Insighteous
Insighteous t1_j430uuc wrote
Reply to comment by chatterbox272 in [D] Is making a dataset publicly accessible necessary for acceptance at top-tier conferences in ML? by newperson77777777
Publishing everything is a good thing. At the moment I am trying to reproduce some results of a paper and have to work with „we created X datasets by three methods“. And NO WHERE in the paper it is stated what these three methods are. Also no code.
It is so annoying. Cannot put it in words.
Insighteous t1_j2vwdoz wrote
Reply to comment by TheOverGrad in [D] life advice to relatively late bloomer ML theory researcher. by notyourregularnerd
Jump ten years ahead and compare 31, 32 to 37. It is not as weird as it might seem to be.
Insighteous t1_j23rpgd wrote
Well. It is nice. But in no way it has the quality of a PowerPoint made by one BCG / McKinsey Consultant.
Insighteous t1_ixh7wbc wrote
Reply to [D] Schmidhuber: LeCun's "5 best ideas 2012-22” are mostly from my lab, and older by RobbinDeBank
So this is how research works? Like a big fat self-marketing campaign. Disgusting. Was it always like that? What is with (my idealized) imagination of working together in a big scientific community and enhance knowledge for everyone. Or what is this about?
Insighteous t1_j9f0xgb wrote
Reply to [D] Maybe a new prompt injection method against newBing or ChatGPT? Is this kind of research worth writing a paper? by KakaTraining
Please don't call it engineering. The word is already devalued enough.