I find this extremely sad.

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@[email protected] @[email protected] and, of course, we all know the most efficient way to do science is sift through thousands of papers with a sufficiently sized Markov model specialized in language and hope our fitting process magically filters out the fundamental scientific concepts that the words are trying to express and not, you know, the eight trillion other possibilities.

[hipsterelectron@circumstances.run]

@jonny @aud yeah we saw flashes of this earlier in bioinformatics everyone loves the idea of models that just work if your data looks similar and it makes you feel terribly intelligent to unify all these concepts but you quickly run into the problem that validating new methods receives zero interest from journals while it's very easy for journals to accept work using a method they've seen before even if it's completely inapplicable. only difference is that LLMs require much less technical effort to hook up which is a great business success but it depends on marketing that generality free of domain constraints

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@[email protected] into an unconstrained model that is designed to model an entirely orthogonal set of concepts and is likely to reproduce linguistic noise rather than scientific truths.

Haaaaate all this.

[hipsterelectron@circumstances.run]

@jonny @aud bazel also marketed as the universal build tool even though it's actually worse than making your own system from scratch

[hipsterelectron@circumstances.run]

@jonny @aud i like react though and i think everyone is wrong for hating it but that's totally unrelated

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@[email protected] I think I'd rather draw the tarot than use a chatbot (and I mean this with all respect to drawing the tarot): because with the tarot reading I could use it as a storytelling framework to sort out my instincts, feelings, and conflicts, and go on to do more experimentation. Can't do that with a chatbot.

[jonny@neuromatch.social]

@hipsterelectron @aud you know i actually like react, and it is both "a cultural signifier for a kind of guy/kind of site" as well as "something i use all the time and find genuinely useful for making websites that are not a total disaster"

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@[email protected] @[email protected] this is a really good way to put it

[hipsterelectron@circumstances.run]

@jonny @aud don't like how it can make web pages annoying to inspect but react itself doesn't do that it's generators that work on top of it which also tends to be why most corp websites are inscrutable. saying it goes against web standards when web standards means google and apple is lol to me

[hipsterelectron@circumstances.run]

@jonny @aud just want people to have the right critiques i.e. mine

[samir@mastodon.functional.computer]

@hipsterelectron @jonny @aud Most of the problem that people have with React isn’t React, it’s using Webpack and friends to build a blog with no HTML, which requires JS and AJAX to render anything at all. You can do this with any framework.

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] I also have to admit that I was forced to work on Redux, not just React, which I hated