[HexagonalKitten]

I've seen the same in discussions of many things from programming to cars.

For instance, FP vs Imperative, where a simple example (map for instance) is being shown and someone always compares it to a for loop, and then disses garbage collection. They're obviously thinking of their existing language (we know from the GC comment) and not of whatever point the OP is trying to make about composability or whatever.

To some degree, examples are to blame. They often aren't good and don't show, to the actual audience, what the author intended. In my FP example, you need something that can't get stuck in a syntax-level debate and is complex enough for the benefits to show through. Like doing something that would take a 50-level deep stack of for loops in an unnested fashion.

It gives you more respect for great teachers who can pull examples out of the air that both illustrate and refuse to misdirect.

Can you (because I certainly can't) write a good post or blog about the minimum useful deep learning project that can't be done equivalently via any other methods?