myopicgoat

6 ms·

1.
by myopicgoat 7y ago
Dh
2.
by myopicgoat 7y ago
I think that may be only partially fair: some people appreciate his writings because they question things which, at the time, (and possibly still now) would have been considered “true” or unquestionable (particularly stuff on moral). One ma
3.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
You may be referring to p-values, and the arbitrary 0.05 threshold but in that case, the connection is risky at best and wrong in general (common misinterpretation of p-value as probability of alternative being false)
4.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
Thsee questions pop up every time Julia comes on HN and have been answered time and again for example by Chris Rackauckas [1], at the end of the day there will always be pros and cons and people unwilling to change from languages they’re pr
5.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
In Oxbridge, colleges compete for public exposure because ultimately that’s what leads to donation & to get top undergrads applying who, eventually, will donate £££ to the college once they land a good job. So there’s quite a lot of PR
6.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
This is a tricky line of thinking. Once surveillance is there you can always hide behind the “now we’re safer”, the issue is that you can always survey more and always claim that going back would be less safe and so on and so forth. A good
7.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
Last I saw him (last year) he was still a prof at Oxford, pushing for a startup called « invrea » (that does try to use PP [1]). I think UBC was before that. [1] http://invrea.com/index.php
8.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
This is a question of perspective, you can in fact just take it as a regression over the continuous 0-1 interval with loss |y-o(Xw)| where o is the sigmoid and could report that loss (in fact a package such as Sklearn will usually return th
9.
by myopicgoat 8y ago
I agree with this though opening up to external scrutiny (up to a reasonable extent similar to - say - CERN) would help dispel a feeling of “yet another faster-than-light type experiment”. I also don’t think that the “combativeness” with wh
10.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
No, because that would take full rows of the feature matrix (thereby corresponding to the full information of one individual). The idea here is to “generate” rows corresponding to plausible artificial individuals. That way you can give a
11.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
Right. No offense but where do you live in China? Beijing or Shanghai is not exactly the same as Xinjiang. Also foreigners (still) enjoy a de facto “upper class” status in China so it’s likely you may be unaware (or choose to be) to much of
12.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
MAC address randomisation has been proven to be essentially useless: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.02874v1
13.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
Seems a bit overreacting dissing the whole of journalism for the odd pun seen in an article. Eg: John Oliver’s late night show is, objectively, quite good journalism (even if he denies it) though it’s not very “serious”.
14.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
From 4 years ago... a lot has changed since. Consider this recent post for example: https://tk3369.wordpress.com/2018/02/04/an-updated-analysis-...
15.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
The question discussed is interesting and important but I felt the structure of this article is somewhat unfortunate: it explains very well and objectively some of the statistical issues and solutions with censored data but then when discus
16.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
This is very neat! It made me think of hackmd.io which offers similar features though maybe less minimalist/distraction free but with collaboration. Thanks for sharing!
17.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
I agree with the sentiment but your last paragraph needs some (serious) backing "incredibly easy to stop 80% of anthropogenic emissions", really?
18.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
As much as Chomsky may have been incorrect, I think it is foolish to call him "depressingly ignorant" without justifying your statement. His international recognition both in his field and in his commentaries did not appear out of
19.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
Nothing is sufficient by itself if you want to figure out what's going on in the world. Reading from different sides even biased sides, Chinese, Russian, Qatari or Western 'propaganda', is the best way to train a critical min
20.
by myopicgoat 9y ago
This is hilarious, well worth a read.