mattlondon> "And the answer is always along the lines of "just try a load of stuff and pick the one that works best"." Sounds to me like an opportunity to appl

mattlondon> "And the answer is always along the lines of "just try a load of stuff and pick the one that works best"." Sounds to me like an opportunity to apply automation - Monte Carlo is your friend and machine cycles are cheap! Most software development and ML development are diametrically opposed. That's why we have statisticians. Most software developers like the control that programming gives them - that's why they are programmers. They prefer developing systems that can be programmed (trained) quickly, consistently and with rapid feedback using computer languages. ML in contrast, is sort of like the claw crane arcade game at Walmart, you remember, the one where you insert 50 cents and then get to "control" the movement of a scoop for 10 seconds and then it drops onto a pile of possible prizes and, when you raise the crane, it drops the prize back onto the pile. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claw_crane https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claw_crane If you're very lucky, you get a stuffed bunny or duck for your kid. Usually your kid goes away disappointed. There's something there but it's just beyond your ability to find it in 5 minutes. That's what ML looks and feels like but 50X worse. The ML training software has 50-100 knobs(you get to pick!) and the object of your desire lives in a multi-dimensional hyperspace. Find out how to use the knobs to reach your boss' goal. This is imo NOT a task for a software developer. And you don't even get a fuzzy bunny for your efforts. Yes, the claw cranes are rigged: http://kotaku.com/5929888/why-yes-those-claw-machines-are-rigged-says-arcade-operator http://kotaku.com/5929888/why-yes-those-claw-machines-are-ri... And if you think that's bad, consider that much of AI-related ML is like trying to succeed with a claw crane designed by God (or maybe the Devil). It pays to choose your challenges carefully.