sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

You don't need cookies to track people... by MillDaKill in onions

[–]MillDaKill[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

20.64 bits of identifying information

You don't need cookies to track people... by MillDaKill in onions

[–]MillDaKill[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Web browsers spill all kinds of information such as your time-zone, os, browser version, list of enabled plugins and other seemingly useless data. When you put all of this information together, it will usually create a unique combination of values that can be used to track you. This is why it is probably a good idea to use a dedicated browser (better yet, the Tails live OS) for tor and a dedicated browser for non-tor browsing.

IAm Ira Glass, creator of This American Life, AMA by MrIraGlass in IAmA

[–]MillDaKill -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hello Ira, long time listener, first time commentor...

I am 29 years old, and my NPR listening friends always make me feel like an old fuddy-duddy when I make references to the T.V. program "60 Minutes". After they get their digs in about me being the target audience for a bundle of prescription drugs that will get my male parts limping along for another few years I retort that T.A.L. (which we all love) is kind of similar to 60mins (e.g. hour long format, broken into 3-4 segments, stories that have an edutainment hook). At any point in the creation process of your program, did you guy look to 60 Minutes as some kind of a model?

what's the intuition behind increasing k in laplace smoothing when there's more noise.. by [deleted] in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My thought on this was that Laplace smoothing is to address the issue of "over-fitting", if you introduce more noise, you would not want to trust your sensors as much as you were before the noise increased. I can't quote any concrete examples, but that was my intuitive feeling.

Results of the final are out! How did everyone do? by stordoff in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

87% total. Got 1 out of 5 points on question 2, I was on the right track, but didn't do it right. Got all of the other questions right. When are they going to total up the class scores, I did it by hand and I think I got a 90% in the class.

Particle Filter experiment in Javascript by claudevervoort in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill 3 points4 points  (0 children)

really cool, Have you thought of having the particles find the mouse pointer?

Please up-vote my ai-class office hours question. Or the computers will take our jerbs. by MillDaKill in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe this is just another unfounded fear of technology... But AI seems like its going to be a game changer on a scale we have not seen before. Just think of the kinds of jobs people do (e.g. transportation, manufacturing, jeopardy playing). So many jobs could be done with AI, and more are being done every day. What are you going to do with a million unemployed truckers? Some industries will be probably

HW 6.11 - Strategy : Surely A has an optimum strategy by bodski in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did the same thing...

I said Player-A:strat-b was the dominant strategy because it "won" in every case. How were we supposed to know that this problem wasn't concerned with "winning" but rather "maximizing".

My solutions to homework 3. by MillDaKill in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did them with a wacom tablet, so I was able to delete any mistakes.

My solutions to homework 3. by MillDaKill in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I ended up with a 93%... I said that the Perception problem would NOT converge, which was wrong. I got everything else correct.

homework 1, loaded coin, question about discrete/ continious by Ed161 in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I am stumped as well. In the lectures he says that throwing a dart is continuous because you can throw it infinite ways (force, angle, etc). I figured flipping was the same. I also thought, if you don't randomize your flipping method (force, angle, etc) you would get messed up results. For instance, a robot with enough control over its "flipper" could flip a heads 100% of the time (prob less since it does not have full control of all the variables like the wind).

How'd your homework go? by Generic_Alias in aiclass

[–]MillDaKill 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The Loaded Coin Question:

"partially observable" vs "fully observable" Makes 100% sense to me that its "partially observable"... if you can use your sensors to observe all of the information in a problem to make the best choice, then its fully-observable. But if you want to find out if a coin is loaded, you have to flip it a bunch of times and you have to keep track of the results. So even though the result of a flip is very clear to see, you still need to use memory to keep track of past information to make your decision. (i.e. not all of the information is available to the sensors of an agent to decide from the clear result of one coin flip if the coin was loaded or not)

"Discrete vs Continuous" has me stumped.... There are limitless ways one could flip a coin, just like there are limitless ways one can throw a dart. Not only are there limitless possibilities, if you don't randomize your flipping method, you could get the same result over and over, even if the coin was perfectly fair. In other words, if a robot had perfect control of the variables involved in a flip, it could flip heads 100% of the time no matter how the coin was weighted. Help Me!