gcp

98 ms·

901.
by gcp 11y ago
If I read their papers right, they don't actually use the SL policy network, because it played worse when combined with MCTS than the RL one, even if it was stronger without tree search. (But you need the tree search to make a strong p
902.
by gcp 11y ago
They don't have neural nets or fancy nonlinear function approximators for board state evaluation Nonlinear function approximations are pretty common due to combining several evaluation heuristics and indexing in to tables with weight
903.
by gcp 11y ago
They don't just stop, they cut off arbitrary subtrees if there's compelling heuristical evidence they won't affect the result.
904.
by gcp 11y ago
Of course it was. If your explanation of AlphaGo somehow involves saying it was different from chess programs you can stop right now - you're just entirely wrong . Whether chess engines and go engine are brute force or not just depend
905.
by gcp 11y ago
Thanks for writing this out - you're 100% right. A ton of the strength came from tree search. DCNN are strong but they do not beat professionals yet. They can guide the tree search well, though. The paper about AlphaGo is really disapp
906.
by gcp 11y ago
Have you played go? When you play Go you start to appreciate how complex it is, how strong Lee Sedol is and what this achievement means. In 2006 a paper was published (by Remi Coulom) showing that just playing random moves and combining t
907.
by gcp 11y ago
Feminism is fine and compatible. Misogyny isn't and not compatible. I'm assuming expressing hate towards a group counts as an "exclusionary practice" whereas demanding equal rights isn't.
908.
by gcp 11y ago
Wouldn't say that it's perfectly fine but yes, it's probably more likely that the CEO won't care if something bad is being said about an employee that broke the organization's rules, than the reverse. I would think
909.
by gcp 11y ago
He literally said: "taken their misogyny elsewhere"
910.
by gcp 11y ago
Well, feminists want equal rights for women. A misogynist hates women. One of those is compatible with the companies code of conduct and the other isn't. So I think it's fair to treat them differently.
911.
by gcp 11y ago
Can we still not like people and say it? Is it still ok to say that we don't get along with someone, that we're happy to not work with them anymore without having it cataloged as "hate speech"? Sure! But calling them &
912.
by gcp 11y ago
Meego dying killed Fennec. It would have gotten further development if it had had users that warranted so.
913.
by gcp 11y ago
Firefox already uses a ton of JavaScript internally. The setting for web content has nothing to do with the internals of the browser.
914.
by gcp 11y ago
We'll need to see the certification chain. I agree with the other commenters this is suspect; not seeing any SHA-1 certs in the chain either.
915.
by gcp 11y ago
So basically once you submit it your domain is forever HTTPS on Chrome? Yes, and Firefox too since they share the preload lists. Mostly though the cases I am coming up with are mostly testing or implementation speed. It is generally easi
916.
by gcp 12y ago
I was hoping to see extended WebRTC support in Facebook :(
917.
by gcp 12y ago
Not so much because we're fed up with it as simply the performance characteristics of low end Android phones and the user expectations regarding mobile browsers not being compatible. Startup time is just so darn important. Not being ab
918.
by gcp 12y ago
What does "native code" mean in that sentence?
919.
by gcp 12y ago
There is none, which is why I said the browser is just a tool in a politics game. It enforces the existence of the log. The security doesn't come from checking whether the cert is in the log!
920.
by gcp 12y ago
I think JavaScript and the associated performance war was already well underway before Chrome even existed.
921.
by gcp 12y ago
Ironically, ironically... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_1-2-3 (Decline) "The inability to fit the larger code size of compiled C into lower-powered machines forced the company to split its spreadsheet offerin
922.
by gcp 12y ago
but it's inactive for whatever reason Not hard to see why from your explanation. You don't need implementation in the browser. You need the CAs to provide the public audit logs and all HTTPS domain owners to check them for unexp
923.
by gcp 12y ago
It was Excel that used p-code. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000007.html
924.
by gcp 12y ago
Firefox does not use the built-in certificate store. Mozilla has their own trusted CA list.
925.
by gcp 12y ago
/query?
926.
by gcp 12y ago
Explain me how this is better than IRC.
927.
by gcp 12y ago
One of the big advantages of LLVM's license in this regard is that, unlike GCC, you don't risk leaking patents either even if you did open source it. Or did they fix that now?
928.
by gcp 12y ago
If clang/LLVM caught up in generated code performance to GCC then I must admit that is news to me.
929.
by gcp 12y ago
The Play Store (LOL) claims there's about 50M-100M users. It's up to you whether that counts as "nobody" or not.
930.
by gcp 12y ago
You get there if you click links. It's not only this incident, Google often "accidentally" block other browsers for a day or two and then claims it was an "accident". Chrome seems to be immune to such accidents, tho

More ›