I don't have a horse in the race. I don't even know what financial statement analysis is. But it worries me that a novel reliance on these models for traditionally skilled labor jobs will turn into a dependence. These models use the built up experience of human practitioners to achieve similar results. But if a dependence grows, then there will be no more skilled human practitioners to further develop improved skills and knowledge for these jobs. Calcifying the skills in time.
That wouldn't be a problem if the models actually worked for that. We don't miss cobblers.
But these models only seem to perform these jobs on the surface. Enough that companies will try them and waste resources. This will just hurt the bottom line optimizer shops and boost the professionals doing quality work on the long run.
I wish our civilization made these future med tech advancements every day. Sadly only rats benefit from our greatest medical achievements from cancer cures to limb regeneration.
getting tired of the underhanded shilling for c and procedural style programming. the people doing this still pretend they are the underdogs but their point of view is over saturated.
I don't know why you got that feeling, TFA says this:
> Some view C as a language so simple and raw that you’ll spend all your time working around the language’s lack of built in data structures, and fixing pointer bugs. The truth is that C’s simplicity is a strength. It compiles quickly. Its syntax doesn’t hide complex operations. It’s simple enough that I don’t have to constantly look things up. And I can easily compile it to both native and web assembly. While C has its share of quirks, I avoid them by habits developed over 22 years of use.
Which is nothing unreasonable.
I code mostly in a Lisp dialect but I don't take offense at, say, the Linux kernel being mostly C.
i am not assessing the truthfulness, the reasonableness, the correctness, or the veracity of the claims made in the article in any way. i simply do not care because the claims are purely subjective, untestable, unmeasurable. it is an opinion piece and one that is dulled out ad nauseam in the programming world today. enough to be annoying now. one opinion for another.
> Also when this person says the subscript "denotes the order of the measurement" I'm trying to figure out what kind of order he's talking about.
I hate that the most when reading papers. Authors trying to sound abstract and academic, but only accomplishing being frustratingly vague. AUTHORS YOU STILL HAVE TO INSERT THE SUBJECT INTO YOUR SENTENCES FOR THEM TO MAKE SENSE.
I'm so frustrated at this aspect in research papers more than anything else. You must disambiguate. Use absolute descriptors and do not use relative descriptors. Don't tell me to look right, because I'll look left. Use absolute descriptors! "then after spinning the prism the light cone blah blah blah" SPIN!? SPIN IN WHAT DIRECTION????? LEFT?RIGHT?! LATERAL? UP? DOWN???? How fast? How slow? You imagine all of these CRITICAL ASPECTS in your head when writing such ambiguous sentences, but the reader cannot read your mind.
Having written papers like this before, a large part of the problem is that almost all CS research is published in conferences, rather than journals, and conferences frequently have extremely strict length limits, on the order of three or five pages. If you have an even slightly complicated procedure it can be nightmarishly difficult to get even the core information into your paper, and you can forget about details or tangents.
reply