Discovering arXiv

I am pretty sure GANs were the thing that got me onto arXiv on October 16, 2018. [verify date from browser history/downloads/messages] I want to be annoyingly precise about that because the first encounter with a new intellectual substrate matters to me more than the sanitized sentence "I became interested in AI." Before this, technical knowledge mostly came packaged as courses, books, tutorials, documentation—things that had already been cleaned up enough to teach. arXiv was different. Here were people publishing the frontier while it was still messy. Sometimes wrong. Sometimes barely readable. Sometimes a PDF would contain an idea that had existed in somebody's head a few weeks earlier and now I could just download it in Texas for free.

GANs were already conceptually insane to me: two learned systems shaping each other through an adversarial objective until one could synthesize outputs that increasingly fooled the other. The important thing was not only the pictures. It was the architecture. You could define an interaction between optimization processes and get a capability that was not directly hand-coded. That general pattern—specify the game, the losses, the information channels, then let behavior emerge—felt much closer to cognition than the software I had grown up writing.

Then a few weeks later I read a paper on deep reinforcement learning and it completely blew my mind. [identify exact paper] This was the stronger hit. An agent has observations, actions, rewards, internal representations; it interacts with an environment and gradually forms behavior. Of course the implementation is not "a brain." Of course modern RL abstractions omit enormous amounts of cognition. But at the time it was the first place I felt cognitive features mapping cleanly onto algorithmic substrate. Value is not merely a philosophical word; you can instantiate a learned value function. Policy is not merely "what the creature does"; it can be an object that maps state to behavior. Representation can be learned because it is useful downstream rather than because a programmer named every category in advance.

This was intoxicating because it connected two things I already loved: math and making. The equations were not sitting there as inert descriptions of nature. They were executable design constraints. You write down an objective, an update rule, a network architecture, a sampling process, and then you run the thing and some tiny piece of adaptive behavior appears. The calculus and linear algebra that had seemed beautiful on their own suddenly became engineering affordances for constructing systems that learned.

I started following citations and downloading papers. I would print them. During the period when I was working at McDonald's I would read AI/ML papers in the back room. [embed: any photo / surviving printout] This was one of the most absurdly productive consequences of being directionless: nobody had assigned me a curriculum, so I followed curiosity. One paper mentioned a model, I looked up the model. The model relied on a concept I didn't know, I learned the concept. Somebody cited a neuroscience mechanism, now I had another literature to fall into. The graph expanded much faster than any degree plan I had seen.

I also loved that nobody could stop me. This is maybe obvious if you grew up assuming scientific literature was available to you, but my whole life had included fairly strong notions about which institutions had legitimate authority. arXiv had almost none of that gatekeeping at the reader interface. I did not need to be admitted to Stanford to read what Stanford researchers were doing. I did not need to wait for a professor to decide I had completed the prerequisite chain. I could open section 3, discover that I did not understand a symbol, go learn it, and come back.

There is a downside to this learning style. It creates holes. I learned many things out of order. I sometimes built an intuition around a paper before I had the textbook-level framing that would have made its limitations obvious. I could become overly impressed by architectures because I encountered them as inventions before I encountered the boring baseline they only slightly improved. But I still prefer that mode to waiting for permission. The frontier gave me reasons to learn foundations, and foundations gave me better eyes for the frontier.

[link/embed: earliest recovered arXiv papers] [scan: printed papers with annotations] [link: early ML implementations / repos] [timeline: Oct 2018 onward]

The citation graph eventually pulled me toward brains. At some point the computational metaphors stopped being enough and I wanted to know what biological intelligence actually looked like when measured. A book called Rhythms of the Brain became one of the portals.