The embedded mini-app ecosystem is a real model in China. Wechat being the most popular platform. Douyin also has a good share of it. You even see such ecosystem in payment apps like Alipay. I'm also certain there are special deals with Apple structured around this concept.
Using a massive context window is akin to onboarding a new employee before every mundane task performed. While a trained employee will take new task easily with existing context.
The trade off is simply cost. The cost remains in the LLM scene with regards to speed of execution and token cost.
I understand that the answer is no here. Because this method is only suitable for the class of linear system thats the equivalent of sparse matrices. GPUs on the other hand are more optimized for the general purpose matrix multiplication here. Unless it can be shown that there are certain economically high-usage scenarios of this class of problems (e.g. the usage magnitude of bitcoin mining), the investment into this specific research does not seem warranted.
I believe the idea is that not all entities and institutions are eligible to borrow via the FED discount window, e.g. there is the primary credit system (primarily banks), and the second credit system (for some other low risk entities). Thus the repo market serves this segment of the market for liquidity.
That actually sounds awful, sorry for my naivety if this is just industry standard. But for such a mission critical piece to have no redundancy build over it is just poor. Especially that it's prone to failure since it's situated on the outside of the plane.
It just seems to be that this is some terrible engineering done on Boeing's end of not fully understanding the critical situation here.
Generally two failures:
1. a lack of redundancy in a mission critical sensor
2. a blind trust on MCAS's priority over pilots
Thanks for the elaboration. Could you help me further understand one more thing? When you say MCAS only listens to one, does that mean during the time when one AoA sensor fails? Or it always listens to one during normal operation?
Also, it does seem like Boeing dropped the ball here to not build further redundancy here.
I've always been confused here on this, does that mean the 737 MAX has a high chance to have faulty reading from their AoA sensors? Or is that pretty much the industry standard right now? This has always seem like the actual culprit.
Reading both of the posts make me believe that Sutton has stated a more global outlook in the progression of complexity than Brooks did, or that Brooks is simply trying to continue to encourage the current generation of AI research.
My naive take of each of their arguments, which are seemingly obvious but nonetheless profound:
Sutton: advancement in computation capacity > specifically devised methods
Brooks: building specific tools help in solving the problem
You see, neither of them are wrong. However, what Brooks is arguing for is essentially - hey, we invented paper, but we have no computer yet, let's make some line paper and graph paper to increase our productivity, hooray! Then what Sutton is saying is, dude, show me how your method will continue to be productive when computers are invented.
I do also want to propose my takeaway from these pieces though. From Brooks I take that building tools/methods is essential to local optimization and tools/methods can be extended to fit new global advancements. And to Sutton's point, we are in a state of ever progression by the extension of the essence of Moore's Law.
Interestingly I was just thinking about this the other day, and hoping that someone here would have the answer. I'm really curious what is the total bandwidth per second across different continently globally without accounting for intra-continent bandwidth?
I think another way to think about it is that we are able to discover a world with a scale such that we are mediocre because it's more convenient for us to place ourselves at such position. What if there exists an alternative dimension on a quark with its own universe is yet something we are able to uncover.
While I don't believe it's hard to see that perspective and be cognizant of it, I don't quite agree with that sentiment. Categorization itself has an immense level of usability. E.g. building steps to simulate a real human with AI. Even if like the below poster says, the spectrum may be more continuous than discrete, it is perhaps much faster to try to advance in a particular field with categorization than solely relying on unsupervised learning.
Also love the sign up dialog. A quick thing though, the color background for signup page and login page is too similar, so i switch between the two, the mental shift is slightly hard there. Maybe have a different background color for both would be great?
You would know when you have two particles entangled at the moment of entanglement. You could know you have a half of a pair of entangled particles when the other half is sent away. But you could never know when the pair has become disentangled.
In chinese there is a proverb consist of four characters: 相由心生。Its derived meaning is basically that: you will look how you are.
For years I've been daunting over the implications of it. I was never a firm believer nor a firm disbeliever. Advances in modern science such as this article only brings new light to how I think about this.
Whilst it may seem to be a form of discrimination to judge a person by their appearance just like racism or sexism, maybe there is certain evolutionary notion behind this. Maybe we as human have evolved certain abilities to recognize a person's inner traits/personality based on their look. I certainly do not believe that beauty or handsomeness maybe a fact in determining the personality of a person. But through observation a person's confidence or innocence can be somewhat picked out by how they appear. Which I do not believe is correlated with how they portray themselves in terms of exterior such as haircuts or the amount of make up they put on. But rather, their gaze betray them of the real self.
Perhaps that old Chinese proverb has some truth in it, and our science is about to uncover it.
In Canada the situation used to be same that you have to wait until after your contract is over then you can unlock your phone for a petty fee. Fido has just changed their policies early this year to allow unlocking for $50 within half a year of starting a contract. Not sure about other carriers, but can't say how glad I was to see this change as I come to US every few months.
Of course, still unfortunate that I have to pay the fee, though I'd rather have this than in states where you still have to wait until your contract is up.