3 ms·
I guess I knew I was taking a risk with that comment, but I was thinking more of it being low value; I didn't even consider that it might be taken this way. It
by Cyphase 2y ago
I guess I knew I was taking a risk with that comment, but I was thinking more of it being low value; I didn't even consider that it might be taken this way. It wasn't a dig of any sort. It was just a late-night quote-unquote "interesting" observation from a Python fan, with simonw being known for Django and LLM research. I probably should have added something to make that clearer.
- fredoliveira 2y agoFair, and I appreciate the explanation. I do think this provides value. Perhaps not to everyone here, or people who have been working on LLMs for a while. But to people who think they have no ability to grok (pun not intended) LLMs because they don't have the mathematical chops? I think it'll be valuable for them.
- Cyphase 2y agoWow, there's really a kink in the wire somewhere between you and I. :) > I guess I knew I was taking a risk with that comment, but I was thinking more of it being low value; I didn't even consider that it might be taken this way. > ... I was thinking more of it being low value ... "It" being my comment; I was taking a risk because my intention with the comment was just a relatively bland observation. A low value _comment_. Again, no digs about the article whatsoever, at all, 0.000%. You are completely misunderstanding my intention. No hard feelings at all, just want to clarify that for the record. :) My comment was just a low value, passing observation, basically equivalent to if this article had been written by Sarah Wexler (made up name) and I had said, "Hmm, another person with the initials S.W. explaining LLMs..".