will-burner
There are open source NER models that can identify any specified entity type (https://universal-ner.github.io/, https://github.com/urchade/GLiNER). I don't see why this WhisperNER approach would be any better than doing ASR with whisper and then applying one of these NER models.
How Scaling Changes Model Behavior
edit: Get some Moo Deng jokes in the docs!
The article helped me realize why so many people in the startup/tech/software engineering scene are drawn to effective altruism, it's a way to scale helping humanity in the best way possible. The effective altruism argument is that it's more productive to by mosquito nets in Africa than to volunteer at a food shelter because buying mosquito nets will save more lives.
But this article helps explain why I don't personally feel drawn to or buy into effective altruism. Because caring doesn't scale, you can only really care about a handful of people close to you. And to me that altruism feels better and seems like it goes further than donating money to help more people that I can't truly care for.
I don't know if it's just me but I would not be stoked to be asked this question during an interview. During interviews you're implicitly trying to differentiate yourself from others vying for the position. You usually do this by talking about your experience in different ways. I find it annoying when the interviewer explicitly asks you to differentiate yourself from others vying for the position. In part it annoys me because I think that should be the job of the interviewer to determine based on how I've answered their concrete questions about my experience. But also explicit questions like this one give such an opportunity for bs that I do not think they give a lot of signal. I guess I could be wrong though and don't spend enough time thinking about what makes me better than other people.
But I'm curious what prompted you to bring that up in this thread? I don't see how it's connected to the blog post.
At the end of the day though, I get the feeling the author is too concerned with status and the rat race of business in America. His view of what it’s possible for someone in tech to work on is very narrow, at some point he says you can either work at google on google search or work at palantir or a few other things.
I’m thankful to the comments here for pointing out more of the bad thing Palantir has been apart of, and so while i feel this article is interesting, Palantir still sounds pretty bad.
Yeah the author seems to think this paragraph is pro ayahuasca. Healing years of abuse - definitely good. Getting divorced - could be good or bad depending on the situation. Spending all your savings on making a film instead of buying a house. This one is leaning (could be good) towards more of a bad decision than a good one to me.
For a while in undergrad I was a double math and psychology major. I spent a semester doing undergraduate research in a psychology lab where I would take people in to do be subjects in the experiment and then write them a check afterwards for participating. During the experiment they'd listen to one syllable sounds some from a english and some not from english and the experiment tested whether the subjects were better at remembering the one syllable sounds from the english language when played one syllable sounds back after listening to the first set.
As I type this I think it's an interesting experiment, but it felt to me that the interesting questions in Psychology need to be so dumbed down to be able to run an experiment to test any hypothesis that what's actually interesting about Psychology get's lost in the weeds of trying to rigorously so the scientific method. I don't know a solution to this or whether it's even a problem, but it's problem endemic to the question of whether we're actually making progress in psychology. For the record, I do think we're making progress in Psychology.
On top of that I liked all the drug stuff and the kind of dystopian world created in the book.
It’s kind of cliche for a white male nerd of a certain age, but it has stuck with me. How imaginative the book is, the huge mix of characters and stories in the book, and the style of writing are incredible. The pace of interesting ideas is very fast and engrossing, and the language used to describe things is complex but not overly so.
It's obviously important to push the cutting edge, and it's imaginable that someday a chip like this could be in a personal computer (over 100 cores and over 4TBs of memory!).
The only things I can think, which I don't have experience with so I don't know if it's reasonable, would be high performance instances at data centers, supercomputing, and high performance main frames (is that a thing?).
At the same time, I can't help but think that this practice buys lock in for Apple in some way in the form of potentially new iphone features. And it's just veiled as a pro consumer privacy measure.
Time will tell.
They get their chips from the same company that Nvidia does.
From the article
>Cerebras had a net loss of $66.6 million in the first six months of 2024 on $136.4 million in sales, according to the filing.
That doesn't sound very good.
What makes them think they can compete with Nvidia, and why IPO right now?
Are they trying to get government money to make chip fabs like Intel or something?
>One useful trick for judging different kinds of work is to look at who your colleagues will be. You'll become like whoever you work with. Do you want to become like these people?
I've had 3 careers: working with high school students in low income areas, being an academic research mathematician, and now being a data scientist. The people I liked the best and who I would like to become like were the teachers I worked with at the high schools in low income areas.
>Indeed, the difference in character between different kinds of work is magnified by the fact that everyone else is facing the same decisions as you. If you choose a kind of work mainly for how well it pays, you'll be surrounded by other people who chose it for the same reason, and that will make it even more soul-sucking than it seems from the outside. Whereas if you choose work you're genuinely interested in, you'll be surrounded mostly by other people who are genuinely interested in it, and that will make it extra inspiring.
This pretty well states the soul-suckingness of working in industry.