ajkjk

27 ms·

601.
by ajkjk 1y ago
just curious.. why you are deleting your chats? what if you want to search them for something from a while ago?
602.
by ajkjk 1y ago
As the other replier said, despite your dismissiveness, the knowledge about the system is in the probabilities, so it's right there in the equation. Suppose you flip a coin. Before flipping the coin, your knowledge is "heads or ta
603.
by ajkjk 1y ago
It pretty much is the same, except that entropy in physics usually has a constant in front of it.
604.
by ajkjk 1y ago
There is a whole article explaining it... if you don't read the article, how do you expect to know the idea?
605.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Doesn't sound intuitive at all really...
606.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Don't suppose you read the paper..?
607.
by ajkjk 1y ago
No one of any level of math skill would mistake the the derivative of x^n as nx + x^n-1. There's no way DFW messed that up, but it's also a pretty bizarre mistake to have a character make if they're supposed to be making mis
608.
by ajkjk 1y ago
I imagine that that particular confounder is not possible to eliminate via randomization. Perhaps you collect a bunch of data on nurse awakeness--day shift vs night-shift, measuring alertness somehow, or measuring them on other activities k
609.
by ajkjk 1y ago
"more samples" is not what controls for confounders. Controlling for confounders is what controls for confounders, which you can only do with enough samples that you can randomize out the effect of the confounder. Whether or not t
610.
by ajkjk 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial The same thing it means in every context: that (with enough samples) you can control for confounders.
611.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Well the standard response to this kind of "do it the way everyone does it" is "... change has to start somewhere". It's hard to tell, without hearing a report from a council of open-minded-rigorous-experts, whether
612.
by ajkjk 1y ago
I have remembered the phrase "Radiant AI" from the Oblivion Marketing when it came out, 2005ish I guess, when I was in high school. I'm glad it stuck with someone else as much as it did for me: the hype, the disappointment, b
613.
by ajkjk 1y ago
I have the opposite opinion, I guess! We've been trying to solve everything with language syntax for a long time and it's a bit of a dead end, as the OP shows. Better to start trying new things. Anyway you can always copy paste it
614.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Okay here's my idea, not found on the list in the article, what do you think: You add a visualization sugar via an IDE plugin that renders if/else statements (either all of them or just error cases) as two separate columns of code
615.
by ajkjk 1y ago
You seem to be under the mistaken and misguided impression that the only kind of derivative is the one in a real analysis textbook. I bet you think delta functions aren't real either, lol.
616.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Data point for you: Asteroid City is my favorite, I've watched it like eight times now? and I could barely get through Rushmore. All the commenters in here complaining that new Wes doesn't have what old Wes had.. Maybe they'r
617.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Evidently they do? Maybe there is some domain knowledge you're missing here as you belligerent protest that it's nonsense.
618.
by ajkjk 1y ago
You seem really confused about something. The article is talking about SDFs that do not have that property, which it is then trying to force to have that property via a hack of sorts (f/|del f| apparently), because once the property
619.
by ajkjk 1y ago
The article is talking about functions whose changes over an displacement dx are not just bounded by K |dx| for some K, but specifically by the value K=1. So it's not the same thing as the Lipschitz property in analysis, although I gue
620.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Don't know much about this kind of thing, but it seems like it would be useful, if possible, to store the actual displacement (dx,dy) vector to the surface instead of just its magnitude, the SDF. I can't evaluate the tradeoff of s
621.
by ajkjk 1y ago
The sort of headline that people are going to love to reshare because it validates all their beliefs in one shot. And of course it does: it was designed to. Nevermind that reality is never as interesting as a scary headline.
622.
by ajkjk 1y ago
This notion is everywhere and it's just dead wrong. It's still possible to think in the presence of biases. The fact that your opinion may be subject to some unconscious biased in some direction does not invalidate your opinion.
623.
by ajkjk 1y ago
American smiles in photos are mostly not fake, fwiw.
624.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Well yeah, that's why it has that disclaimer. Everyone knows there's an obvious bias there.
625.
by ajkjk 1y ago
I've never heard of a nondeveloper having a dev environment set up for testing. Often that can quite technical.
626.
by ajkjk 1y ago
I am on about the fact that you are imagining something working in a way that it does not work in practice. You have two choices: 1. A developer makes a PR. They build the app and run it themselves to make sure it works, does what they inte
627.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Oh that's neat
628.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Hopefully nobody lets legal touch anything without the ability to run the code to test it, plus code reviews. So probably not.
629.
by ajkjk 1y ago
Er...
630.
by ajkjk 1y ago
I didn't say anything about nazis. But if someone's saying "america first immigrants bad" and the response is "that's a pretty fascist thing to say"... like... yes it is? That's what fascists said, mo

More ›