not exists (yet maybe) Blink is an individual and does not represent a company (aka not google, not eleuther, not <insert VC company>, etc) So he had to fill something up i guess haha The idea of a foundation has been tossed around. So it may eventually happen Also the RWKV project predates this paper by over 2 years - nothing is truely new and revealed today on this paper Your simply just finding out about it now in a formal paper consolidating various things that was learnt in this project

ftxbro 3y ago
> Blink is an individual and does not represent a company (aka not google, not eleuther, not <insert VC company>, etc) So he had to fill something up i guess haha I saw there is no one listed in the author list as independent researcher or no affiliation or whatever. It seems hard to believe, if it's a lot of random contributors on a discord channel. Did they all have to make up some kind of 'DBA' (doing business as) name?
- pico_creator 3y ago
  I would not really call it random. While it was open for feedback/contributions. There is a strong requirements for substantial contribution to the paper itself to qualify for authorship. So unfortunately that does limit it in part to folks who are more familiar in writing such papers, have the resources for doing benchmarks, and charting, etc And less so for folks who for eg, tinkers, contributed to dataset, porting the implementation to X lang, doing LoRa, or various other experiments that has nothing to do with the core architecture
  - ftxbro 3y ago
    Sorry I didn't mean to say "random" in the sense of stochastic, more like "eclectic". Usually when I saw such papers with eclectic author mix, at least a few are listed as independent researchers or unaffiliated (even though they might have a PhD or are applying to grad schools or whatever). I was wondering maybe I'm out of date and everyone in those circumstances now just has a 'doing research as' corporate alias.
    - pico_creator 3y ago
      Ahh. As someone who has been listed as “independent researcher” before. I get what you mean - oh well, it is what it is

ftxbro 3y ago

> Blink is an individual and does not represent a company (aka not google, not eleuther, not <insert VC company>, etc) So he had to fill something up i guess haha I saw there is no one listed in the author list as independent researcher or no affiliation or whatever. It seems hard to believe, if it's a lot of random contributors on a discord channel. Did they all have to make up some kind of 'DBA' (doing business as) name?

pico_creator 3y ago
I would not really call it random. While it was open for feedback/contributions. There is a strong requirements for substantial contribution to the paper itself to qualify for authorship. So unfortunately that does limit it in part to folks who are more familiar in writing such papers, have the resources for doing benchmarks, and charting, etc And less so for folks who for eg, tinkers, contributed to dataset, porting the implementation to X lang, doing LoRa, or various other experiments that has nothing to do with the core architecture
- ftxbro 3y ago
  Sorry I didn't mean to say "random" in the sense of stochastic, more like "eclectic". Usually when I saw such papers with eclectic author mix, at least a few are listed as independent researchers or unaffiliated (even though they might have a PhD or are applying to grad schools or whatever). I was wondering maybe I'm out of date and everyone in those circumstances now just has a 'doing research as' corporate alias.
  - pico_creator 3y ago
    Ahh. As someone who has been listed as “independent researcher” before. I get what you mean - oh well, it is what it is