riotman

Unless it's invertible.

> "It's no different than consoles" is a pretty strong statement to make unsupported. There are many differences.

Like what? ps5/xbox series x/ps4/xbox one are very sophisticated, comparable to a modern desktop PC, yet it's totally closed off. Consoles no longer resemble embedded devices like previous gens. Heck, even the original nes used the MOS 6502 chip, which was very popular in PCs in the early days.

Why did you use neural networks? There are faster techniques in analytical geometry that can extract surface contours from color gradients from images, and they do this faster and directly.

> If the mechanism of action is well understood

In OP's paper, I'm not sure if they met this criteria.

"People who say AGI is a hundred years away also said GO was 50 years away" this is not true. The major skeptics never said this. The point skeptics were making was that benchmarks for chess (IBM), Jeopardy!(IBM), GO (Google), Dota 2 (OpenAI) and all the rest are poor benchmarks for AI. IBM Watson beat the best human at Jeopardy! a decade ago, yet NLP is trash, and Watson failed to provide commercial value (probably because it sucks). I'm unimpressed by GLT-3, to me nothing fundamentally new was accomplished, they just brute forced on a bigger computer. I expect this go to the same way as IBM Watson.

"More than 800 statisticians and scientists are calling for an end to judging studies by statistical significance in a March 20 comment published in Nature."

While their sources are supporting this statement, I'm getting mixed signals.

https://www.nature.com/magazine-assets/d41586-019-00857-9/da...

This is their primary source, of the statisticians calling to retire statistical significance. However, their primary reasoning is because statistics is misused to make erroneous conclusions. It seems like there is a lack of understanding about the philosophy and mathematics behind statistics that's the problem by its practitioners, not statistics itself.

sigh I think the modern web was a mistake from hacks of the 90s to share documents. Can we plz get a fresh restart from scratch?

Bad question on my part. More relevant: Why wasm? From what I gather, js seems to already have a bytecode for their JIT runtime. Why not expose that so that we can have C++ in the web?

Then why not abandon wasm, and make this byte code a target for llvm?

Do they have a different bytecode and runtime from WASM? Why not unify everything to web assembly byte code?