fair enough
-
-
when in a pessimistic mood, I think all papers have some bullshit—but industrial bullshit is harder to detect
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I feel like different companies have different flavors of bullshit.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
bullshit is a many splendored thing
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @johnregehr @danluu and
Is there a blog post of 'signs a paper is BS'? Similar to Aaronson's '10 signs' for math papers?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cjordansquire @danluu and
very tough. we're not talking about cranks and crackpots here.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @johnregehr @danluu and
What about catalog of reasonable baseline algorithms and tasks?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cjordansquire @johnregehr and
It might be way subject specific, though, so it'd take a series of posts/community wiki/SO post.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
agree with
@johnregehr that this seems v. hard. Past example tasks (e.g., SPEC) got heavily gamed...1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @danluu @cjordansquire and
For most papers I care about Idk how you'd even create a standard let alone a non-gamable one.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Many papers claim something like "We build A, 2x better than B", where both are proprietary.
-
-
Replying to @danluu @cjordansquire and
AFAICT there's no way to verify the claim other than "know a guy who isn't invested in lying"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danluu @cjordansquire and
And, unfortunately, I don't really see how that can change with proprietary systems.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
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.