"This is content production in the age of algorithmic discovery — even if you’re a human, you have to end up impersonating the machine."https://twitter.com/alicemazzy/status/927598668076781569 …
mean... this kind of requires positing that in two to four thousand years the number of people who thought "maybe i should come up with my own thing instead of copying what these jerks are doing" was zero
-
-
not zero, but not very large, either
-
like, if you're learning a new thing, you'll probably want see what the people already good at it are doing, and then try and be like them
-
instead of going around stabbing at the dark all random-like
-
sure, but even then the whole exercise is that you take the example and build on it to try to gain advantage. how far afield human intuition can go in doing that gives every appearance of being limited
-
specifically it gives the appearance of getting stuck in the neighborhood of local maxima so it can't find global maxima, which is a huge problem for machines too, so there is that, but there are strategies for mitigating that that machines have access to that humans don't
-
like throwing enormously larger amounts of precisely coordinated processing power at it
-
I find it interesting that while strong chess engines calculate up to 20 moves ahead, human grandmasters seldom do more than 5
-
obviously the machine has more brute force, but humans require less to be good at chess — we've better heuristics
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.