jegp

joined 3 months ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
One afternoon module for a camping trip? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey_Heist ? It's not DnD, but the rules are ridiculously simple: you're a bear and if you want to do bear stuff, you roll in your "bear" skill. If not, you roll for "not bear" (i.e. criminal). It's so dumb it hurts, but it works for all ages and I had a blast trying this with some friends.

What are some science fields or projects that could use programming help? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Congratulations on the degree! And congratulations on identifying the clusterfuck. It's hard to see the forest for trees.

I agree with the premise in the suggestion for "discrete AI", but my analysis is different: I think we need continuous AI. Three reasons:

  1. Biology is doing it and it's working great.
  2. Modern AI is hitting a power wall in much the same way Titanic realized too late that it couldn't sink. We're going to have a gigantic energy headache soon. (This is the same argument for discrete AI)
  3. We simply do not understand complex dynamical systems well. Which is why the weather is so hard to predict. But the world consists of dynamical systems, so this is really where we want to push the envelope.

I'd argue helping out in the field of neuromorphics. It's basically the combination of DL + dynamical systems, similar to how brains are computing. There's a lot of energy to be saved (> x1000, really) and there's a lot of new, cool hardware coming out you can help interface. And many of the new ideas in DL comes from neuromorphics (sparsity, SSMs...). We're building up an open source community over at open-neuromorphic.org

Happy to answer any questions you have

30
Help! How do I start writing articles? (en.wikipedia.org)
 

I've been trying to write several articles that have been rejected every time. I'm giving it another go but I'm now on my third iteration of a new article and it's been a frustrating experience. Can you help me understand what I should do differently?

I'm frustrated because I want to contribute, but I feel like running into a wall. The comments left by the reviewers are well meaning, I'm sure, but it's demotivating that I have to keep revising something without knowing why. Before I give up, I wanted to consult the community. Could you let me know if there is a better place to ask my question?

Here's my question: What quality of standards should a new article adhere to? I identified a topic that I'm an expert on and would like to put up a minimal version, just do that it at least exists. The article is brief but I ensured that it's correct and that I'm citing a lot of external resources. One of the items of feedback I got was to write a "careful introduction". What does that mean? How is this brief verdion different from articles that are way more sparse and poorly written? I don't understand why it's necessary to do everything perfectly on the first go.

What confuses me is that I've tried to write responses to the rejections, but it feels like I'm talking to a chat bot. I wish they could give me examples or be concrete about what should go or what should be added.

Thanks!

*Permanently Deleted* in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I actually agree that the patent system could be improved a lot. Not all things are bad about it.

What do you mean with "innovation"? How would that be defined?

*Permanently Deleted* in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Patent documents are rarely useful because they're kept as general and opaque as possible to cover as many innovations as possible. I agree that it's important to protect manufacturing, but patents are not the right way to go about it for at least two reasons: (1) they block innovation by design (e-ink screens are great examples) and (2) they create a huge barrier to entry for new ideas (think about how many lawyers are making a living on this) I disagree with the senders on so many things. But patents were invented in a world of monarchies and craftsmen. Time to go!