2,190 karma · joined August 9, 2010
Another book I'd recommend (in a very different category) is Godel, Escher, and Bach, by Douglas Hofstadter.
NYT article summarizing some of the issues addressed: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/science/chess-artificial-...
I believe their eventual Science paper addressed these concerns.
I used to think so, but some European cities really do offer counterexamples. I'm thinking of places like Munich, Vienna, and Copenhagen. It's not uncommon to see people there who, by American stereotypes, wouldn't be expected to ride scooters: moms with kids, men in suits, etc. Perhaps the urban cultural gap is so vast that what you're saying is indeed true of the US, but I wouldn't take it as a given.
As for why it took so long, it is and it is not fine-tuning. Getting RGNs to train _at all_ was a rather difficult process, and required a lot of finicking around. But since I got them working, I haven't actually spent all that much time fine-tuning them, and so I expect there to be a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of optimizing performance (starting from the baseline I found.)
Also as for how it’s different from what’s described in the paper, that’s the topic of the introduction of the paper. Rosetta uses both fragment assembly and co-evolution methods.