argonaut

81 ms·

841.
by argonaut 10y ago
It's almost like you didn't read the comment. They had experts review their code, and they didn't catch the bug. They had huge public interest, and nobody caught the bug. So the chances are, unless big, breaking changes to th
842.
by argonaut 10y ago
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffer
843.
by argonaut 10y ago
How do you know Buzzfeed's source isn't a disgruntled employee with an axe to grind? So this almost-unfalsifiable FUD is useless.
844.
by argonaut 10y ago
No company finds leaks that way (assigning different truths). Finding leaks is a matter of looking to see who accessed which documents.
845.
by argonaut 10y ago
How do you know Buzzfeed's source isn't a competitor with an axe to grind? You don't. So this almost-unfalsifiable FUD is useless.
846.
by argonaut 10y ago
You haven't actually commented on the actual content of the Buzzfeed article or the Fortune article, but instead have decided to go the route of putting forth FUD about sockpuppets and media manipulation.
847.
by argonaut 10y ago
The fact that they had a specific team test their security is already evidence they aren't clueless. Clueless would be refusing to have teams test your security.
848.
by argonaut 10y ago
No, there are millions of people who are trying to cure cancer or solve poverty.
849.
by argonaut 10y ago
Yes, it is rare to be outright prohibited. But it will definitely be looked down upon by managers. It is also culturally uncommon. Very few Google engineers are consulting on the side, for example. It is extremely common for CS professors t
850.
by argonaut 10y ago
You think you're being clever, but you're not. Seniority actually matters in academia.
851.
by argonaut 10y ago
Are you curing cancer or solving poverty? If not, stop criticizing people for that. It's a tired cliche. I also find it ridiculous that's the standard you set for "community service."
852.
by argonaut 10y ago
As I mentioned, a CS professor with enough seniority to have a family to raise is going to be pulling a 200k+/year salary, more than enough to comfortably raise a family, even in the Bay Area (probably not SF). Something I didn't
853.
by argonaut 10y ago
You're off the mark here. Most people who do a PhD and go on to becomes a professor don't have money as an important goal, because doing a PhD and then getting tenure takes ~12-15 years, and nobody can afford that kind of opportun
854.
by argonaut 10y ago
I don't think this describes US defense doctrine. America has not launched a massive surprise first strike in a very long time (if ever). Iraq and Afghanistan knew the invasion was coming a long way off. To me, US defense doctrine reli
855.
by argonaut 10y ago
9GAG does have a tech savvy community, that's my point.
856.
by argonaut 10y ago
They, erm, can't do that . Scraping LinkedIn would violate the terms of service.
857.
by argonaut 10y ago
> Yet, if you had invested in bitcoin 5 years ago you would have outperformed Berkshire Hathaway's lifetime performance. I have some penny stocks to sell you...
858.
by argonaut 10y ago
Exactly. I had LinkedIn on my list of undervalued tech stocks, and I think this bears that out. LinkedIn has absolutely no competition. LinkedIn is the world's biggest, virtually-complete graph of most enterprise organizational charts
859.
by argonaut 10y ago
Most people have not heard of 9gag. Most adults probably don't really know what a meme is yet either (they've probably seen a few, just don't really get it yet).
860.
by argonaut 10y ago
> we have very good suspicion and experimental data ... that it is optimal ...
861.
by argonaut 10y ago
And if the judge determines the charter is unrelated, for example, you can expect a never-ending series of appeals over that judicial decision. That's just one example.
862.
by argonaut 10y ago
Rather than just relying on what you think, you would need to propose a legal framework that can actually be enforced, for distinguishing between the two. Because it is legally ambiguous. Because if your framework becomes "non-profit t
863.
by argonaut 10y ago
Suspicion and empirical evidence cannot prove something is optimal. You cannot exhaustively empirically search an infinite space of models. You are seriously misunderstanding the definition of "optimal."
864.
by argonaut 10y ago
The fact that X works and A, B, and C don't work, does not imply A is globally optimal.
865.
by argonaut 10y ago
No, we don't know why. You also have little basis to claim the biological visual cortex is optimal. It certainly works , which is enough for people who draw inspiration from it.
866.
by argonaut 10y ago
The chicken and egg problem is that we design neural nets in order for Gabor filters to show up. If you used a different neural net architecture choice, they wouldn't show up. So the presence of Gabor filters indicating optimality is s
867.
by argonaut 10y ago
This fits in with my point: they imposed several restrictions about the model space: maximizing sparseness, and they also make several linearity assumptions.
868.
by argonaut 10y ago
Those benchmarks exist. Anything to do with zero-shot or one-shot learning.
869.
by argonaut 10y ago
You seem to be describing hyperparameter optimization, which I seriously doubt CNNs are going to be used for anytime soon.
870.
by argonaut 10y ago
Really? My impression is that most new grad students have a superficial understanding of this stuff, which they promptly never use, since they just end-to-end deep learning solutions.

More ›