3 ms·

He is highly knowledgeable in his field. He's very abrasive in his conduct but don't mistake it for incompetence. Even the "AI can't do video" thing was blown

He is highly knowledgeable in his field. He's very abrasive in his conduct but don't mistake it for incompetence. Even the "AI can't do video" thing was blown out and misquoted because discrediting people and causing controversy fuels more engagement. He actually said something along the lines of it "not being able to do it properly" / everything he argues is valid from a scientific perspective. The joint embeddings work he keeps professing has merit. --- I think the real problem is that from a consumer perspective, if the model can answer all their questions it must be intelligent / from a scientist's perspective it's not capable for the set of all consumers so it's not intelligent. So we end up with a dual perspective where both are correct due to technical miscommunication and misunderstanding.

kergonath 2y ago
> He is highly knowledgeable in his field Indeed. It seems to me that he has a type of personality common in skilled engineers. He is competent and makes informed decisions, but does not necessarily explain them well (or at all if they feel trivial enough), is certain of his logic (which often sounds like arrogance), and does not seem to have much patience. He is great at what he does but he really is not a spokesman. His technical insights are often very interesting, though.
- kordlessagain 2y ago
  Technical gatekeeping is a thing, and definitely a problem at times. This is particularly problematic when dealing with concepts that aren't fully understood, even by their originators, as these might contain valuable insights despite their apparent strangeness. The risk of losing out on potentially groundbreaking perspectives must be weighed against the importance of scientific integrity. To address this, the technical community could benefit from fostering more open dialogue, encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration, and creating spaces where speculative ideas can be explored without immediate judgment. Usually doesn't happen here.
zer0c00ler 2y ago
[dead]

kergonath 2y ago

> He is highly knowledgeable in his field Indeed. It seems to me that he has a type of personality common in skilled engineers. He is competent and makes informed decisions, but does not necessarily explain them well (or at all if they feel trivial enough), is certain of his logic (which often sounds like arrogance), and does not seem to have much patience. He is great at what he does but he really is not a spokesman. His technical insights are often very interesting, though.

kordlessagain 2y ago
Technical gatekeeping is a thing, and definitely a problem at times. This is particularly problematic when dealing with concepts that aren't fully understood, even by their originators, as these might contain valuable insights despite their apparent strangeness. The risk of losing out on potentially groundbreaking perspectives must be weighed against the importance of scientific integrity. To address this, the technical community could benefit from fostering more open dialogue, encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration, and creating spaces where speculative ideas can be explored without immediate judgment. Usually doesn't happen here.

zer0c00ler 2y ago

[dead]