Zitron thinks capex is a liability that needs to be paid off in a year instead of a long-standing asset.
Similarly he thinks that an investment into an AI startup is also a loan that the startup needs to pay back out of their own revenue, instead of a share of a company that will IPO at a higher valuation.
Basically his doomerism is a byproduct of financial illiteracy.
The "March for Science" that happened earlier this year had estimated attendance of 1.07 million.
Now go to Google Images and search for "March for Science". Nearly every sign I see is either political in nature, elevating science to a level of religion/infallibility, or casting science as a fashion/meme ("Scientific is the new chic", "Science isn't wrong", "In science we trust").
That was poor wording. It was in reference to the science "cheerleaders" who, from my own observations, are often equally as clueless about science as there anti-science counterparts.
> We have too many people thinking it's okay to discredit scientists and scholars because they don't understand how research works.
And a similar number of people who elevate science to the level of religion, marching in its name and developing a brand of hero worship for scientists when they too know nothing at all about the scientific process. Both are forms of anti-intellectualism that are growing in our polarized political environment.
Do you mean "the weight parameters you have access to[sic]" or do you frequently find yourself limited by the model's token vocabulary?