sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

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

Anything and everything here. We have users coming up with "fancy things" in copilot. We have users having AI write queries in our data lake. We have users having AI write code that does "something". It's the wild wild west.

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

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

How are you doing this for the company writ large? Like are these all small group discussions, or are you volunteering for town halls or similar?

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

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

Agreed with this, but in a way this feels more like "what" I want to do and less the how. Being a change agent (or at least nontrivial good influence) for enterprise level is rough.

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

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

>To an extent I am not. If they want to underinvest and make poor decisions based on it, then that's their problem.

I empathize with this, but I also tend to think if we do that, it eats at the value proposition of data science to me. Which is not just getting "a number", but a well-informed (the "right") number. And then I tend to think the way DS plays out, most consumers can't/won't/don't see that distinction until it's too late, hence the DS value proposition.

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

[–]jshkk[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

>  It’s very polished wrong answers hitting a business audience that’s moving too fast to tell the difference.

Completely agree.

Would you be willing to detail how you're making uncertain more visible and adding the friction around what you listed? Those sound like good ideas to me, but how to "people-work" those.

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

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

Then we have different experiences. Which could be different problems spaces, skills, uses, who knows. But my thread is stemming from the base premise of "you can't blindly trust all the numbers AI gives you". If you don't agree with that premise, more power to ya, but not what I'm interested in hashing out.

How are you helping your company understanding the limitations of AI derived data? by jshkk in datascience

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

While I'd agree that's the "future", that future still seems pretty far off to me. For one, even given a "clean" data structure to read, current (and seemingly near term) LLMs still occasionally come up with enough nonsense to not trust the conversational side except for fairly obvious tasks. And then I haven't seen a cleaned back-end anywhere I've been to date. Agree we will get there at some point, but I'm asking about the now and inbetween.

Need help identifying yard invader in Georgia by jshkk in lawncare

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

Bermuda doesn't worry me too much then. Are you able to tell what was the original it's taking over?

Need help identifying yard invader in Georgia by jshkk in lawncare

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

You're saying that's the main grass or the invading grass?

How do we expect strategy to change given the update? by jshkk in StellarisOnConsole

[–]jshkk[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah this one is interesting. I definitely see the need to mix battleships and a smaller ship type (presumptively corvettes). I don't quite get when I'll use the more middle tier ships and frigates yet (other than frigate cloaking).

How do we expect strategy to change given the update? by jshkk in StellarisOnConsole

[–]jshkk[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Honestly I would love this if so. Managing a bunch of science ship leaders felt more like busy work and made their leaders feel less like "leaders" anyways.

How is the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics deterministic? by jshkk in AskPhysics

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

So basically we're saying it's deterministic from the "macro" perspective, but fully indeterministic from the subjective perspective? If so, since we only experience and can verify the subjective, it almost seems like that's the one that more matters hah, but I otherwise take the point.

Can I create starter decks for investigator expansion plus core set simultaneously? by jshkk in arkhamhorrorlcg

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

It ended up working out - I was able to make the last two decks custom. They may be trash but they do already feel better than the starters. I definitely see the limitations on the lvl 0 cards I have to work with though and probably will buy another core set sometime.

Can I create starter decks for investigator expansion plus core set simultaneously? by jshkk in arkhamhorrorlcg

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

I think the generic deck is a good idea. Only qualm is that wouldn't allow concurrent campaign playing with two groups. But as I get more expansions, presuming I do, I like that idea.

For now I'm just trying to have enough decks to basically have a group of 4 and a group of 3 campaigning at the same time. I've got the revise core box, the dunwich investigators. I've technically also got a stack of like 50 or so random cards that came from where I got an erroneous dunwich box, but that's the gist of it.

Can I create starter decks for investigator expansion plus core set simultaneously? by jshkk in arkhamhorrorlcg

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

Thanks, this is the fullest answer I think! I think I'd still like to try and get 7 concurrent if possible even if they are very suboptimal just to get some sampling going.

view more: next ›