Sure, we’re all free to form opinions on who to trust.
If the claim is that Trump is simply throwing trade with Canada for no reason whatsoever, i.e. he’s simply an unhinged madman, that’s certainly a politically popular narrative. I’ve provided pointers to reasonable evidence for pressuring a neighbouring state to get its security issues under control, and based on years of hearing about that stuff it seems rational to me. You’re free to disagree, friend.
I think the heart of the issue is inflow through Canadian ports, as well as complex money laundering and trafficking schemes between Canada, China and Mexico. You can check the article I posted above for more info. There’s also some info about this in the Whitehouse press release I linked below. So it’s not strictly a border crossing problem.
I follow what’s happening with Canadian drugs / money laundering pretty closely. The article I linked isn’t a random newsletter site, it’s from one of Canada’s top investigative journalists. Here’s the official white house statement from the Whitehouse website. I’ve heard Trump reference this multiple times:
Canadian here, who is also not a Trump fan. It is true that Canada has extremely lax border controls and there are complex organized crime networks that exploit this inside of and through Canada.
The US security establishment is aware of this, as is the Canadian security establishment. The 1% fentanyl headline is indeed widely reported, it’s also a red herring. The simple answer is Canada doesn’t really look, so not much is seen. More info here, by one of Canada’s best investigative journalists:
IMO Trump is, as the official white house press release says, trying to put pressure on Canada to address this. Are tariffs the best way to do that? A valid question, for sure. Does he have other, possibly irrational, motivations? Also an excellent question.
But I see much Canadian and US commentary that assumes there is nothing rational about this at all, and that there is no Canadian border/security issues, and I would say that’s incorrect.
Distill.pub was one effort to modernize publishing in CS. Chris Olah wrote some thoughts [1] about why he didn’t feel it was tenable. Seems like the primary challenge was the additional effort and skill involved in crafting rich-content/interactive material.
Bishop’s Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning is one example that has tremendous depth and much clearer notation. Deep Learning by Goodfellow et al. is another example, albeit with less depth than Bishop.
I’m glad you’re enjoying the book. The approach is ideal for a very small subset of the ML population, no doubt that was their intention. I’m just weighing in that it’s entirely possible to cover this material with rigour yet much simpler notation. Even as someone who could parse this I’d go with other options.
I’m just wrapping up a PhD in ML. The notation here is unnecessarily complex IMO. Notation can make things easier, or it can make things more difficult, depending on a number of factors.
In the linked Paul Graham comment, he is not wholly supportive of remote work. The comparison is that communism, like remote work, can appear to work, but he attributes this to the fact that it sprung from a healthy foundation (his example is in-person work). If anything, Graham leans toward in-person work in this tweet.
Was high speed carving a couple of years ago. Blew a turn and rag dolled. Broke 2 vertebrae in my neck and two in my back. Fractured the back of my skull. Speed + impact can get intense.