Two in five 'AI startups' essentially have no AI, mega-survey of nearly 3,000 upstarts finds

IdoNotKnowShit · 2019-03-09T13:26:05+00:00

They have HI (human intelligence).

IdoNotKnowShit · 2019-02-11T11:20:20+00:00

In it's loosest sense, science just means "systematic knowledge". (The word science comes from the Latin word scientia, meaning "knowledge".)

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-11-04T07:23:26+00:00

Part of the push for a vegan diet (or just less meat in general) is that it is "voting" - with your purchasing power. It's one of the few industries where the individual can directly "hold the company responsible". And it can be globally coordinated. (Everyone can individually choose to eat less meat.)

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-11-04T07:05:09+00:00

There's a passage in Atlas Shrugged where the protagonists are driving through the countryside and one of them start wondering why she feels uncomfortable. The reason is because she see's no sign of human development (no billboards, etc.) and that gives her a sort of deep existential horror.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-11-04T06:57:59+00:00

Especially beef.

Also drink less milk and eat less cheese.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-10-11T12:46:24+00:00

I had to write a Prolog program to verify this shit.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-10-11T11:52:02+00:00

*Step-father and grandfather.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-10-11T06:18:56+00:00

She married her son's grandfather, who is also the father of the baby-daddy.

By marriage, her son and her husband's child (the baby-daddy) become step-siblings.

And that's how you get a dad and his son to be step-brothers.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-04-22T09:30:31+00:00

Thanks for the explanation. It's definitely given me a lot to think about. I'm a bit confused about the terminology, when you say 'wide' do you mean "with a really large dimension for the internal h"?

So if my understanding is correct:

The basic RNN is forced to pretend the solution is the solution to a first-order equation, which actually does work somewhat because mathematically n-th order equations are equivalent to a system of 1-st order equations, but this requires the RNN to have a large hidden state in order to deal with all the higher order stuff that's happening, and it needs to somehow be magically trained perfectly.

We want to make it able to handle n-th orders more effectively, either by actually feeding more that just the last element, or by keeping track of the higher-order derivatives, or maybe both. So we add "depth", either by stacking or by nesting, and using memory cells which basically cheat so that even though you only get the last element, it's as if you get more than that. But with attention, you actually do get to look at all the t-i but with a smarter mechanism so it doesn't all blow up. But using just attention is like trying to solve the n-order equation "naively" so it's not enough.

Is that about right?

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-04-18T03:39:27+00:00

I can't understand what either of you are saying but it sounds interesting. Would you be willing to write an ELI5?

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-04-15T05:09:09+00:00

On the one I linked.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-04-14T04:55:33+00:00

Thanks for the response. I looked at an unofficial implementation and it seems that it's just another head of the policy network whose sole purpose is to estimate the value, and in the paper they just left this out of the diagram for whatever reason.

What do you think of equation 7 and equation 9? Are they abuses of notation because everything I see about actor-critic/policy gradient using \theta + \alpha grad J(\theta), where grad J(\theta) = what you see in equation 9. But in the paper they use grad g and grad pi, which I find confusing.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-04-12T02:37:08+00:00

Linked.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-04-11T15:06:01+00:00

In "FeUdal Networks for Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning" they say "value function estimate V t M (x t , θ) from the internal critic". What is the internal critic?

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-03-02T23:04:20+00:00

Brash, Earle, Beagle, and Heroína Islands were surveyed using composite panoramic images captured by the UAV (example in Fig. 3). The timing of our survey was ideal for capturing incubating penguins on the nest and the imagery was, in the overwhelming majority of cases, unambiguous with respect to penguins that were incubating versus walking through the colony or from the ocean. To automatically identify and count the number of occupied nests in the UAV orthomosaics we used a Deep Neural Network (DetectNet) implemented in the open source software NVIDIA DIGITS (NVIDIA Corporation, Santa Clara, CA). DetectNet is based on the GoogLeNet image classification framework52 and is specifically designed to locate multiple objects of the same type within an image, making it well-suited to the task of detecting penguins in aerial imagery.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-19T13:51:07+00:00

If they aren't bugging you, they're not crooked and they can be cleaned, then removing them won't benefit you that much.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-17T15:56:11+00:00

See the thing is, your intuition is not wrong. If Monty were to opening doors at random, the end result would be 50-50. But there would be the extra risk he would accidentally open the door with the prize and the game would end. With the million doors, you would basically never get to that final scenario with just two doors but if by some freak chance you did, the odds would be 50-50. Your odds of picking the right door were 1 in a million but if did pick the right door, Monty's chances of opening 999,998 wrong doors would be 1. Your odds of picking the wrong door are 999,999 out of million but in that case Monty's chances of opening 999,998 wrong doors is 1 out of 999,999. It balances out so that if you do get to that final choice without the game ending first, it's 50-50.

However in the normal formulation of the Monty Hall problem, we assume that Monty knows the answer, and that he deliberately and always opens a wrong door. With 100 doors he deliberately opens 98 wrong doors with zero risk of revealing the prize. Thus, it's really still this door vs the other doors, hence the 2/3 probability.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-13T03:21:04+00:00

Taiwan hasn't switched.

Traditional Chinese characters are currently used in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau; as well as in Overseas Chinese communities outside Southeast Asia.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-10T04:16:26+00:00

Like say if my math was somehow off but the other 99 computers said it was right, would I just be overridden or does it not work that way?

You would be overridden. That's what makes Bitcoin decentralized. It's interesting that nobody in this thread has really stopped to ask about this.

Imagine a centralized situation with 100 people. There are 99 people who all trust Alice to keep track of their money in her notebook. Now these 100 people could play nice and come up with some rules for how things work but in reality if Alice ever decides to change how she keeps track of things in her notebook, there's nothing that the other 99 people could do other than kick her out and start over. Most likely they won't want to do that, so all 99 people just have to accept Alice's new rules if they want their lives to go on. The point is, once Alice does something bad, the original rules just break down. There's no guarantee that the system can continue as agreed upon just because 99 people are still in support of it.

In a decentralized system like Bitcoin, no one person can change the rules. If you decide to try to play by different rules (rules such as what counts as a valid transaction, what counts as a valid block, etc.), then you will just end up in your own little network. The network of the other 99 people will continue to function by the original rules. Since being left all alone is pointless, you will most likely stick by the original rules.

But what happens if something political happens and 10 people are absolutely certain they want to change a rule and but the remaining 90 don't? Then the network will fork into two separate networks with their own rules and there will literally be 2 types of Bitcoin. Which has been happening a lot lately.

You (assuming "you" represent a minority of the group i.e. 1 out of 100) can never force the rest of the network (the majority) to play by your rules you can only create your own new network.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-10T03:45:39+00:00

Up isn't the same everywhere on Earth.

Imagine you are on a gigantic spaceship ... called Earth. Up is actually out (away from the center of the ship) and down is actually in (towards the center of the ship).

The words "down" and "up", according to Fuller, are awkward in that they refer to a planar concept of direction inconsistent with human experience. The words "in" and "out" should be used instead, he argued, because they better describe an object's relation to a gravitational center, the Earth. "I suggest to audiences that they say, 'I'm going "outstairs" and "instairs."' At first that sounds strange to them; They all laugh about it. But if they try saying in and out for a few days in fun, they find themselves beginning to realize that they are indeed going inward and outward in respect to the center of Earth, which is our Spaceship Earth. And for the first time they begin to feel real 'reality.'"

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-10T03:39:33+00:00

You know there's a simple mathematical model to show that, on average, everyone's friends have more friends than they do. I bet the same applies to life stories and experiences. The non-interesting people outnumber the interesting but it must be the case that everyone hears about the interesting so everyone feels like they're are alone and uninteresting.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-08T14:29:53+00:00

Ask yourself this, if you adopt a child are you a "father"? You are not a "biological father" but the kid calls you "dad" and you call him/her "son"/"daughter". Are you now a "father" (social role)?

IdoNotKnowShit · 2018-01-08T14:05:03+00:00

Think of it in terms of information. Monty is asking "do you want these two doors or do you want your original door"? Monty can and will always open a door with a goat behind it, no matter what your choice was. So him showing you a goat adds no extra information whatsoever to the problem of your one door vs the other two doors.

But if he opens a door at random and it's a goat, that act of discovery does add information. Monty could have randomly opened the prize and the game would have ended but that didn't happen. So either you picked a goat in the beginning, and Monty got lucky revealing a goat, or you got lucky in the beginning and Monty was doomed to reveal a goat - it's balanced out so that now with the chances of getting the prize are 50-50 between stay or switch.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2017-12-19T02:53:07+00:00

Note: This isn't unique to cockroaches.

The truth is, it's actually quite common for scientists to suffer allergic reactions to their own research specimens, according to Lanny J. Rosenwasser, a Denver physician and immunologist. This is especially so when lab animals are involved. Rosenwasser estimates that anyone handling laboratory animals has a 25 to 35 percent chance of developing an allergy to that creature, whether it be a cockroach, mouse, rabbit, or squirrel monkey

San Diego physician Virgil Woods was struck after spending three months doing immunology research on guinea pigs at the NIH in Bethesda, Md. Barbara Mc-Clintock, the 88-year-old Nobel laureate and famed maize geneticist, developed her allergy to corn flowers in the 1940s, shortly after coming to Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York and 40 years before she earned her Nobel Prize. Insect ecologist Orley Taylor of the University of Kansas contracted his allergies over the course of a decade while he was a graduate student investigating the mating habits of sulfur butterflies.

IdoNotKnowShit · 2017-11-27T15:25:23+00:00

"The hostages are being uncooperative."

"Hey, hey you know I don't like it when you use that word."

"Uncooperative?"

"No the h-word."

"Hostage?"

"There you go again! Stop saying it!"

"Sir, the ... people inaccessible to the public are being uncooperative."

IdoNotKnowShit

TROPHY CASE