LeCun’s research into Convolutional Neural Networks contributed to modern AI, so the nickname is quite appropriate. It’s because of this that he was pursued by Facebook.
Google software engineering may not be perfect, but that's because we all have high standards probably. I've worked at both FAANG and non-FAANG companies, and while the sample size is small and not representative of ALL non-FAANG companies, I will say that my experience at FAANG companies is the engineers there do to get dream big and come up with ingenious engineering solutions that make engineering work at non-FAANG look like college senior undergrad projects. I think we should celebrate what Google has done for software engineering instead of nitpicking every little detail that they got wrong.
These are new or existing IG users. Either way, the user must download the app and go through a full onboarding flow to increment the count, which is how publications are tracking. The count is public for anyone to see.
The "feature" happens to be a full app that you must consciously download. You must then go through the onboarding flow before finally the number of users is incremented. That's just like downloading any other app. These are not trivial numbers.
The original commenter is trying to build intuition so my statement was simply to help the commenter understand that Transformers can operate on patches.
As for
> after all, the original authors didn't anticipate the use case in Vision.
To quote the original "Attention is all you need" paper:
"We are excited about the future of attention-based models and plan to apply them to other tasks. We plan to extend the Transformer to problems involving input and output modalities other than text and to investigate local, restricted attention mechanisms to efficiently handle large inputs and outputs such as images, audio and video"
To say that the original authors did not anticipate the Transformers use in Vision is false.
If I understand what you're asking, the Transformer isn't initially treating the image as a sequence of pixels like p1, p2, ..., pN. Instead, you can use a convolutional neural network to respect the structure of the image to extract features. Then you use the attention mechanism to pay attention to parts of the image that aren't necessarily close together but that when viewed together, contribute to the classification of an object within the image.
Great inside look into the psychology behind a big acquisition like this. I can't help but feel Noam's ego was bruised by the poor due diligence experience he experienced at Facebook, causing him to lash out at the company within the post. Otherwise, really insightful details, especially that Instagram was acquired for $1B, which is what he was anchored on.
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the right of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
Since the models are not suppressed to answer certain questions and indeed have been demonstrated to be biased toward one end of the political spectrum, and if you treat the model’s output as a knowledge graph, as proposed by John Schulman, one of the cofounders of OpenAI, then yes, I would say the suppression of freedom of speech is a valid argument to make. Otherwise why would there be a set of “uncensored” models that exist in the open source world?
I would suggest you read about these models and think about the implications. Perhaps that’ll lead to you to reconsider your stance
In addition to the cost, OpenAI censors their models, and while that seems protective at first, if you think about it, if the model is the knowledge graph, then censor data in the graph is censoring free speech.
I highly doubt Reddit has 1.5B monthly users, otherwise they would have reported it in the media. Very few companies have the execution capabilities to reach 1B+ users
congrats! I was just listening to your changelog interview from months ago in which you said you were going to move on from this after you brush up the code a bit, but it seems the momentum is too great. Glad to see you carrying this amazing project(s) forward!
That's the first time I've heard that. Curious what about it makes it harder for you. That's a shame, but it seems like 3b1b doesn't cater to your learning style!
> Instant global communication is valuable enough by itself to attract massive investments and interest.
If that's the case, with the advent of email in the early 1990s, why didn't the internet completely take off? It took another 15 to 20 years and only when Google and Facebook came into the picture, did we get open source technologies that spread throughout the world and is used daily.
> The age of adtech is closing and the world is better for it.
If you read most spending reports by companies, they would disagree. SMBs to large businesses all use advertising to increase the reach of their legitimate products. Your local barbershop likely runs Google ads to reach new customers so that he can run his business.
Furthermore, adtech lead to an infusion of capital into the internet, which led to many wonderful things for society. It's easy to paint adtech in a bad light when you only consider the worst things about it, which are being addressed.
Sure, but also could be a human nature desire to spread news. Knowledge is power after all. Furthermore, upper management trusting important news to employees isn't a failure of upper management, but rather, placing trust in employees.