Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
pharmakos said:
Scientists might not be affected by pop sci, but there are countless examples since the fucking Renaissance where public interest in a scientific subject helped push scientific advancements. Perhaps because, tho scientists aren't affected by pop sci, the people that FUND science are? Idk. But you're just being an elitist asshole for the sake of being an elitist asshole, really not sure what you're trying to contribute, so?
Click to expand...
You weren't talking about science overall; you were talking about a specific piece of it. You aren't wrong about overall science, you are incredibly naive and ignorant about a specific piece of science.
 
  • 1Picard
Reactions: 1 user
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
Mudcrush Durtfeet said:
Happy holidays! Remember kids, arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics.
Click to expand...
The one thing we can all agree on this festive season is that your opinions about anything is hot garbage. Happy holidays!
 
  • 2Truth!
  • 1Salty
Reactions: 2 users
pharmakos

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,305
-2,233
wormie said:
You weren't talking about science overall; you were talking about a specific piece of it. You aren't wrong about overall science, you are incredibly naive and ignorant about a specific piece of science.
Click to expand...

Again: are you imagining that I thought "oh, good, this is on Ars, now maybe some physicist out there will see this and be inspired to figure this shit out"? Because that's not what I was saying, at all.

I was just saying "it's cool this is the general trend this piece of science is on," you're the asshole reading what you want out of it trying to win some internet badass points in a thread where you're not likely to earn many.
 
  • 1Salty
Reactions: 1 user
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
pharmakos said:
Again: are you imagining that I thought "oh, good, this is on Ars, now maybe some physicist out there will see this and be inspired to figure this shit out"? Because that's not what I was saying, at all.

I was just saying "it's cool this is the general trend this piece of science is on," you're the asshole reading what you want out of it trying to win some internet badass points in a thread where you're not likely to earn many.
Click to expand...
I am not imagining anything. I am going off what you said, as quoted in my previous reply.
 
  • 1Picard
Reactions: 1 user
pharmakos

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,305
-2,233
wormie said:
You weren't talking about science overall; you were talking about a specific piece of it. You aren't wrong about overall science, you are incredibly naive and ignorant about a specific piece of science.
Click to expand...

So I'm right overall that public opinion matters, but I'm wrong that this individual blog post matters. Is there some number of blog posts I could present to say that public opinion has reached an appropriate saturation level to reach the image as a whole that we agree upon? How many articles would have to exist to represent a statistically relevant trend?

Science as a whole is made of individual parts. If I'm right that public opinion as a whole sways science, then why am I wrong to be happy that an individual unit of public opinion is swaying a way that interests me?

You may not have even admitted it to yourself yet, but you really are just being an elitist asshole, and it's rather obvious to everyone outside of your ego bubble.
 
  • 1Dislike
Reactions: 1 user
MusicForFish

MusicForFish

Ultra Maga Instinct
<Prior Amod>
35,188
138,083
giphy.gif
 
  • 3Solidarity
Reactions: 2 users
Gruden

Gruden

<Bronze Donator>
50
88
Ehh, I dont see how there can be a fifth Force of Nature. You're only allowed four in a deck. Stupid scientists
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
pharmakos said:
So I'm right overall that public opinion matters, but I'm wrong that this individual blog post matters. Is there some number of blog posts I could present to say that public opinion has reached an appropriate saturation level to reach the image as a whole that we agree upon? How many articles would have to exist to represent a statistically relevant trend?

Science as a whole is made of individual parts. If I'm right that public opinion as a whole sways science, then why am I wrong to be happy that an individual unit of public opinion is swaying a way that interests me?

You may not have even admitted it to yourself yet, but you really are just being an elitist asshole, and it's rather obvious to everyone outside of your ego bubble.
Click to expand...
It’s not an individual blog post you stupid fuck. It’s about hyping up unproven and untested shit in order to get clicks. What happens when this piece of science is debunked? How will that affect public perception of use of tax funds? You are right that science needs to be presented to a wide audience in order to continue its support. You are a stupid mother fucker for thinking that hyping up unknown science is in a useful way to go about it.
 
  • 1Salty
Reactions: 1 user
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
Tuco said:
Wait what, deep learning is dead?
Click to expand...
Deep learning hype is. And the research is dying since its making no real progress. Soon it will be just another useful optimization technique in industry and a chapter in a textbook in schools.
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
wormie said:
Deep learning hype is. And the research is dying since its making no real progress. Soon it will be just another useful optimization technique in industry and a chapter in a textbook in schools.
Click to expand...
False. The government, like usual, is behind the curve and on the deep learning/AI hype train currently.
 
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
ZyyzYzzy said:
False. The government, like usual, is behind the curve and on the deep learning/AI hype train currently.
Click to expand...
Maybe. I have a view skewed towards academia. The field is beginning to get rekt by replication issues and the fact that there are thousands of papers submitted to conferences that all have the following format:

"In this paper we present novel findings that are important to the future of issue_X. Our novel and unique and totally awesome approach has improved performance of state of the art by 0.002% on a carefully curated and cleaned data set that in no way reflects anything real"

^ Every fuck paper you read is like that. I had to slog through some ACL proceedings from this year and there is nothing fucking new in that shit. Also, last years NIPS (I REFUSE TO CALL IT NeurIPS, eat shit and die faggots) had a very widely spread talk about how ML and DL specifically is akin to alchemy. That sentiment hasnt gone away since then. I think a lot of people are frustrated as to a lack of real progress in the last 4-5 years. Anyway, the last hope for DL, IMO, are the physics departments as they are doing cool shit and they tend to figure things about about the truth of models while CS people are usually potato farmers in comparison.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
47,956
82,711
wormie said:
Deep learning hype is. And the research is dying since its making no real progress. Soon it will be just another useful optimization technique in industry and a chapter in a textbook in schools.
Click to expand...
I don't know what hype bubbles you're watching pop but the hype is at Cleganebowl levels in robotics, vision and autonomous vehicles from where I'm standing.


I mean, the first time we came to the thought of, "So we make this chain of weighted convolutions or whatever and end up with a system we can only kind of probe from on the outside and if we spend enough $$$ on data input it might get some good results" was back in, I don't know, 2014. Deep learning has gotten steadily better since, but I think it's getting more and more hype even if people are coming to that same realization.
machine_learning.png
 
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,968
Tuco said:
I don't know what hype bubbles you're watching pop but the hype is at Cleganebowl levels in robotics, vision and autonomous vehicles from where I'm standing.


I mean, the first time we came to the thought of, "So we make this chain of weighted convolutions or whatever and end up with a system we can only kind of probe from on the outside and if we spend enough $$$ on data input it might get some good results" was back in, I don't know, 2014. Deep learning has gotten steadily better since, but I think it's getting more and more hype even if people are coming to that same realization.
machine_learning.png
Click to expand...

Yeah industry needs a few years to catch up to the boredom. Biggest reason its hyped is because VC are chasing it, thats changing soonish.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
47,956
82,711
wormie said:
Maybe. I have a view skewed towards academia. The field is beginning to get rekt by replication issues and the fact that there are thousands of papers submitted to conferences that all have the following format:

"In this paper we present novel findings that are important to the future of issue_X. Our novel and unique and totally awesome approach has improved performance of state of the art by 0.002% on a carefully curated and cleaned data set that in no way reflects anything real"

^ Every fuck paper you read is like that. I had to slog through some ACL proceedings from this year and there is nothing fucking new in that shit. Also, last years NIPS (I REFUSE TO CALL IT NeurIPS, eat shit and die faggots) had a very widely spread talk about how ML and DL specifically is akin to alchemy. That sentiment hasnt gone away since then. I think a lot of people are frustrated as to a lack of real progress in the last 4-5 years. Anyway, the last hope for DL, IMO, are the physics departments as they are doing cool shit and they tend to figure things about about the truth of models while CS people are usually potato farmers in comparison.
Click to expand...
We probably agree then. I think the massive glut of papers like that is just because you don't need to do shit to get that 0.002%, so you can coattail ride all day without producing anything novel or worth reading.

Most real-world computer science before deep-learning is more closed-form where once you find a better solution you've got something novel, so there's less room to needledick your way into paper acceptance by tweaking something and curating your data harder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.