DanWaterworth

9 ms·

31.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
There's also biochar
32.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
AFAIK, planting more trees by itself doesn't really help in the long term, because trees eventually decompose releasing the carbon they captured.
33.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Inference in this context means getting the output of a neural network on some input. Training meaning adjusting a neural network to so that it's outputs are more like the training data. Training involves finding derivatives and requir
34.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Myrtle Software | Software Developer | Cambridge, UK | ONSITE FULLTIME INTERNS https://myrtlesoftware.com We're looking for developers to work on our compiler that generates hardware to accelerate convolutional neural netwo
35.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
It needs to be spine strict for that to work, but the amortization for finger trees doesn't work without laziness
36.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
When you need that kind of behaviour, you can't replace it with something flat (without doing binary searches or similiar at each crossing). Sometimes intrusive lists are the right thing. I built something once that used intrusive skip
37.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
I don't know how the kernel is using intrusive lists, but that kind of traversing and switching is occasionally useful.
38.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
You can't necessarily replace intrusive linked lists with arrays. They have more operations. You can traverse so far in one list then switch to traversing in another.
39.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
The problem with using lazy data structures for storing things is that deletes don't necessarily free up storage. Fingertrees are fine when you need to store a collection in order to implement some algorithm (and being persistent makes
40.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
> belief in things not empirically testable or verifiable and that science. Sorry to nitpick, but science isn't verifiable, it's falsifiable. Also, there are religious people who'd agree with your characterisation of faith
41.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
So did religion.
42.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Modern science came out of religion. To believe that they are in direct opposition is unbelievably narrow.
43.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
IANAL, but that's not how I read the FAQ or the license: 4.6 Access to Derivative Databases. If You Publicly Use a Derivative Database or a Produced Work from a Derivative Database, You must also offer to recipients of th
44.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
> Either way, this aspect is independent of the point I was making above and which is that functional code is not inherently easier to test than procedural code. That's true, you can certainly just write procedural code in functiona
45.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
When you do dependency injection well, you don't inject every object; that would be horrible/impossible. What you may have noticed is that there are two kinds of objects, ones that you inject and ones that you don't. The ones
46.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
I stand corrected.
47.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
This is interesting. It doesn't mention GC, but since frozen objects can be shared between guilds, I assume the GC remains global. Perhaps this will trigger interest in immutable datastructures in ruby.
48.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Right, you're assuming there's one tree being maintained.
49.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Thanks, I see. Are you assuming ephemeral usage of nodes to make that claim?
50.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Re-read the article, bearing in mind that O(sqrt n) is a set that contains O(1).
51.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
I don't know where you got those numbers from.
52.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
It's roughly right, but it's not cache obliviousness that enables the violation. For the argument to work out, you have to evaluate it within a model that has an explicit cache and hence, treats big O results as being parametrized
53.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
> It has nothing to do with the model and is just a question of whether b is a variable in the big O notation. There are models, like the cache oblivious model, where b is assumed to be a variable, so the model matters. > a binary tr
54.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
> Sorry cache-misses don't count as part of a theoretical analysis on complexity. They don't in the random access machine model, but there are other models where cache misses do factor in.
55.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
> O(log_b(n)) is the same as O(log n) Not in every abstract model. See other reply.
56.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
Which is why you have to evaluate in a model with an explicit cache width. In such a model, b is not a constant. The cache-oblivious model [1] is a fairly well-known example, but that won't work in this case, since we need to know b to
57.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
You have to evaluate it in a model with an explicit cache width size, then O(log_b(n)) < O(log(n))
58.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
It doesn't hold for binary tree lookups vs B-tree lookups.
59.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
> if Oi(f(N)) > Oi(g(N)), Ot(f(N) will be > Ot(g(N)). That doesn't hold. Some instructions take longer than others.
60.
by DanWaterworth 10y ago
There are models like the Transdichotomous model [1], where the properties of the machine vary based on the problem. That seems to be what is happening here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transdichotomous_model

More ›