First update to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL since the challenge ended – Medium links!! Go add your Medium profile now 👀📝 (thanks @diannamallen for the suggestion 😁)

Maker movement is doing to startups what startups did to corporations.

Here is why 👇

Startups fixed the problem of innovation, that corporations lack.

In big, slow corporations, innovation is a RISK and distraction from the core $$$ profitable business.

Agile startups could launch, iterate fast and eventually stumble upon new growing market opportunities.

However,

When a startup reaches product-market-fit, it has to 🚀 "grow at all costs" and reach market dominance before some giant corporation can replicate their new product and distribute it to their existing giant customer base.

Startup's "growth at all costs" often means growth at the expense of charging customers $$$ money.

Hence, to be sustainable, startups have to constantly chase investor money.

Startup teams spend more time finding and pleasing investors, than finding and pleasing customers.

95% of startups die because they run out of (investor) money + no business model + crazy investor expectations.

Same way corporations die, when unable to adjust to new technology and market shifts.

So, on the subject of bonkers hyperbolic pretzeling over the Bell judgement, Grace 'destroy books I don't like & make inappropriate jokes about sterilising teenage girls' Lavery has some thoughts.

Tell me why my feminism is wrong Grace.

Oh

Well, if anyone thought the Bell judgment was going to make TRAs reconsider making massively overblown claims with no evidence backed up with nothing but a thick wadge of emotional blackmail.... HAHAHA, no one thought that.

A high court in the UK made a delimited judgment about teenager's ability to consent to puberty blockers. This puts all trans people everywhere in the world at risk.

Because if any human anywhere has any thoughts that deviate in any way from the rote line dictated by

the trans rights movement, this puts all trans people everywhere in mortal danger.

Let's be honest Grace. It doesn't put trans people at risk. It puts trans ideology at risk. Because trans ideology depends on the idea of innate gender identity, and the trans child is the

necessary material evidence of the ontology of gender identity.

That is, children are being medicalised to provide evidence to underwrite adults identities.

Nothing to see here.

A relationship begins to get stiff when excessive patterns begin to form.

Too many patterns leads to a boring, predictable, logical lifestyle.

Get the emotions involved.

Do something spontaneous out of the blue moon & flip the script.

'What's wrong with the patterns?'

Nothing is wrong with patterns.

However, there is a problem when all you have are patterns.

It's boring.

'Can you explain why?'

Sure 👇

The thing with relationships is that it's meant to be an emotional experience.

It's very difficult to logically explain love, right?

'Right.'

Well this is where you want to steer the ship the right way.

1. Too emotional is bad.

2. Too logical is bad.

Let me break it down.

1. Too emotional

If a relationship is completely ruled by emotions, then it's too volatile.

You will never reach productivity if you are aimlessly only following each others emotions.

This lifestyle tarnishes any structure for the couple.

'So why do people do it?'

Because it's fun.

You may ruled by this stage in the honeymoon phase.

Normal.

You'll be so spontaneous that it almost becomes a lifestyle.

But it's hard to level up your life when you're too spontaneous.

Avoid.

Ever wonder how traders get in stocks before they explode? 🧐

Or find options that move 1,000% in a single day/week?🤯

I made a thread going over exactly how I find these stocks BEFORE they take off 🚀
👇👇👇

So, let's start with the software I use…

Finviz!! Finviz is a free website that I use to scan for stocks.

They have a lot of other cool features as well, but I only use their scanner.
👇

Head on over to finviz and go to the screener

Click on the “All” tab on the top and put in the criteria in the next tweet
👇

This is the first scan that I use for bullish swing setups
✅Quarter +10%
✅Week Down
✅Vol over 400k
✅Optionable
✅Price > $20
👇

The next scan I use is the opposite of the first one.

Simply change:
✅Quarter +10% to -10%
✅Week Down to Week up

This is my bearish scan for swing setups. 👇

Important paper from Google on large batch optimization. They do impressively careful experiments measuring # iterations needed to achieve target validation error at various batch sizes. The main "surprise" is the lack of surprises. [thread]

https://t.co/7QIx5CFdfJ

The paper is a good example of lots of elements of good experimental design. They validate their metric by showing lots of variants give consistent results. They tune hyperparamters separately for each condition, check that optimum isn't at the endpoints, and measure sensitivity.

They have separate experiments where the hold fixed # iterations and # epochs, which (as they explain) measure very different things. They avoid confounds, such as batch norm's artificial dependence between batch size and regularization strength.

When the experiments are done carefully enough, the results are remarkably consistent between different datasets and architectures. Qualitatively, MNIST behaves just like ImageNet.

Importantly, they don't find any evidence for a "sharp/flat optima" effect whereby better optimization leads to worse final results. They have a good discussion of experimental artifacts/confounds in past papers where such effects were reported.