When you complain about an open source project's management you'll get the reply, "Use something else if you don't like it!" That'd be true except for the tiny problem that *many* projects also strive for complete monopolistic dominance.
Let me tell you about Java in early 2k:
Overnight it seemed as if the *only* way to get a job was at giant companies, and they *loved* Enterprise Java.
"No more XML situps!"
"Convention of configuration!"
And this worked just the same way Java's did and RoR started eating into Java's lunch.
The goal of all projects is capture.
It's actually passive aggressive authoritarianism.
When you have no choice but to use their project they use this control to exploit you and ignore your needs.
When you complain about their actions they tell you to just leave.
But, you can't, so they actually mean: "Shut up and do as you're told."
All this adds up to "just use something else" is only an abusive control gesture.
*That* is authoritarianism, but...
More from Tech
THREAD: How is it possible to train a well-performing, advanced Computer Vision model 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗣𝗨? 🤔
At the heart of this lies the most important technique in modern deep learning - transfer learning.
Let's analyze how it
2/ For starters, let's look at what a neural network (NN for short) does.
An NN is like a stack of pancakes, with computation flowing up when we make predictions.
How does it all work?
3/ We show an image to our model.
An image is a collection of pixels. Each pixel is just a bunch of numbers describing its color.
Here is what it might look like for a black and white image
4/ The picture goes into the layer at the bottom.
Each layer performs computation on the image, transforming it and passing it upwards.
5/ By the time the image reaches the uppermost layer, it has been transformed to the point that it now consists of two numbers only.
The outputs of a layer are called activations, and the outputs of the last layer have a special meaning... they are the predictions!
At the heart of this lies the most important technique in modern deep learning - transfer learning.
Let's analyze how it
THREAD: Can you start learning cutting-edge deep learning without specialized hardware? \U0001f916
— Radek Osmulski (@radekosmulski) February 11, 2021
In this thread, we will train an advanced Computer Vision model on a challenging dataset. \U0001f415\U0001f408 Training completes in 25 minutes on my 3yrs old Ryzen 5 CPU.
Let me show you how...
2/ For starters, let's look at what a neural network (NN for short) does.
An NN is like a stack of pancakes, with computation flowing up when we make predictions.
How does it all work?
3/ We show an image to our model.
An image is a collection of pixels. Each pixel is just a bunch of numbers describing its color.
Here is what it might look like for a black and white image
4/ The picture goes into the layer at the bottom.
Each layer performs computation on the image, transforming it and passing it upwards.
5/ By the time the image reaches the uppermost layer, it has been transformed to the point that it now consists of two numbers only.
The outputs of a layer are called activations, and the outputs of the last layer have a special meaning... they are the predictions!
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?