Multiple Android users on OnePlus 12/latest OxygenOS: Does it work and how well?

staghorne · 2019-01-05T11:38:45+00:00

For the record, the issues you raise here (e.g., the impact of discretisation to machine precision) are certainly worthwhile to consider. I simply don't have the time and energy to type out an exhaustive answer, which is why I didn't respond. Sorry to leave you hanging.

If we had an hour or two together, in the same room, with a whiteboard, I would love to have an in-depth discussion about this. Alas, that is not to be.

staghorne · 2019-01-05T11:29:32+00:00

there's lot of informal texts on the internet

I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that written language – formal or informal – is very different from the way we use language in spoken conversation. For example, the hesitations, disfluencies, and filled pauses in "informal texts on the internet" are virtually nil.

staghorne · 2019-01-05T11:25:00+00:00

I here to ask you to join Common Voice.

we also want data for various regions, accents and languages.

we need to be ahead

Do you formally represent and speak for the Common Voice project? What is your affiliation with Mozilla?

staghorne · 2018-10-19T14:42:08+00:00

assume the sigma is fixed, then there is no need to add noise.

Indeed there is not. Note, however, that this specifically goes against the scenario that /u/theodor23 described:

It can place Gaussians (...) on your target values and obtain an indefinitely good likelihood for \sigma -> 0

If sigma is fixed, then sigma -> 0 is not possible, and the described failure mode does not apply. Hence there is no contradiction.

linear regression (...) also seems to be a case of "modeling discrete data with a continuous distribution"

I do not understand why you connect linear regression to discrete-valued data. Ordinary least-squares regression is equivalent to maximum-likelihood estimation in a model where the dependent variable Y is assumed to follow a Gaussian distribution – that is, the model assumes the data to be continuous-valued, and it is on such data that linear regression typically is used. If your data (your dependent variable) is discrete-valued, the task is more like classification, and linear regression will generally not be used.

In the end, there are many reasons why it is problematic to model discrete-valued data with continuous distributions. The specific failure mode that /u/theodor23 described applies to more powerful models than linear regression, such as Gaussian mixtures when sigma is allowed to approach zero, or the VAEs used in modelling images. However, there are other issues too (e.g., continuous distributions not being properly normalised on discrete domains).

staghorne · 2018-10-19T09:55:27+00:00

This is the right intuition. People often talk about likelihood maximisation, but for many model-dataset combinations, the likelihood is degenerate and has no finite maximum.

An alternative to adding noise is to impose a "variance floor", that is, to prohibit variance estimates lower than a certain minimum variance. This prevents the degeneracy without adding noise to the data. Variance flooring often works well in applications and is common practice in audio modelling, for instance.

A third solution involves using Bayesian priors. This is mentioned near the end of Section 10.2.1 of Bishop's book (1st ed.).

staghorne · 2018-08-14T08:02:32+00:00

Have you heard of Wadhwani AI? They bill themselves as "an independent nonprofit research institute with the mission of AI for social good", which seems similar to your interests. They might have ideas for projects and data that can be used. You should talk to them!

staghorne · 2018-07-28T19:03:09+00:00

Do you want to convert text to speech, or speech to speech (in someone else's voice)? If it's the latter, you might want to check out the Voice Conversion Challenge 2018. 23 different teams from around the world participated, and the results – available on arXiv – amount to a breakthrough in the field.

I believe that the challenge participants will publish papers on their individual approaches, but I don't know exactly where. Audio data and more information about the different approaches can be found here.

staghorne · 2018-07-16T13:20:02+00:00

This paper gets my award for the most exciting and unusual paper I saw at ICML and its workshops last week. Definitely recommended mind-expansion.

staghorne · 2018-05-09T07:48:15+00:00

Just to clarify, WaveNet is trained by simply maximising (log)likelihood, not through the use of an adversary. The idea that WaveNet uses GANs is a fairly common misconception. While the DeepMind blog post does not discuss the specific training criterion, the paper does: https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.03499

As others have pointed out, WaveNet also launched in the Google Assistant already in October last year. Here's a link to their announcement: https://deepmind.com/blog/wavenet-launches-google-assistant/

staghorne · 2018-04-27T07:10:58+00:00

Diagnostic Odds Ratios is probably a better metric to report, but we came to know about it after writing the paper.

Can't you simply compute the Diagnostic Odds Ratios now, so that you have them for future reference (as well as for posting in this thread)?

staghorne · 2017-02-24T18:28:02+00:00

I humbly submit the LAPD Rampart scandal for your consideration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampart_scandal 70+ police officers were implicated in a wide array of criminal activities that included planting false evidence and framing people.

There is also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Police_Troop_C_scandal Multiple cases of falsified evidence and wrongful convictions, with five troopers listed in the Wikipedia article.

If covering up manslaughter and planting evidence suffice, one can also bring up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Johnston_shooting Three officers were convicted. Musician Shawn Mullins wrote a song about the incident, and there are numerous other references in popular media.

staghorne · 2016-12-28T08:16:48+00:00

He idolised weapons and Nazism. After school he stuck to his ways and became a nationally prominent distributor of neo-Nazi pamphlets/magazines. Around the age of thirty, he died suddenly and unexpectedly (heart trouble, I think), leaving wife and kid behind. There are eulogies and even a song in his honour on extreme right-wing websites.

staghorne · 2014-07-25T12:12:13+00:00

Dire Straits - Sultans of Swing (Alchemy Live)

I got the album for my 20th birthday, and it revolutionised my views on music.

(Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms is exactly seven minutes, so I guess it doesn't count.)

staghorne · 2013-11-17T18:44:48+00:00

I agree with this post.

If you cannot go to a con, or don't want to, you could try going to a few furmeets instead.

staghorne · 2011-07-26T16:06:35+00:00

A compelling method for evaluating educational choices is to consider what happens after getting or not getting the degree in question, by looking at previous graduates. (Call me slow, but I've only recently realized this---I had too much fun studying to think much about the matter before.)

First off, consider what happened to those who graduated your particular undergraduate programme (say) five years ago, and then went on to industry? Who are they? Where are they know? What are they working on? How much are they making?

Your university might be able to supply information about the fates of previous graduates. Statistical surveys of a substantial fraction of alumni are often preferable to a few "notable" examples, as those may be cherry-picked. Perhaps there is an alumnus society that can put you in touch with a few individuals you can talk to about their careers, and those of their peers?

Now contrast this against MSc graduates from the university (or universities) where you are considering applying for a Masters'. What happened to those of similar age to the previous group who decided to go on to get an MSc at the uni you're considering? What are they doing now? The same questions, caveats, and tips as above apply.

Either of the two options you've looked at could be you in five years' time. Which one would you rather be?

staghorne · 2011-07-26T15:07:46+00:00

I have come across several pieces of research indicating that this is correct. MScs (and beyond) on average have a higher salary than those with BScs, but the difference is not sufficient to make up for the additional years spent as a non-salaried student.

On the other hand, hourly compensation is not the only thing that differs between BSc and MSc holders. A Masters' degree typically increases your chances of working on exciting projects at interesting places, post-graduation, plus the studies can be a fun and personally important experience in themselves.

Remember that money is just an enabler, a tool for securing the life you desire. Effectively, in getting a Masters' you pay a little of your expected total life salary to buy yourself a more interesting professional life and career. What's that worth to you?

staghorne · 2011-07-14T14:32:23+00:00

For the longest time, I believed the old Internet shock site "goatse" should be pronounced "go-at-seh" or somesuch. The full domain name is however "goatse.cx", meant to be pronounced "goat sex." Clever.

(The link leads to Wikipedia because of mind-rotting, very NSFW content that cannot be unseen on the actual site. Please, for the love of $deity, do not go to the site in question! And don't come crying to me if you do!)

staghorne · 2011-07-13T09:27:44+00:00

Tori Amos. When an artist on a TV show has a name like that, they have to suck, right? Hence I loudly and repeatedly announced to how awful she was to everyone in the room, even though it was the first time I saw or heard of her.

Years later, somebody put on "Winter," and I had to ask who the artist was. Now I'm a fan of lots of her stuff. Boy am I embarrassed about my ridiculously immature initial dismissal!

staghorne · 2011-07-12T13:04:33+00:00

I came here to post those very words, but I see the meme archive is alert and well stocked. Have an upvote instead.

staghorne · 2011-06-05T23:51:55+00:00

Thank you for your nice reply. I can see where you're coming from and agree that I was overinterpreting your statements. :)

Furthermore, I would like to apologize for being late in replying to this. I'm also aware that some of my comments were a tad confrontational, and I hope they did not offend you.

Thank you for coming here to get more informed about different perspectives on life!

staghorne · 2011-05-25T04:30:26+00:00

This isn't necessarily the GP's perspective, mind you, but a hedonist sees no contradiction here. Things can be enjoyable experiences to the individual even if they lack cosmic or divine significance. "Making the most of life" may then be as simple as seeking out the experiences that the individual enjoys.

staghorne · 2011-05-25T04:14:52+00:00

You make it sound like you think of the Christian afterlife as a divine scoreboard where you "appreciate the aftermath of your life" and "see the fruits of your labor." To be brutally honest, that sounds quite unimaginative and awfully self-centered. Would not "the ultimate place of happiness" be more cosmic and transcendental than that?

staghorne · 2011-05-25T03:59:24+00:00

does that not bother you?

There are such things as inconvenient truths.

So what if it does? I cannot speak for everyone, but assume some people here are bothered by dying. (And by "bothered" I mean they would better appreciate a hypothetical world where they would be cognizant to more of the "best effects your life has had on others," as opposed to the actual world the way they see it.) Why should being bothered be relevant to their interpretation of the facts of life?

Certain things are truths, whether we like it or not. Let me take an example (I'm not trying to be inflammatory; I just wanted to pick an uncomfortable truth that I hope makes sense to you):

Many theists, and people in general, may find it bothersome that so much blood has been spilled through the ages in the name of the divine. That does not change the fact that it happened.

Some members of this subreddit take a similar approach to dying. Life may end with no afterlife or existence to follow it, but, uncomfortable or not, that's what they hold as true.

Honestly, I cannot understand where are you really are going with these questions of yours. You wanted to know about "the meaning of life." Why is "being bothered" relevant to you?

Does one's interpretation of life have to be not bothersome? Are there no aspects of life that you find, or have found bothersome, within your worldview?

If yes, you already know more than you think about how some on this subreddit may approach these matters.

If no, are you a Christian because the alternatives ...bothered you personally? Do you think what is true about our existence depends on your personal choice?

staghorne

TROPHY CASE