Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

(fish in the poker sense, if that wasn't clear)

Right, I just think Kohut's third box (we are talking about the bottom one, right?) may be just as profitably looked at through the "egolessness" prism as through the "integrated" prism.

Looking through the shu-ha-ri prism, I could see the top two boxes as being symptomatic of the "ha" stage: breaking the rules with grandiose intentions usually leads to worthless results? In this model, there are two paths out: a retreat from frustration, back into "shu", or a tunnelling through frustration, onwards into "ri"?

(to what degree might tunnelling relate to LLM "double descent"?)

Speaking of "weaponized curiosity", I once ran across a recommendation for determining which puppies to bother attempting to train as hunting dogs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41488445





ELI5 which features of double descent evoked tunnelling to you?

If we look at "twice made dips", we say two times as there is first a dip, then a peak (rise and dip), and then the next dip. This is like when one hops the band gap: there is first a free wave, then one that looks like it dies out, but if it is still a bit big by the end of the gap, then it goes on to the next free wave.

Bloch oscillations? Didn't see that coming tbh. ELIgs then

No, not so fancy (do they arise from interference from the internal reflections?).

In standard tunnelling, one starts with a normal oscillation, goes to evanescence in the "tunnelling" regime, and then continues with oscillation again once on the low side of the potential; in double descent the test error goes way up (like the potential earlier) in the "tunnelling" regime, and then on the far side comes back down and then continues descending.

Have I explicated my model?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: