4 ms·

A few things, or rather ripples, survived the bubbles. AI crashed in the 1980s - but we eventually created Dragon Speech, handwriting recognition and a few othe

A few things, or rather ripples, survived the bubbles. AI crashed in the 1980s - but we eventually created Dragon Speech, handwriting recognition and a few other useful solutions. The DotCom bubble burst, but we wound up with [arguably] useful results in the long run (agile, or whatever comes next, might be the biggest ripple). Even if this bubble bursts, bigger and greater things will arise because of it. With only 2 samples of these bubbles the p-value is miserable, but history has taught us to see these bubbles through. Wisdom is not the sum of success, it is the sum of failure. We need to learn just how far we can push deep learning - within reasonable moral degrees of freedom.

blueprint 8y ago
> Wisdom is not the sum of success, it is the sum of failure That doesn't make any sense. Failing is not implicitly useful and (while we are on the topic of morality) must not be held up as a goal.
- ianai 8y ago
  Failure is not what happened in any of those examples. A failure is several orders of magnitude below a Great Recession or Great Depression.
- zamalek 8y ago
  > failure [...] morality They were simultaneously different points and part of the same point in my argument. Separately, failure is a good thing - as any CEO would tell you. Together, they are horrific. It's very complicated, which is a far cry from "idiotic" as the article portrays.
  - blueprint 8y ago
    Failure is a good thing? By itself? What a strange fantasy.
- paulcole 8y ago
  Succeeding isn’t implicitly useful either. Succeeding mustn’t be held up as a goal or you end up with Uber.
  - blueprint 8y ago
    We were talking about wisdom.
- vertexFarm 8y ago
  Ha. You are in for some rough lessons my friend.
  - blueprint 8y ago
    Go ahead and say what they are if you know them. I doubt you will be able to say anything. Instead of being silent, you should have the courage to admit you don't actually know what you're talking about and don't have much if anything to tell me.
    - blueprint 8y ago
      More downvotes please. The weakness of your argument and the fact all you can do is repress and attempt to censor my reply (because you can't understand it) needs to be made more obvious! Best prevent other people from finding out about what I said and attempt to socially pressure them into not holding such an opinion because then they wouldn't be able to be fooled by you anymore and even you might have to change. And that's just too scary. I can answer every critique you throw at me about this topic. Yet no one here could reply to even one of my responses. You're laughable in your denial, ignorance, and weak-mindedness.
      - DanBC 8y ago
        vertexfarm did not downvote you. It's not possible to downvote replies to your own comments.
        blueprint 8y ago
        Yes, I know. That much was already clear by the fact more than one downvote was received. I'm addressing a group of individuals whose way of thinking is so homogeneous they may as well have lost their individual identities.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
    - 8y ago
- SuoDuanDao 8y ago
  I would say failure by definition cannot be held up as a goal. The upside of failure is that it teaches more reliable lessons than success, there's no survivorship bias at play when learning from failures like there is with success. Jack Ma's lengthy interview at Davos this year touches on the subject if you'd like to see that perspective defended by someone with authority.
  - blueprint 8y ago
    > I would say failure by definition cannot be held up as a goal. It depends on who is doing it. Maybe you understand what you said, but others have an interest in not understanding it because they have an obstacle in themselves. > The upside of failure is that it teaches more reliable lessons than success, there's no survivorship bias at play when learning from failures like there is with success. I would like to improve your abilities or otherwise open up your wisdom. Any "upside of failure" is by definition a success. Therefore people's statements about success and failure, as if the nature of the result can be captured by a singular datapoint, are self-contradictory, and meaningful only as a reflection of the individual's limitation of understanding. > if you'd like to see that perspective defended by someone with authority. We're talking about wisdom here, so the only authority is a perfectly enlightened being, not an ordinary human being who has knowledge but no way to confirm the degree of exactness of their own ability to make confirmations. No one without enlightenment perceives the causes of why things happen to them. If you want to convince me someone is an authority on how a good and a bad thing happens then I will need to see any proof at all they realize the principle by which the world operates. Otherwise you should realize that's merely their own ideas, of which some percentage may be correct, despite their inability to confirm it.
ianai 8y ago
Bubbles (last I checked) don’t have a firm empirical definition. But the ebb and flow that you’re arguing for is very dramatic. Society could have made those discoveries without leaving large swaths of people and places unemployed. Further, anything that impacts the populous negatively makes a bigger, deeper, and longer lasting, negative impact on national wealth than anything a few companies could ever achieve in similar constraints.
- zamalek 8y ago
  > Society could have made those discoveries without leaving large swaths of people and places unemployed I am currently a proponent of self-driving cars, as I believe that human reflexes are designed to operate at, on average, 6mph. Almost anything could be better than us, at least in theory. Testing the limits of self-driving cars is how we determine what we can't do with them (and asking too much is how we zero-in on the failure point). This has complex moral consequences. Will more people be killed due to failure, or fewer? Thats great if it works out, but horrific if it doesn't. It's incredibly difficult to draw a line given that we don't know what the whole landscape is. This bubble is worsening unemployment. One ripple arising from that is UBI. Another is a positive-sum world. ML is currently successful in medicine. It's not all doom and gloom - we are already reaping long-term benefits.
  - 80x25 8y ago
    > This bubble is worsening unemployment. By what measure?
    - zamalek 8y ago
      By the measure of the parent comment, and, I think globally. It's often best to accommodate an argument when you have more than one way to make your case. If someone believes that unemployment is on the rise, despite the facts that you (specifically) may have, let them win it - because they have seen the same facts and don't care.
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    Our reflexes are fine at about 100 Hz. That gives up to 2m distance at rival urban speeds before action and drivers shouldn't rely just on reflexes anyway. The problem is not reflexes, the problem is some drivers being dumb and a bunch of others distracted. You could mandate a very limited systento prevent both without solving the self driving car problem at all. (I recommend looking at trains for this solution.) It is being done because it is attractive, not because it is necessary.
gaius 8y ago
The DotCom bubble burst, but we wound up with [arguably] useful results in the long run (agile, or whatever comes next, might be the biggest ripple). The outcome of the dotcom bubble was the build-out of the infrastructure (dark fibre). A similar bubble built out the railway infrastructure the century before that. Agile is a bubble in and of itself.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

blueprint 8y ago

> Wisdom is not the sum of success, it is the sum of failure That doesn't make any sense. Failing is not implicitly useful and (while we are on the topic of morality) must not be held up as a goal.

ianai 8y ago
Failure is not what happened in any of those examples. A failure is several orders of magnitude below a Great Recession or Great Depression.
zamalek 8y ago
> failure [...] morality They were simultaneously different points and part of the same point in my argument. Separately, failure is a good thing - as any CEO would tell you. Together, they are horrific. It's very complicated, which is a far cry from "idiotic" as the article portrays.
- blueprint 8y ago
  Failure is a good thing? By itself? What a strange fantasy.
paulcole 8y ago
Succeeding isn’t implicitly useful either. Succeeding mustn’t be held up as a goal or you end up with Uber.
- blueprint 8y ago
  We were talking about wisdom.
vertexFarm 8y ago
Ha. You are in for some rough lessons my friend.
- blueprint 8y ago
  Go ahead and say what they are if you know them. I doubt you will be able to say anything. Instead of being silent, you should have the courage to admit you don't actually know what you're talking about and don't have much if anything to tell me.
  - blueprint 8y ago
    More downvotes please. The weakness of your argument and the fact all you can do is repress and attempt to censor my reply (because you can't understand it) needs to be made more obvious! Best prevent other people from finding out about what I said and attempt to socially pressure them into not holding such an opinion because then they wouldn't be able to be fooled by you anymore and even you might have to change. And that's just too scary. I can answer every critique you throw at me about this topic. Yet no one here could reply to even one of my responses. You're laughable in your denial, ignorance, and weak-mindedness.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      vertexfarm did not downvote you. It's not possible to downvote replies to your own comments.
      - blueprint 8y ago
        Yes, I know. That much was already clear by the fact more than one downvote was received. I'm addressing a group of individuals whose way of thinking is so homogeneous they may as well have lost their individual identities.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - 8y ago
SuoDuanDao 8y ago
I would say failure by definition cannot be held up as a goal. The upside of failure is that it teaches more reliable lessons than success, there's no survivorship bias at play when learning from failures like there is with success. Jack Ma's lengthy interview at Davos this year touches on the subject if you'd like to see that perspective defended by someone with authority.
- blueprint 8y ago
  > I would say failure by definition cannot be held up as a goal. It depends on who is doing it. Maybe you understand what you said, but others have an interest in not understanding it because they have an obstacle in themselves. > The upside of failure is that it teaches more reliable lessons than success, there's no survivorship bias at play when learning from failures like there is with success. I would like to improve your abilities or otherwise open up your wisdom. Any "upside of failure" is by definition a success. Therefore people's statements about success and failure, as if the nature of the result can be captured by a singular datapoint, are self-contradictory, and meaningful only as a reflection of the individual's limitation of understanding. > if you'd like to see that perspective defended by someone with authority. We're talking about wisdom here, so the only authority is a perfectly enlightened being, not an ordinary human being who has knowledge but no way to confirm the degree of exactness of their own ability to make confirmations. No one without enlightenment perceives the causes of why things happen to them. If you want to convince me someone is an authority on how a good and a bad thing happens then I will need to see any proof at all they realize the principle by which the world operates. Otherwise you should realize that's merely their own ideas, of which some percentage may be correct, despite their inability to confirm it.

ianai 8y ago

Bubbles (last I checked) don’t have a firm empirical definition. But the ebb and flow that you’re arguing for is very dramatic. Society could have made those discoveries without leaving large swaths of people and places unemployed. Further, anything that impacts the populous negatively makes a bigger, deeper, and longer lasting, negative impact on national wealth than anything a few companies could ever achieve in similar constraints.

zamalek 8y ago
> Society could have made those discoveries without leaving large swaths of people and places unemployed I am currently a proponent of self-driving cars, as I believe that human reflexes are designed to operate at, on average, 6mph. Almost anything could be better than us, at least in theory. Testing the limits of self-driving cars is how we determine what we can't do with them (and asking too much is how we zero-in on the failure point). This has complex moral consequences. Will more people be killed due to failure, or fewer? Thats great if it works out, but horrific if it doesn't. It's incredibly difficult to draw a line given that we don't know what the whole landscape is. This bubble is worsening unemployment. One ripple arising from that is UBI. Another is a positive-sum world. ML is currently successful in medicine. It's not all doom and gloom - we are already reaping long-term benefits.
- 80x25 8y ago
  > This bubble is worsening unemployment. By what measure?
  - zamalek 8y ago
    By the measure of the parent comment, and, I think globally. It's often best to accommodate an argument when you have more than one way to make your case. If someone believes that unemployment is on the rise, despite the facts that you (specifically) may have, let them win it - because they have seen the same facts and don't care.
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  Our reflexes are fine at about 100 Hz. That gives up to 2m distance at rival urban speeds before action and drivers shouldn't rely just on reflexes anyway. The problem is not reflexes, the problem is some drivers being dumb and a bunch of others distracted. You could mandate a very limited systento prevent both without solving the self driving car problem at all. (I recommend looking at trains for this solution.) It is being done because it is attractive, not because it is necessary.

gaius 8y ago

The DotCom bubble burst, but we wound up with [arguably] useful results in the long run (agile, or whatever comes next, might be the biggest ripple). The outcome of the dotcom bubble was the build-out of the infrastructure (dark fibre). A similar bubble built out the railway infrastructure the century before that. Agile is a bubble in and of itself.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]