xpe

53 ms·

841.
by xpe 2y ago
Dear author (and others who writing things like this): it looks you put in considerable time on code comparisons and benchmarks. Why not publish the source code for them? Benefits include: 1. The comparisons, as you've written them up,
842.
by xpe 2y ago
From the Wikipedia page on Chess960: > Hence, on average, a Chess960 starting position is actually 18.2% more balanced than the standard starting position. I'm also interested in the underlying distribution (not just the average). F
843.
by xpe 2y ago
Woosh.
844.
by xpe 2y ago
Yes, it is a fact the definition exists on Brittanica. This is a positive thing, not a normative value. But we, together, also shape how words are used. Just because someone uses a word doesn’t mean we have to like it or accept the context.
845.
by xpe 2y ago
I agree. See: “What democratize really means” https://intage.us/articles/words/democratize/ > Remember, language is shaped by culture, and you are part of that culture. You do not have to abdicate responsi
846.
by xpe 2y ago
/facepalm. Woosh indeed. Can I blame pronoun confusion? (Not to mention this misunderstanding kicked off a farcically unproductive ensuing discussion.)
847.
by xpe 2y ago
When combined with intellectual honesty and curiosity, the best LLMs can be powerful tools for checking argumentation. (I personally recommend Claude 3.5 Sonnet.) I pasted in the conversation history and here is what it said: > Their pos
848.
by xpe 2y ago
The paper that coined the term "stochastic parrots" would not agree with the claim that LLMs are "unable to produce a response that isn't in their training data". And the research has advanced a _long_ way since the
849.
by xpe 2y ago
> you can try to convince all you want, but you're just grasping at straws. After coming back to this to see how the conversation has evolved (it hasn't), I offer this guess: the problem isn't at the object level (i.e. wha
850.
by xpe 2y ago
I'll try again... Can you (or anyone) define "thought" in way that is helpful? Some other intelligent social animals have slightly different brains, and it seems very likely they "think" as well. Do we want to defin
851.
by xpe 2y ago
Most importantly, I'm happy to learn and/or be shown to be mistaken. Based on my study (not at the Ph.D. level but still quite intensive), I am confident the comment above is both wrong and poorly framed. Why? Seeing phrases &quot
852.
by xpe 2y ago
Interesting! I share a keen interest in synthesizers. If you play these patches on the DX7 itself, how good is the reproducibility? I would assume the digital settings to match perfectly. Is there anything else going on that might make patc
853.
by xpe 2y ago
Please clarify what you mean. On what basis do you say this? Unless I’m misunderstanding, I disagree. If you reply, I’ll bet I can convince you.
854.
by xpe 2y ago
Some great synths are taxing to operate and tweak in real time even if you know what is happening. So I appreciate your point about variations on the interface.
855.
by xpe 2y ago
Attempt to summarize one part (the “playability”): You are suggesting the velocity curves and their interaction with the algorithms gave the DX7 a lot of its nuance?
856.
by xpe 2y ago
I've written many game engines (simulations). I've found that parsing the rulebook into code gives me a much clearer insight into the game.
857.
by xpe 2y ago
/[01]{8,}/: I was hoping to have a conversation. This is why I asked questions. Any responses to them? Looking up the thread, you can see the context. Many of us pushed back against vague claims that AlphaChip was "snake oil&
858.
by xpe 2y ago
> So you're saying Head of AI of Google of Jeff can't choose a better venue? Phrasing it this way isn't useful. Talking about choice in the abstract doesn't help with a game-theoretic analysis. You need costs and bene
859.
by xpe 2y ago
Sure, we want individuals to act in a way to mitigate collective action problems. But the collective action problem exists (by definition) because individuals are trapped in some variation of a prisoner's dilemma. So, collective action
860.
by xpe 2y ago
> "scientific publication" These air quotes suggests the commenter above doesn't think the paper qualifies a scientific publication. Such a characterization is unfair. When I read the Nature article titled "Addendum:
861.
by xpe 2y ago
> Trying to pass that off as a significant "advance" in a "scientific publication" borders on scientific fraud and should definitely be called out. If true, your stated concerns with the AlphaChip paper -- selective b
862.
by xpe 2y ago
If so, does this qualify as “snake oil”? What do you mean? Snake oil requires exaggeration and deception. Fair? If a paper / experiment is done with intellectual honesty, great! If it doesn’t make a big splash, fine.
863.
by xpe 2y ago
Are you suggesting Dean take a different approach in his response? Are you saying it was already too late given the environment? (I’m also not sure I know what you mean by environment here.)
864.
by xpe 2y ago
In a perfect world, making a paper easier to replicate has advantages, sure. (But it also has costs.) Second, even a healthy environment can be undermined by lack of skills or resources, intellectual dishonesty, or conflicts of interest.
865.
by xpe 2y ago
I think for most people the word “bullying” has a value judgment built-in.
866.
by xpe 2y ago
> if it worked, they wouldn't be sharing it and would simply be printing money by taking advantage of it. Sure, there are some techniques in financial markets that are only valuable when they are not widely known. But claiming this
867.
by xpe 2y ago
> Google continues to peddle unsubstantiated snake oil I read your comment, but I'm not following -- or maybe I disagree with it -- I'm not sure yet. "Snake oil" is an emotionally loaded term that raises the temperatu
868.
by xpe 2y ago
> But saying "they couldn't replicate it because they're idiots, therefore it's replicable" is not a rebuttal, just bullying. > It's not a value judgement, just doesn't help his case at all. Calling
869.
by xpe 2y ago
> You're not going up and down the track during an hour record. Here the English language obscures the physics. Sure, the black line on the track is at a constant elevation. But the tire's point of contact is different from the
870.
by xpe 2y ago
Any bump results in some energy transfer. In the case of small enough bumps and tires at ideal pressures, most energy is returned, but not all. These losses accumulate. The question is "how much does it add up to?" This is why I r

More ›