HN user
Everyone wants to use less compute to fit more in, but (obviously?) the solution will be to use more compute and fit less. Attention isn't (topologically) attentive enough. All these RNN-lite approaches are doomed, beyond saving costs, they're going to get cooked by some other arch—even more expensive than transformers.
Is this a popular view? I think mathematicians can be odd, but usually they communicate quite well. I think as far as popularization of their fields go, mathematics is probably doing the best out of the lot: numberphile, 3blue1brown etc.
You could fill a form and request them not to train; they usually approved it fairly quickly, but did not advertise it well enough!
Shocking comment. Do you think the scientific method is inbuilt in our DNA or something? Where do you think it all comes from?
On the other hand, the other response to OP's comment is a perfect display of what he means. A lot of tech bro hubris/idiocy.
Not within mathematics, where it is the entire sport, and which is the point of contention.
Ah the nature vs nurture debate, we meet again!
Give me a Neural Net in its first epoch and I shall mold it into anything!
Not a typo but an incorrect use of that word.