4 ms·

Very block-boxy ("and it does a whole bunch of math and voila!")

by mjfl 13y ago

tdicola 13y ago
Isn't that the point of tools like scikit-learn? You don't need to know how to code, optimize, etc. all the algorithms, just understand how to use them.
- mjfl 13y ago
  Perhaps, but I feel like if you are trying to use a statistical tool, it would be best to know how it works. Think about if every scientist claimed a discovery when they found a result with a 90% confidence interval. Machine learning (at least in this application) is different because often the consequences are testable, verifiable, but I still think that it's better to know how it works than treat it like a black box.
  - 3rd3 13y ago
    There is probably a large group that lacks advanced linear algebra and statistics for learning the theory but would still be able to build useful applications using a ML library. I think the video is mainly directed at that group.
  - andreasvc 13y ago
    What makes you assert he is treating it like a black box? There isn't time in the presentation to go into detail, but actually linear models are inspectable, namely, you can obtain a list of features and how they are weighted. Also, as he said, the scikit-learn documentation is of high quality and explains how the models work. BTW you give an example of scientists, but like he stressed, machine learning as he applied it is a form of engineering.
ColinWright 13y ago
Yes. So are compilers. And web frameworks. And editors. And memory-management tools. Progress is made by no longer re-implementing and re-inventing the things that many, many people have invented and implemented in the past, and building on their work. This doesn't mean that there is no value in learning about these things for yourself, but the packaging of knowledge in reusable tools is the only way programming progresses.
- Dewie 13y ago
  Nicely encapsulated doesn't have to imply a black-box implementation, though. I for one would like it if compilers were less black-boxy; ideally, I want to find out why my compiler does a particular thing by investigating its output, querying the API, going through the compilation steps, etc., rather than having to google some StackOverflow answer.
skj 13y ago
black box, not block box.
- _archon_ 13y ago
  I didn't even see that at first, although now that I look at it... I kind of like the term "block box". It takes a black box, and defines it in terms of how it's used, not what it does. It is a block that can be implemented in a certain way. How does it work? Doesn't matter at this level. It's a building block for a differently-focused project. A block box.

Very block-boxy ("and it does a whole bunch of math and voila!")

by mjfl 13y ago

Very block-boxy ("and it does a whole bunch of math and voila!")

Isn't that the point of tools like scikit-learn? You don't need to know how to code, optimize, etc. all the algorithms, just understand how to use them.

mjfl 13y ago
Perhaps, but I feel like if you are trying to use a statistical tool, it would be best to know how it works. Think about if every scientist claimed a discovery when they found a result with a 90% confidence interval. Machine learning (at least in this application) is different because often the consequences are testable, verifiable, but I still think that it's better to know how it works than treat it like a black box.
- 3rd3 13y ago
  There is probably a large group that lacks advanced linear algebra and statistics for learning the theory but would still be able to build useful applications using a ML library. I think the video is mainly directed at that group.
- andreasvc 13y ago
  What makes you assert he is treating it like a black box? There isn't time in the presentation to go into detail, but actually linear models are inspectable, namely, you can obtain a list of features and how they are weighted. Also, as he said, the scikit-learn documentation is of high quality and explains how the models work. BTW you give an example of scientists, but like he stressed, machine learning as he applied it is a form of engineering.

ColinWright 13y ago

Yes. So are compilers. And web frameworks. And editors. And memory-management tools. Progress is made by no longer re-implementing and re-inventing the things that many, many people have invented and implemented in the past, and building on their work. This doesn't mean that there is no value in learning about these things for yourself, but the packaging of knowledge in reusable tools is the only way programming progresses.

Dewie 13y ago
Nicely encapsulated doesn't have to imply a black-box implementation, though. I for one would like it if compilers were less black-boxy; ideally, I want to find out why my compiler does a particular thing by investigating its output, querying the API, going through the compilation steps, etc., rather than having to google some StackOverflow answer.

skj 13y ago

black box, not block box.

_archon_ 13y ago
I didn't even see that at first, although now that I look at it... I kind of like the term "block box". It takes a black box, and defines it in terms of how it's used, not what it does. It is a block that can be implemented in a certain way. How does it work? Doesn't matter at this level. It's a building block for a differently-focused project. A block box.