hall0ween

Amazing that the new stadium has less capacity too

It’s tough to take your response seriously with loose thinking like “The point is the almost sexual release you get from (2).”

Upon further reading, you use emotional language too - “witch-hunt” and “hysteria”.

Are these witch-hunts? And can you tell if people over the internet are nearing sexual release?

Are you responding to emotional language and other’s loose thinking with your own?

far be it for me to question your prophetic capacities. i wonder, do you have any historical examples or logic-based arguments that our doom of nigh?

> Individual action means absolutely nothing.

You may want to view action and sphere of influence. Does an individual have international or national influence? Probably not. How about within their community, home, or person? Probably, yes.

I want a good society and I think that’s will be made up of good individuals making individual action. So to me, this all starts at home with the individual’s sphere of influence.

It makes me wonder about the power of religious zealots being simply having read a book, considered profound, many times. And I’m curious about which book I would choose.

> Christmas is devoted to reading books we all know perfectly well.

Ha, this seems counterfactual to how the americans (traveling around recently and I don’t remember seeing anyone with a book open).

> Universities have pushed post-modernism since the 60s which is the precursor for the deprecation of truth.

Call me crazy, but the situation may be more nuanced than this (and your next statement). For example, all universities embraced post-modernism? Also, universities are the arbiter for truth? If so, which universities and which truths? Or is it the transcendental Truth all universities gave out? Lastly, post-modernist ideas on media or some other part of culture?

Have ye any citations?

are there any use cases, aside from code generation and formatting, where fine-tuning consistently useful?

The market hype is real. Check-signers at businesses expect LLMs to have the ability the AI CEOs talk about in their interviews and conferences but don’t exist (and are no where near existing).

I’m confused. If 50% of the revenue goes to inference, that means the other 50% goes into research?

That’s all well and good, but how can we make money off of this post?

Well I’ve been working on an agentic app with a fun UI (https://aimakememoney.com) to turn complaints into startups ready for their first round of seed funding.

Current data scientist here, working for a cloud consulting firm. Two things stand out from my experience: (1) my company isn't hiring, while the DS team is doing fine revenue wise, the rest of the company is doing poorly; so uncommunicated moratorium on hiring; (2) I interviewed at an AI company that I'm currently subcontracting under - and they like me - and I didn't get past the first round because their requirements are so high right now (aka I did mediocrely on one interview and that was enough to tank me).

All this is to say, GenAI is booming but there's competing factors going on for businesses to hire.

Also a different take, look for contract jobs. As with (1) above, my company isn't hiring FT but they're open to contractors.

I wish you luck.

In my opinion, Nature is part of the problem in academic research. In the US, taxpayers must pay to access the information that they paid to fund! And then the researchers (other taxpayers) have to pay to publish and pay to access the content.

This manner of doing business is frustrating to me. Personally, Springer executive board, I hope this hits your bottom line.

Classes and workshops, something with the same people that occurs over several weeks. But it’s important that the content is something you’re personally interested in.

> Two experiments with different challenge-to-contact ratios were conducted to assess transmission dynamics and mutation development. In experiment 1, a 4:1 challenge-to-contact ratio resulted in 100% transmission among direct-contact mice, with all mice succumbing to the infection. In experiment 2, a 1:1 ratio yielded 50% transmission, with all challenged mice also succumbing.

It’s not clear from the abstract that any human-made changes were made to the H5N1 either.

After reading the abstract, this title seems to me like flame/click-bait.

This test has been done in mice only (since no other animal was mentioned in the abstract).

If one follows the scientific method, this means whatever conclusion the authors make can only be extended to mice. Extrapolation to “mammals” is not present in the abstract implicitly or explicitly.

That’s a tough take but I think fair. There’s also a common thought in industry that nothing gets done in academia (e.g., credentials are often weighed less from a university than from employment). Or at least anecdotally for me.

I'm cryptographically ignorant. What does this mean for python?

pwnd

I don’t have an opinion on the issue, cause it’s outta my wheelhouse. Well, aside from civility, which you need to work on.

Fair point!

I would say anecdotal. This hasn't been my case across four universities and ten years.

My experience of thinking is that it is a constant phenomenon. My experience of LLMs is that they only respond and are not running without input.

I've been out of live neural recordings for about 3 years. While this is neat, it's my recollection that this is dated science...with better PR.

Does OpenAI have similar data available to compare to?

<Tether's ears burning>

Could you explain more about the "highly discriminatory and ideological" behavior you've seen? Is it across the board, in the sciences? For example, is a neurosurgery lab at UC Davis working on glioma research either discriminatory and ideologically driven?

Using AI to blankety blank

I agree neuroscience still in the stone age. Flooring the research I don’t think will do much to change it. It’s like flooring plasma physics research during the renaissance. We need different patterns of thinking, imo. Two examples come to mind: (1) our interest to boil down neural dynamics via quantization (what else would it look like, you may wonder. and exactly my point!) and (2) studying the brain in artificial environments. it’s like look at fish behavior while they’re in a tube in space

Burn