If one takes results like this -- https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04494 -- and then
consider what happens with, say, Code Llama, it seems plausible that it is
representing both the breadth and depth of what humans know about large and
complex code bases. It is not clear to me why knowledge can’t
It is an interesting question.
A colleague of mine, to whom I refer either affectionately (sometimes) or in
exasperation (most times) as The Mystic believes that this utilization was what
the Phenomenologists were after, though he considers only Husserl and Fink the
real deal, and the others
“math had become too big; nobody could understand more than 1/4 of
it”.
"But with four neighbors I can compute most of it" ;-)
On Sat, Feb 10, 2024, 5:25 AM David Eric Smith wrote:
> There’s a famous old rant by von Neumann, known at least by those who were
> around to hear it, or so I was
There’s a famous old rant by von Neumann, known at least by those who were
around to hear it, or so I was told by Martin Shubik.
von Neumann was grumping that “math had become too big; nobody could understand
more than 1/4 of it”. As always with von Neumann, the point of saying
something
