argonaut

89 ms·

961.
by argonaut 10y ago
I'll concede that 1) and 2) are basic properties that an educated layperson would understand after reading a few ML blog posts. Hardly a working theory of neural nets. They're still rules of thumb. You've argued that they are
962.
by argonaut 10y ago
> inspired by Turing machines This is the very spirit of ad-hoc engineering and trial and error: trying some architecture out because it resembles / has high-level connections to some other unrelated concept.
963.
by argonaut 10y ago
You've just numbered 5 different rules of thumb... That hardly supports your idea that things are not adhoc.
964.
by argonaut 10y ago
Deep learning is very adhoc and experimental right now. Anyone reading through the literature would see that. That's why I'm pessimistic about AGI, but very optimistic about short-mid-term industry applications.
965.
by argonaut 10y ago
Firstly, gregatragenet is saying you should leave a company if you don't feel like you're being paid enough (with the implication being you asked for a raise and were denied), or feel like too much is demanded of you. Which is cor
966.
by argonaut 10y ago
It was an attack on HN'ers blindly upvoting things from arxiv, because most HN readers do not properly scrutinize postings from arxiv or take it with a grain of salt. I was well aware these were actual researchers. Your comment probabl
967.
by argonaut 10y ago
If backprop is "the deep end," then I really don't know what you're doing...
968.
by argonaut 10y ago
PSA: In case you didn't know, anyone can publish anything to arxiv.
969.
by argonaut 10y ago
Correct. That does not refute my point at all, which was that seattledev14 is mistaken.
970.
by argonaut 10y ago
No, most SV companies will pay a recruiting fee for any engineers they hire, even junior engineers. This is okay because it is typically a percentage of first year salary - so the fee is less for junior candidates.
971.
by argonaut 10y ago
US CS PhD students only spend on average 2 semesters teaching (at Stanford/Berkeley/CMU, the requirement is roughly 2 terms of teaching, at MIT it's 1 term).
972.
by argonaut 10y ago
Make sure to implement backprop yourself: don't use Tensorflow, just use numpy and write out the matrix multiplications yourself.
973.
by argonaut 10y ago
A PhD should not put you in debt (if you don't have university/fellowship/RA funding you shouldn't be doing a PhD). The only cost is opportunity cost.
974.
by argonaut 10y ago
I realize that's what many people do, but I don't agree with it because it's an implicit signal of interest/worthiness, due to affecting rankings. It gives people on HN the wrong perception of what is popular/worth
975.
by argonaut 10y ago
https://www.google.com/#q=mnist
976.
by argonaut 10y ago
/r/machinelearning is pretty high quality, very technical. You'll see a lot of well-known researchers posting there sometimes (whereas here you only see karpathy every once in a blue moon). I'm only a random guy who did
977.
by argonaut 10y ago
To expand on what gcp is saying, that's not true. Rectified linear units do better than sigmoids but are not differentiable (but are sub-differentiable), and ReLUs have the problem where small changes don't do anything (in the neg
978.
by argonaut 10y ago
Yikes. Unfortunately this is why (IMO) I see a lot of mediocre ML articles upvoted very highly on HN that have either very little discussion, or generally poor quality discussion, especially around hot topics like neural networks. The discu
979.
by argonaut 10y ago
I don't think the change is coming quickly, actually. I think truck drivers have a good 10 years before they're out of a job, both due to technology (self-driving cars won't be fully autonomous for at least 5 years), and due
980.
by argonaut 10y ago
Just a note: Logistic regression on raw pixels already gets you 88% accuracy. Nearest-neighbors on raw pixels gets you 95% accuracy. You should not draw too much conclusion from a network with accuracy < 97%, because you probably just ha
981.
by argonaut 10y ago
Sure, but none of that refutes my point. All you've done is point out a logical fallacy in a side comment I made, my argument didn't rely on the side comment. If the bill does not in fact achieve, or cannot be proved to achieve,
982.
by argonaut 10y ago
Even if that was true, it is opinion that picks which "facts" to put in the title. If the title was "Governor Vetoes Bill That Would Have Cost State $1.3 Million," that would also be factual, but it is quite blatantly ed
983.
by argonaut 10y ago
You have stated something that someone with a high school-level (e.g. superficial) understanding of probability/statistics would understand. Most research in neural networks requires only a very superficial level of statistics. There a
984.
by argonaut 10y ago
I would agree with you and I also did research on neural networks when I was in college. I'm not sure if those downvoting you have actually done/seen neural network research. Deep learning is pretty engineering driven (as opposed
985.
by argonaut 10y ago
> From this we can assume that censorship issues are not only an issue for foreign firms, but also a primary concern for domestic companies This does not follow from the previous statement. Also, it doesn't refute the reality that
986.
by argonaut 10y ago
To make a good point, you also need to show that China doesn't have agricultural subsidies. 5 seconds of Google searching reveals a long lists of results: https://www.google.com/#q=chinese+agricultural+subsidies htt
987.
by argonaut 10y ago
Because China's space program and defense industry are protected as well. So if we're really going to try to decide whether China or the US are more protectionist than the other, in that comparison the examples cancel each other o
988.
by argonaut 10y ago
I'll just repeat my extremely short comment: > pointing out examples of a nation engaging in protectionism contributes little to the discussion unless you compare it to other nations.
989.
by argonaut 10y ago
Every nation has protectionism. Every single one . What's important is the degree of protectionism . So pointing out examples of a nation engaging in protectionism contributes little to the discussion unless you compare it to other
990.
by argonaut 10y ago
1. You're conveniently ignoring the fact that Google did self-censor from 2005 to 2009. So the idea that it's "too expensive" being the reason is just FUD. Unsubstantiated speculation. 2. The question about whether or

More ›