tnbalsam

I think societal commentaries on long-running trends are much more relevant than the flash-fried news cycle of the day. I'd contest that is far better than the, well, "news" (i.e. the meaning that it's all of the things that are "new") cycle because it's 1 step grounded in our history, and 2 steps grounded in our primary relevancy in the issue going forward.

This is an interesting magazine that encompasses the whole topic well, I think: https://www.slow-journalism.com/

I have DID, and one of the ways I ended up communicating with myself was through imagined friend contact.

This really sounds like you have a dissociative spectrum symptom. Up to 1 in 12 people are at the very least at the OSDD-1b spectrum, down to 1 in 100ish and > with DID, so it's super common.

Most people don't know they're systems, but usually it involves a lot of talking to one's self, having a lot of very distinct "modes", certain kinds of memory issues/weird amnesia/short term stuff, the ability/feeling like you could be really good friends with yourself (alternately, the ability to deeply hate yourself as well), and being able to go from having an amazing day to absolute raw terror, not even recognizing it because of emotional amnesia.

So yes, it is normal, and this sounds very system-ey. If you are a system, don't pass over this! Discovering your dissociative spectrum tendencies, if you have them, is very hard and requires a lot of effort, but it is a transition that is very significantly life-changing, in a very positive direction.

The most important thing is that if your identity is fragmented, most people only focus on meeting the needs/listening to the people near the front of the brain/consciousness, so the younger alters/personality states/people/etc. get ignored and there's always anxiety and never-ending loops of feeling a desperate need for something but not getting it (because communication between people in the brain -- and yes, they are individual people! you can share multiple people in a brain, it's just like your body is more of a mech than anything else -- is usually completely cut off with DID and vastly inhibited with dissociative spectrum disorders, but the emotions eventually build up under pressure and finally leak out there.)

I think the above properties define a currency.

Currencies are tangible, generally recognizable and agreed-upon value containers to be traded for goods and services.

Calling it anything else at this point, I'd contend, would likely be essentially incorrect of its own merits, and I do think trying to separate it out would create confusion as it really does no good at all.

It is certainly a special kind of currency, but no different than some of the other universal currencies that we've had in the past, really, at all.

Yes, this makes sense. I'd suggest retitling the article to be something along the lines of "ML Expert Roadmap", and then continue to flesh out all avenues. As it stands, the roadmap has really nothing to do with AI at all, but your point about not just jumping to the shiny hammer certainly rings true and makes sense. I certainly think that's the right approach algorithmically, especially if you're looking to be a more generalist data shop.

In a world of senseless marketing hype, I think it's a good idea to take the high road on this one. Reputation alone, even if less-buzzy words like ML are used in favor of AI, really carries a long ways. Plus, we're nearing the disenfranchisement hump, and AI's going to start taking a negative connotation with many businesses, I believe. Just shoot straight and I firmly believe it'll carry you for a long ways, there.

Agreed. I think this is a well-intentioned effort at marketing and sharing knowledge but it seems a bit fluffy for the "AI" side of things. For ML, I think it's a pretty darn good foundation with the traditional hand-jammed/artisinally-crafted/exceedingly data-driven approaches.

Perhaps I may be mistaken, but this seems to be a very long road for a more shallow understanding of deep learning. I'd venture this was written by someone who has a more traditional machine learning background that wants new people to the industry to have that same foundation; however, I'd venture that that is a rather inefficient way to get to deep learning proficiency.

If I were to give a recommendation, it would be this -- pick a topic/project that interests you, follow the classic knowledge-bootstrapping process where you read through papers and (hopefully) have an expert or trained person walk you through the specifics, then get hands-on instantly. Especially with something like fast.ai that values empirical results over hard theory, something understandably popular in the field.

From there I'd recommend branching out, but I'd use a JIT approach. The field isn't necessarily super well-founded at the moment, and while machine learning fundamentals are useful, ultimately it's a waste of time compared to the long-tail benefit of getting immediate empirical results and feedback hands-on.

Just my 2c, YMMV, and anyone is totally welcome to disagree as they wish! :)

Best of luck,

T

This is incredibly confusing. I'm not sure if I'd note it is an article, it feels like there's no direction or point to this compilation of statements. If this is to advertise a company, I'd hope for a little bit of direction and organization to it -- especially if it's being billed as written by a Python and ML instructor.

It looks mostly incomplete...? I'm not quite sure if it's 'comprehensive' yet, some of the language and wording makes it look like it's aimed towards an adult who already knows Python and wants to review what the basics look like.

I'd suggest moving hosting to GitHub too, the pages themselves as they stand appear to look like little more than than a shill for connections. I'm not sure what the point of this exactly is, but if you're working this to completion, please don't let this discourage you. Just go heads down, make it open, and don't push a path for recognition and notoriety, especially if you're trying to help children learn, as opposed to simply increasing your clout.

Best of luck.

Can't wait until people start recognizing ADHD as being linked to dissociation spectrum disorders.

These are not novel symptoms. This is not unexpected. This is exactly what you'd expect to see from someone benefitting from/struggling with dissociation. ADHD is highly correlated with trauma in a lot of ways, it really needs to stop being its own subclinical diagnosis.

This is the reason that a purely categorical system is so dangerous for the mental health narrative in the US & etc. Van der Kolk and co have worked a ton at bringing complex trauma into the narrative, but the politics of the scene really don't allow for that as much, at least at the broader levels that I can see.

What you get with a purely categorical system is reinventing the wheel many times over without being able to connect seemly disparate concepts, a common problem with attempting to model a higher dimensional problem with a lower dimensional projection. You lose your locality constraints because things can't reasonably live "next to" each other, and so you get branching tree structures that are clones or near-clones of each other.

Someday we'll move past this. RSD is just another name for a protector response, which is generally mediated by the lack of the prefrontal cortex operating as much as it does normally paired with the fight-or-flight (+ the other fs) resulting from an engrained trauma response. You also get shutdowns, etc that aren't accurately described by RSD, because it fails to capture the breadth of what's actually going on behind the scenes there.

Unfortunately the state of mental health in America is rather barbaric at the moment, it'll in all likeliness be the thing we look back on in 50 years like we do at smoking. However, it's a good reminder that even though we're at the latest year we've ever been to as a world, we're not "all the way there" on things, and never quite/exactly will be.