Right... With precision...

Furthermore... big mountains are easier to weigh v small individual atoms? I think it's a little more complicated than big is easy to measure...

I care little about the precision... I've got other priorities. It's the same as the time the internet saves me... Big. It's obvious.

I stand by my statement. It's hard to measure...

My daughter berated me for using AI (the sentiment among youth is pretty negative, and it is easy to understand why), but I simply responded, "if I don't my peers still will, then we'll be living on the street." And it's true, I've 10x'd my real productivity as a scientist (for example, using llms to help me code one off scripts for data munging, automating our new preprocessing pipelines, etc, quickly generating bullet points for slides).

The trick though is learning how to prompt, and developing the sense that the LLM is stuck with the current prompt and needs another perspective. Funnily enough, the least amount of luck I've had is getting the LLM to write precisely enough for science (yay I still have a job), even without the confabulation, the nuance is lacking...that it's almost always faster for me to write it myself.

Without details that's a meaningless stat, I remember some pytorch machine vision tutorials promising they'll only take like an hour, including training and also gives a working project at the end.

I just don't understand why AI is so polarising on a technology website.

OpenAI have even added a feature to make the completions from GPT near-deterministic (by specifying a seed). It seems that no matter what AI companies do, there will be a vocal minority shouting that it's worthless.