trwm

The whole thing reads like great literature. There should be a scientific magazine for papers that can be understood by the motivated layman. I accidentally read the whole thing in one sitting.

How fortunate are they whose families are still alive to mourn them.

There is a difference of degree between running Treblinika and supporting the US military.

A piece of computer history everyone should know is that holocaust tattoos were IBM punch card codes.

We stop pretending that universal time exists and add location to every time stamp relative to some predefined clock at a known location. The issues of when something happened dissapear.

The constraints of today would be much worse. I'd go so far as saying that making even Kubricks version today would be impossible.

The multiplier effect is well known and understood. Nit sure why you're arguing against it.

Yes this is called a positive externality.

It is why outsourcing produced much more devastation than was promised and why onshoring will create much more work than expected.

The end result currently will likely be stagflation since like always politiciand do the wrong thing even when doing the right thing.

Similar to OP if information is low density like a legal contract I can do 1200wpm after a few hours of getting used to it. Daily normal is 600wpm, if the text is heavy going enough I have to drop it down to 100 wpm and put it on loop.

Like usual the limit isn't how fast human io is but how fast human processing works.

This is of course true, but there's something very broken with lisp: metaprogramming and programming aren't the same thing,

Metaprogramming and programming are the same thing. It's just that no language, including all lisp, (but hilariously not m4) get quotation wrong. Lisp gets around this with macros which let you ignore quotation and deal with meta language statements expressed as object language statements when they clearly should not be.

This issue stems from the fact space in the object and meta language is treated as the termination of an atom without distinction between the two.

Cognition is different in that it uses an antisyntax that is fully postfix. This has similarities with concatenative programming languages

Postfix languages are a dual of prefix languages and suffer from the same issue. You either need to define the arity of all symbols ahead of time and not use higher order functions or you need a pair of delimiters which can serialise a tree. Relying on an implicit zeroth order stack solved the problem in the same way a lobotomy solves depression.

At this point this is a distinction without a difference.

The only question is if splines are more efficient than lines at describing general functions at the billion to trillion parameter count.

Business processes don't need deep learning in the first place. It is just there because hype.

Biases are just weights on an always on input.

There isn't much difference between weights of a linear sum and coefficients of a spline.