5 ms·

Get a ham radio technician license, and you may develop an intuitive perspective on most electrical engineering concepts. i.e. the physics lab derivation of th

Get a ham radio technician license, and you may develop an intuitive perspective on most electrical engineering concepts. i.e. the physics lab derivation of the core EE tool set is unnecessary if you understand what the models are describing. AI is slop in and slop out... and dangerous to students... =3 John Shive's Wave Machines is where every student should start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DovunOxlY1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DovunOxlY1k

CamperBob2 2y ago
dangerous to students It's fatally dangerous to students who ignore it or dismiss it out of hand. That much is already certain.
- Joel_Mckay 2y ago
  How so?
  - CamperBob2 2y ago
    Wait and see. You're not paying attention now, but it's not too late to start. Go to your favorite programming puzzle site and see how you do against the latest models, for instance. If you can beat o1-pro regularly, for instance, then you're right, you have nothing to worry about and can safely disregard it. Same proposition that was offered to John Henry.
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      Please reformulate your argument, and I will check back tomorrow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNSHZG9blQQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNSHZG9blQQ LLMs are rules based search engines with higher dimension vector spaces encoding related topics. There is nothing intelligent about these algorithms, except the trick ones play on oneself interpreting well structured nonsense. It is stunting kids development, as students often lack the ability to intuitively reason when they are being misled. "How many R's in 'Strawberry'?" is a classic example exposing the underlying pattern recognition failures. =3
      - CamperBob2 2y ago
        (Shrug) If you're retired or independently wealthy, you can afford that attitude. Hopefully one of those describes you. Otherwise, you're going to spend the rest of your career saying things like, "Well, OK, so the last model couldn't count the number of Rs in 'Strawberry' and the new one can, but..." Personally, I dislike being wrong. So I don't base arguments on points that have a built-in expiration date, or that are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of whatever I'm talking about.
        Joel_Mckay 2y ago
        Every model is deprecated in time if evidenced Science is done well, and hopefully replaced by something more accurate in time. There is no absolute right/correctness unless you are a naive child under 25 cheating on structured homework. The point was there is nothing intelligent (or AI) about LLMs except the person fooling themselves. In general, most template libraries already implement the best possible algorithms from the 1960s, and tuned for architecture specific optimizations. Knowing when each finite option is appropriate takes a bit of understanding/study, but does give results far quicker than fitting a statistically salient nonsense answer. Several study datum from senior developers is already available, and it proves LLMs provide zero benefit to people that know what they are doing. Note, I am driven by having fun, rather than some bizarre irrational competitiveness. Prove your position, or I will assume you are just a silly person or chat bot. =3
        mindcrime 2y ago
        I have no position on whether or not CamperBob is a chat-bot, but they are definitely not being silly. Their point, as I take it, is that it's dangerous to look at the state of "AI" as it is today and then ignore the rate of change. To their stated point from above: > Otherwise, you're going to spend the rest of your career saying things like, "Well, OK, so the last model couldn't count the number of Rs in 'Strawberry' and the new one can, but..." That's a very important point. I mean, it's not guaranteed that any form of AI is going to advance to the point that it starts taking jobs from people like us, but when you fail to look forward and project a little bit and imagine what they could do with another year of progress... or two years of progress... or 5 years, etc? I posit that that kind of myopia could leave one very under-prepared for the world one lands in. > The point was there is nothing intelligent (or AI) about LLMs except the person fooling themselves. Sure. The "AI Effect". Irrelevant. It doesn't matter how the machine can do your job, or whether or not it's "really intelligent". It just matters that if it can create more value, more cheaply, than you or I, we are going to wind up like John Henry. Who, btw, for anybody not familiar with that particular bit of folklore "[won the race against the machine] only to die in victory with a hammer in hand as his heart gave out from stress."
TeMPOraL 2y ago
> Get a ham radio technician license, and you may develop an intuitive perspective on most electrical engineering concepts. May. I managed to get one without developing much intuition for most EE concepts, unfortunately.
- Joel_Mckay 2y ago
  Did you mean you don't understand the equations/theory, or are having difficulty applying the concepts to design circuits? In the first case, install LTSpice (free from Analog Devices), and head here to run down the basics: https://www.youtube.com/@FesZElectronics/videos https://www.youtube.com/@FesZElectronics/videos And in the latter, go though common basic designs analyzing how they work: https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofelectroniccircuitsvol1/Encyclopedia%20of%20Electronic%20Circuits%20-%20Vol%201/ https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofelectroniccircuits... https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel02graf https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel02graf https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780070110779 https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780070110779 https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel0006graf https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel0006graf Then try your own designs combining properties of several designs. Start with simple blinkers and buzzers at first... Try to avoid Arduino designs until you've done a few 555, transistor, and opamp circuits first. =3
  - TeMPOraL 2y ago
    Most of my issues seem to be about power - I have no feel for the relevant math, so even as I remember the basic equations and methods, I never feel certain I'm calculating it right. So in terms of hands-on experience, I pretty much jumped straight from burning through-hole resistors with 12V battery to ignite rocket motors made of PVC and caramel fuel, to Arduinos and RPIs and NodeMCUs -- basically, stuff that comes with an USB port it can draw power from... Thanks for the links, I'll work through them and hopefully come out with some understanding at the end of this process :).
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      Note, part of the fun is the forensic analysis to figure out why stuff didn't work the first time... Maybe a LDO Voron 3d printer kit would be a fun project too =3
RobotToaster 2y ago
At least in the UK you can't if you're a linux user, the software they use to spy on you while taking the test is windows only.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  Well first off, the certificate comes with certain guarantees, and they can't give those guarantees if they can't prove you didn't cheat on the test. "spy on you" is absolutely correct, but a bad faith phrasing. That said, I did my AWS test at a test / exam center where there's isolated computers and cameras to validate that there was no cheating.

CamperBob2 2y ago

dangerous to students It's fatally dangerous to students who ignore it or dismiss it out of hand. That much is already certain.

Joel_Mckay 2y ago
How so?
- CamperBob2 2y ago
  Wait and see. You're not paying attention now, but it's not too late to start. Go to your favorite programming puzzle site and see how you do against the latest models, for instance. If you can beat o1-pro regularly, for instance, then you're right, you have nothing to worry about and can safely disregard it. Same proposition that was offered to John Henry.
  - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
    Please reformulate your argument, and I will check back tomorrow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNSHZG9blQQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNSHZG9blQQ LLMs are rules based search engines with higher dimension vector spaces encoding related topics. There is nothing intelligent about these algorithms, except the trick ones play on oneself interpreting well structured nonsense. It is stunting kids development, as students often lack the ability to intuitively reason when they are being misled. "How many R's in 'Strawberry'?" is a classic example exposing the underlying pattern recognition failures. =3
    - CamperBob2 2y ago
      (Shrug) If you're retired or independently wealthy, you can afford that attitude. Hopefully one of those describes you. Otherwise, you're going to spend the rest of your career saying things like, "Well, OK, so the last model couldn't count the number of Rs in 'Strawberry' and the new one can, but..." Personally, I dislike being wrong. So I don't base arguments on points that have a built-in expiration date, or that are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of whatever I'm talking about.
      - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
        Every model is deprecated in time if evidenced Science is done well, and hopefully replaced by something more accurate in time. There is no absolute right/correctness unless you are a naive child under 25 cheating on structured homework. The point was there is nothing intelligent (or AI) about LLMs except the person fooling themselves. In general, most template libraries already implement the best possible algorithms from the 1960s, and tuned for architecture specific optimizations. Knowing when each finite option is appropriate takes a bit of understanding/study, but does give results far quicker than fitting a statistically salient nonsense answer. Several study datum from senior developers is already available, and it proves LLMs provide zero benefit to people that know what they are doing. Note, I am driven by having fun, rather than some bizarre irrational competitiveness. Prove your position, or I will assume you are just a silly person or chat bot. =3
        mindcrime 2y ago
        I have no position on whether or not CamperBob is a chat-bot, but they are definitely not being silly. Their point, as I take it, is that it's dangerous to look at the state of "AI" as it is today and then ignore the rate of change. To their stated point from above: > Otherwise, you're going to spend the rest of your career saying things like, "Well, OK, so the last model couldn't count the number of Rs in 'Strawberry' and the new one can, but..." That's a very important point. I mean, it's not guaranteed that any form of AI is going to advance to the point that it starts taking jobs from people like us, but when you fail to look forward and project a little bit and imagine what they could do with another year of progress... or two years of progress... or 5 years, etc? I posit that that kind of myopia could leave one very under-prepared for the world one lands in. > The point was there is nothing intelligent (or AI) about LLMs except the person fooling themselves. Sure. The "AI Effect". Irrelevant. It doesn't matter how the machine can do your job, or whether or not it's "really intelligent". It just matters that if it can create more value, more cheaply, than you or I, we are going to wind up like John Henry. Who, btw, for anybody not familiar with that particular bit of folklore "[won the race against the machine] only to die in victory with a hammer in hand as his heart gave out from stress."

TeMPOraL 2y ago

> Get a ham radio technician license, and you may develop an intuitive perspective on most electrical engineering concepts. May. I managed to get one without developing much intuition for most EE concepts, unfortunately.

Joel_Mckay 2y ago
Did you mean you don't understand the equations/theory, or are having difficulty applying the concepts to design circuits? In the first case, install LTSpice (free from Analog Devices), and head here to run down the basics: https://www.youtube.com/@FesZElectronics/videos https://www.youtube.com/@FesZElectronics/videos And in the latter, go though common basic designs analyzing how they work: https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofelectroniccircuitsvol1/Encyclopedia%20of%20Electronic%20Circuits%20-%20Vol%201/ https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofelectroniccircuits... https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel02graf https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel02graf https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780070110779 https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780070110779 https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel0006graf https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofel0006graf Then try your own designs combining properties of several designs. Start with simple blinkers and buzzers at first... Try to avoid Arduino designs until you've done a few 555, transistor, and opamp circuits first. =3
- TeMPOraL 2y ago
  Most of my issues seem to be about power - I have no feel for the relevant math, so even as I remember the basic equations and methods, I never feel certain I'm calculating it right. So in terms of hands-on experience, I pretty much jumped straight from burning through-hole resistors with 12V battery to ignite rocket motors made of PVC and caramel fuel, to Arduinos and RPIs and NodeMCUs -- basically, stuff that comes with an USB port it can draw power from... Thanks for the links, I'll work through them and hopefully come out with some understanding at the end of this process :).
  - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
    Note, part of the fun is the forensic analysis to figure out why stuff didn't work the first time... Maybe a LDO Voron 3d printer kit would be a fun project too =3

RobotToaster 2y ago

At least in the UK you can't if you're a linux user, the software they use to spy on you while taking the test is windows only.

Cthulhu_ 2y ago
Well first off, the certificate comes with certain guarantees, and they can't give those guarantees if they can't prove you didn't cheat on the test. "spy on you" is absolutely correct, but a bad faith phrasing. That said, I did my AWS test at a test / exam center where there's isolated computers and cameras to validate that there was no cheating.