Radiologists like to distinguish between "perception" and "cognition", but the reality is that cognition is the same statistical process machines use, just without knowing the actual probability numbers.
Satellite image processing can certainly detect a hotspot then interpret it as either a small brushfire or a missile launch. Facial recognition detects my features then interprets who I am. It's all pattern matching just at different scales in different parameter spaces.
Thank you. I think my comment was careful to specify "in this domain" and "computer vision model"; I didn't say anything about generative AI. The reference to neural networks was hopefully an obvious rhetorical flair, rather than a one-line assertion that computers and brains are actually equivalent.
I also didn't say anything about whatever Altman or any specific company is doing.
The simple fact is that we send humans to school for years to learn to read and classify these things. It's something computers will be able to do strictly better.
Except it would see all the times similar starting conditions led to different diagnosis and recognize those contradictions. Or all the different treatments and their outcomes. And it would never forget or have bias.
It would be like the sum of all medical professors in existence.
I'm sorry to hear that. The accusations of drug seeking are particularly galling.
AI is absolutely a god send for patients navigating the medical system.
I know the US system is horrible and I sympathize with doctors doing their best within it. But we must admit, they are also responsible for the countless stories just like yours, and have contributed to the public's deteriorating trust of medical institutions. It's not just the insurance companies and conglomerate CEOs.
Well, a good physics teacher might note the difference between external work on the gravitational field, versus the internal thermodynamic work of the human body. Which could lead to a quick discussion of how muscles are a dynamic system depending on constant activation of actin & myosin (and therefore consumption of ATP) as opposed to a static elastic system like a piece of metal.
Very intuitive analogy is that running an engine in neutral burns fuel, but doesn't do work to move the car forward.
If the stone blocks below the hepatopancreatic ampulla (the ampulla of Vater) then it will be blocking the pancreatic duct as well, leading to a buildup of digestive enzymes inside the pancreas.
Them: The problem is making good food choice. The drug helps with that.
You: The drug is a bandaid; just make good food choices.
Antidepressants are the best analogy here. If the core problem is in your brain (or brain-body integration), then, for now, exogenous compounds are the only way to address the core issue.
I think the implication was a focus on the more strongly conserved folksy cultures and stuff. Whereas modern Romans are more... Italian. That having perhaps transformed to a great degree than others in the roughly two millennia.
Don't know why this was down voted. Most people ruled by the Roman empire weren't ethnic Romans. Even in the early days it started as a mix of Italic tribes like the Latins and Sabines. And in 212 AD the edict of Caracalla granted Roman citizenship to all free men throughout the empire.
I imagined this was sort of the whole point of the article.
>This includes side projects that have not gone through IARC, even for DevRel engineers.
So did you do this "Launcher2" or "Ariane" thing and get the approvals? If so, it seems your ass would be covered. If not...
I can sympathize that the process seems convoluted and could particularly bite a DevRel accustomed to more autonomy. One would hope Google would do the whole blame free retrospective thing and improve the systems.
What in my comment makes you think I'm disputing anthropogenic climate change? It's about the pattern of logic you are applying.
You seem to think that because Climate change is a messy topic with one real explanation, every other messy topic must also have a single true explanation. No, it doesn't work that way
Trump is the embodiment of a culture that was willing to make that vote. Of the populace that was tricked by The Apprentice and The Art of the Deal. Of the media more concerned with engagement than information. He spent his lifetime curating the image that made him uniquely positioned for his role, even if he didn't expect to get it.
That's exactly how Professor Sean Wilentz put it on one of his podcast episodes. He referred to it as "the politics of the aggrieved" I believe, while tracing the literary and legal influences from then until now.
What's horseshit is derailing a discussion about political bias in academia by quibbling over use of the word "race" when it wasn't even essential to the point.
People can't change between white and black skin. "Racism" exists in the US. Your gaslighting is embarrassing.
I think you know perfectly well my meaning in context of the comment thread I was replying to.
Yes, some people are mixed ethnicity or "white passing". Yes societal views changes ("Italian used to not be considered white"). At the end of the day, most people fall into one of the categories and don't get to change that.
Satellite image processing can certainly detect a hotspot then interpret it as either a small brushfire or a missile launch. Facial recognition detects my features then interprets who I am. It's all pattern matching just at different scales in different parameter spaces.