3,879 karma · joined January 28, 2014
mailto:mail@miguelsolano.com
https://www.miguelsolano.com
--
"The marble index of a mind forever,"
0xba166baeda7e1c8abc71bcd72a3ff48d
Yes it is. Sadly.
Is this "fact" correct?
Edit: It turns out utterly not. The Basilicas, for instance, were office buildings for public administration.
Why make up something like this?
You mean constituents? Or operands?
"Paralinguistic"
I think you mean syncategoremata?
"Iconic forms"
?
"vau calculus"
Interesting. For the interested, see: https://web.wpi.edu/Pubs/ETD/Available/etd-090110-124904/unr...
Nuclear energy, for one.
Somewhat alarming, if accurate.
Also:
> First wave: Handcrafted knowledge
> Second wave: Statistical learning
> Third wave: Contextual adaptation
I understood clearly enough the first two, but the slides become increasingly ambiguous and fuzzy towards the end; and it seems to me they are mixing up a bunch of not self-evidently related desiderata.
It is not immediate, for instance, that small "generative" models that are easy to interpret necessarily lead to better "abstraction" (whatever that means). And whatever this all has to do with "contextual adaptation" is to me anyone's guess.
Highly alarming (but sadly, from experience, unsurprising) to see such fuzzy position document from such an important funding agency for AI.
Here I would like to think TLA+ would help. But it seems it doesn't either.
Or entrepreneurship, or nutrition, or (yelp) underestablished engineering issues too! Carelessly thought leadership should go the way of "statistical significance" / p < 0.05 sophistry of yore.
Unlike at the micro level, at the macro level your spending is my income.
That alone changes (almost every) received microeconomic intuition.
MD?
"[...] but they still cannot explain the unusual movements that have mystified scientists and the military, according to senior administration officials briefed on the findings of a highly anticipated government report."
And, later in the text:
"[...] And while a forthcoming unclassified version, expected to be released to Congress by June 25, will present few other firm conclusions, senior officials briefed on the intelligence conceded that the very ambiguity of the findings meant the government could not definitively rule out theories that the phenomena observed by military pilots might be alien spacecraft."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjm--7t8Llk&feature=youtu.be
I don't think that's entirely correct.
That's a rather narrow view even of mainstream mathematics IMO.
This is not entirely correct.
--
Also, from your linked article:
I will now introduce the Deutsch Oracle algorithm, one of the first examples of a quantum algorithm that is exponentially faster than its classical counterpart on the size of the input.
This is not entirely correct either.
--
See [1] for an authoritative source.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/science/scott-aaronson-qu...
On the Solvability of Inductive Problems: A Study in Epistemic Topology
Their ad copy say "2.5x Faster than Volta" and "10x Cheaper than Volta", but using CPUs only. Incredibly impressive, if true.
https://www.bostonfed.org/news-and-events/speeches/2019/asse...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_school_of_algebraic_ge...