I find the intent/why very important. I have a rule in vault related that basically anytime CC writes a WHAT (requirement, concept, RFC) it must colocated a WHY and the WHY should be MY words. It helps resolve a lot of confusion.

I find the landscape perspective very valuable when trying to understand NN. Why SGD finds the right buckets? I am not super current, but this looked like the right trail to me -- https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.12...

Really? Even meats? Or drinks?

What is the point of this paper? It bothers me for some reason. Also, they seem completely unaware of physics work on this besides the shit from tegmark. No mention of zecchina or schwab, people actually working on real theories.

Look up "mental rehearsals" I think it's called. You do like 2 dry runs in your head. First, you let your mind kind of do what you're already doing, imagine obstacles and challenges along the path to completion. Second, try your hardest to picture yourself calmly overcoming each of those obstacles through to completion. It makes it seem more attainable.

"show me the incentive and I'll tell you the outcome" or however that saying goes

Hasnt exactly the opposite proven true? I thought they were actually appreciating in some cases? As token value goes up, old hardware becomes valuable.

Was just gonna say the same thing. Just call it a model ffs.

Lol cool anecdote. Guess karma for hating on billionaires is more important than saving lives.

How is this different than "more" than the sum? Is the argument/claim that we can't figure out stuff via composition? If so, why not?