Rumelhart et al wrote "Parallel Distributed Processing"; there's a chapter where he proves that the backprop algorithm maximizes "harmony", which is simply a different formulation of error minimization.
I remember reading this book enthusiastically back in the mid 90s. I don't recall struggling with the proof, it was fairly straightforward. (I was in senior high school year at the time.)
IIUC, the iterators stuff basically makes the task of creating iterator adaptors easier. Note that boost already provides similar facilities in the STLInterfaces library:
Note also that Joaquín López Muñoz has created a very interesting range iterator library which is based on push semantics. These have better performance, which is is intuitively reasonable (for me at least).
Agree completely. I assume OP means major or minor 7th chord - they can't possibly mean dominant 7th, because...does there even exist a single blues song which doesn't have that chord?
And let's say you take maj7 chords - "you and me song", "you are so beautiful", "sing sang sung", "1975" - just off the top of my head. Pretty much any pop song which is melancholic sounding.
For min7, choose virtually any Santana song.
Even if you said maj9 or min9 it still wouldn't be remotely true. Otoh 13th chords....I think you'd have to reach to find a non-jazz occurrence of that chord. And it happens in jazz all the time.
I am pretty sure the analysis is: however the chord is notated in Ultimate Guitar, that's how it's analyzed. So if the chord sheet says C Am F G, that's exactly how it's being analyzed, even if that G is almost certainly acting as a dominant 7th, especially once you factor in what all the other voices are doing.
One of the drawings had the inscription 'I am a wild beast' -- that's 5-7 year old territory. Ofc it's possible that I'm missing some cultural nuance, but the picture is consistent with precocious-little-kid-with-visceral-imagination. He must have been a joy to parent!
Interesting comment, but Germany's much-vaunted Mittelstand is in its initial death throes. Key industries and IP are being auctioned off to the highest bidder, not the least, for lack of heirs. It isn't universally acknowledged, but the same processes that caused the US's manufacturing decay have been occurring in Germany; at roughly the same speed, but with a 30 year lag (since Agenda 2010) viz-a-vis the US.
I see what you're saying, but looking at the video, which shows playgrounds and notes, I'm quite excited to try this because it looks a lot like jupyterlab. Jupyterlab is familiar to any data scientist, but while it's easy to use, it's quite awkward to extend due to the latter being based on a plugin system (understandably) based on typescript.
Here it's all one system, and thinking of the image as a key-value store feels quite natural too. Finally, the UI with panes that go right also feels natural and looks quite slick. I wonder if it's easy to switch between languages? Like can the key-value store pass data to a python program, or use an Apache arrow table?
A few notes: the moving from left to right allows for a dynamic exploration which is different from the typical defined exploration from a notebook. In Glamorous Toolkit we consider that both are important and complementary.
The dynamic exploration is enabled by the tools following the context. For example, the views in the inspector appear when you get to an object that has those views. You do not call these views by name. Also, choosing a different view allows you to change the course of the exploration midstream. Furthermore, you can create a view right in place, too.
The exploration possibilities are visible, but there are more pieces that are less visible that make the environment interesting. For example, there is a whole language workbench underneath and a highly flexible editor that can also be contextualized programmatically.
If you do give it a try, please let us know what you think of it.
I totally agree, and this community far is from the worst. In trans communities there's incredible hostility towards LLMs - even local ones. "You're ripping off artists", "A pissing contest for tech bros", etc.
I'm trans, and I don't disagree that this technology has aspects that are problematic. But for me at least, LLMs have been a massive equalizer in the context of a highly contentious divorce where the reality is that my lawyer will not move a finger to defend me. And he's lawyer #5 - the others were some combination of worse, less empathetic, and more expensive. I have to follow up a query several times to get a minimally helpful answer - it feels like constant friction.
ChatGPT was a total game-changer for me. I told it my ex was using our children to create pressure - feeding it snippets of chat transcripts. ChatGPT suggested this might be indicative of coercive control abuse. It sounded very relevant (my ex even admitted in a rare, candid moment that she feels a need to control everyone around her one time), so I googled the term - essentially all the components were there except physical violence (with two notable exceptions).
Once I figured that out, I asked it to tell me about laws related to controlling relationships - and it suggested laws either directly addressing (in the UK and Australia), and the closest laws in Germany (Nötigung, Nachstellung, violations of dignity, etc., translating them to English - my best language). Once you name specific laws broken and provide a rationale for why there's a Tatbestand (ie the criterion for a violation is fulfilled), your lawyer has no option but to take you more seriously. Otherwise he could face a malpractice suit.
Sadly, even after naming specific law violations and pointing to email and chat evidence, my lawyer persists in dragging his feet - so much so that the last legal letter he sent wasn't drafted by him - it was ChatGPT. I told my lawyer: read, correct, and send to X. All he did was to delete a paragraph and alter one or two words. And the letter worked.
Without ChatGPT, I would be even more helpless and screwed than I am. It's far from clear I will get justice in a German court, but at least ChatGPT gives me hope, a legal strategy. Lastly - and this is a godsend for a victim of coercive control - it doesn't degrade you. Lawyers do. It completely changed the dynamics of my divorce (4 years - still no end in sight, lost my custody rights, then visitation rights, was subjected to confrontational and gaslighting tactics by around a dozen social workers - my ex is a social worker -, and then I literally lost my hair: telogen effluvium, tinea capitis, alopecia areata... if it's stress-related, I've had it), it gave me confidence when confronting my father and brother about their family violence.
It's been the ONLY reliable help, frankly, so much so I'm crying as I write this. For minorities that face discrimination, ChatGPT is literally a lifeline - and that's more true the more vulnerable you are.
I remember reading this book enthusiastically back in the mid 90s. I don't recall struggling with the proof, it was fairly straightforward. (I was in senior high school year at the time.)
reply