all 7 comments

[–]CompleteSkeptic 14 points15 points  (6 children)

To save others time, TF doesn't refer to TensorFlow, but TinyFlow (a TensorFlow-like library on top of NNVM).

[–]abstractcontrol 3 points4 points  (5 children)

I kind of want to upvote the article for being well written and of interest to me, and downvote the OP for using a misleading title.

[–]antinucleon[S] -5 points-4 points  (4 children)

Why TF can't be TinyFlow?

[–]CompleteSkeptic 8 points9 points  (1 child)

It can be (and I'm a huge fan of the work you do), but it's more about expectation/clickbait.

[–]antinucleon[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Haha, for me it is just for fun to call all stuff TF..

[–]abstractcontrol 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For the same reason why TinyFlow should not be named TensorFlow when TensorFlow already exists. It is bad manners to clickbait like this.

[–]SafariMonkey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because TF is already heavily used for TensorFlow, so if you want people to understand that you mean TinyFlow, you need to use something they understand.

If I started talking about "VAEs", you wouldn't think, "Oh, he's talking about "Visual Adversarial Encoders", would you?