saulrh

34 ms·

301.
by saulrh 8y ago
Not knowing anything about the guts of youtube, I'd bet that it actually does optimize for videos it thinks you might like. Unfortunately, it doesn't know anything about you so it assumes you're a random denizen of the inte
302.
by saulrh 8y ago
Systemic use is not a counterargument when there may be a systemic problem. Half of humanity uses corrective eyewear (closer to 90% above the age of 70), everyone should be vaccinated, and a huge chunk of the population needs iron supplemen
303.
by saulrh 8y ago
If you want people to keep their notes in it, it's going to have to advertise stability and longevity. Ruthlessly cut dependencies/requirements and avoid using features that may change under you as time goes on. Use a simple data-
304.
by saulrh 8y ago
I'm a little afraid that putting PWAs in an app store may actually reduce the flexibility they offer by restricting what PWAs can and can't do Not sure what you're saying here. Are you afraid that app store polici
305.
by saulrh 8y ago
It depends on what an account deletion means, yeah. Is there a GDPR for universities that makes them delete all history of your attendance at that institute? Do customer privacy laws force Udacity to do a more thorough deletion than you mig
306.
by saulrh 8y ago
It sounds like each match in the Bo5 is against a different agent. It's a hair dirty, but I don't think it's too bad because the same kind of random-selection strategy is just as possible "in the wild".
307.
by saulrh 8y ago
You haven't posted a single comment that makes me believe you've thought about why these things are happening rather than that they are happening. To explain why the "why" is so important... I know someone that does
308.
by saulrh 8y ago
Back when I was a kid, one of the reasons I preferred paperbacks over hardbacks was because they were easier to hide under the pillow with a flashlight when I was reading them after bedtime. I read books during recess and whenever the teach
309.
by saulrh 8y ago
The majority of industries which involve the potential to cause harm operate with comparable licensing and oversight systems. Food manufacturing, aerospace engineering, civil engineering, factories with dangerous equipment like smelters or
310.
by saulrh 8y ago
Yep. AFAIK you have to get IRB approval to do literally anything with humans involved. Zero discretion is permitted because any amount of discretion degrades trust in the system (and if you thought anti-intellectualism was bad these day
311.
by saulrh 8y ago
Collaborate with a second lab at another institute. Get approval from one IRB to run the study against the other. Problem solved, everything aboveboard.
312.
by saulrh 8y ago
and be tried only after a report is received, or an investigation is started At that point it's too late to save the victims. Obviously unacceptable, right? (edit: got two posts backwards, sorry, fixed.)
313.
by saulrh 8y ago
> Not safe to assume the risks don't exist just because they > aren't mentioned in an Ars Technica article. https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/zsG9yKcriht2doRhM/inadequacy... I don't believe that
314.
by saulrh 8y ago
The exposure limits for lasers in the 1500nm range are almost certainly set by the intensity at which they cause photochemical cataracts. The geometry just doesn't work out for the exposure limits to be set by anything else; a non-visi
315.
by saulrh 8y ago
The eye focuses light. Formally, this transforms incoming photons so that their position on the retina is a smooth function of their direction. Diffraction and atmosphere mean a laser will be distributed somewhat in position, so the incomin
316.
by saulrh 8y ago
I think that I wrote that comment a bit late at night and was thinking about evolutionary psychology, so I'll offer an apology to the evolutionary biologists in the audience. Sorry. :/ The majority of evolutionary biology is good
317.
by saulrh 8y ago
...So, if we're going to put on our evolutionary biology (AKA bullshit) hats, this allows your brain to abuse its 3d modeling circuitry (which is incredibly advanced) to figure out what people are looking at. I bet that "let&#x2
318.
by saulrh 8y ago
We're talking about people with sufficiently significant impairments that they are incapable of working. They are non-technical and likely do not have an emergency fund or usable credit. They do not have the bandwidth to file lawsuits.
319.
by saulrh 8y ago
The relative risk of driving while having ADD/ADHD (accidents/km with / accidents/km without) is around 1.54 [1]. This isn't horrible , of course, but it's still bad . Non-disqualifying visual impairments hav
320.
by saulrh 8y ago
That's what's so striking about this. The new hardware can run neural nets really fast. So they'll be able to do something that can do the job most of the time, but will still screw up badly some of the time. Yo
321.
by saulrh 8y ago
Universally 35+. Several in their late 40s, a couple 60+ (tenured professors and the like). You know how books or movies that talk about martial arts masters use phrases like "no wasted motion" and "elegant grace"? Yeah.
322.
by saulrh 8y ago
Now I just wonder if script readers will react "ooh, I don't know why but this looks nice" or "ugh, something's weird about this script but I can't tell what." The original announcem
323.
by saulrh 8y ago
talking doctors into giving me certain antibiotics a former homemaker can't possibly understand anything about health that doctors and scientists can't figure out, no. sigh . Publish a case study. Please. I
324.
by saulrh 8y ago
Now I'm curious. What did you intend to write? Your post gives equal credence to herbal pseudoscience and modern medicine and, in context, questions whether antibiotics were worth it. Yes, I should probably find a way to condemn ludd
325.
by saulrh 8y ago
There's a huge difference between "you can give yourself an extra two percent by gnawing on a tree" and "if you follow orders we can wipe out almost every single-celled organism in your entire body within twenty-four hou
326.
by saulrh 8y ago
Genes are not like points you can spend in a game to upgrade stuff. Editing them is a two edged sword. Sure... but relative to the objective function that our genes currently optimize. All bets are off once a different objective
327.
by saulrh 8y ago
Probably from the perspective of the people on either end, too, over time - I cannot imagine that the RoE and confidence bounds were designed without considering the expected costs of blue-on-blue incidents compared to the alternatives.
328.
by saulrh 8y ago
...Do you mind if I save your comment and quote you in future debates I get into on this topic? I've cited TLAMs in "killer drone" shitstorms but I could never refine my argument to achieve of pithiness and humor you have. :P
329.
by saulrh 8y ago
That's a bit odd. What version of Android are you on, does it have any of those junk manufacturer skins, and how old is the phone? If my phone is already unlocked I can spout off the hotword, invocation, and content in a single stream,
330.
by saulrh 8y ago
Hundreds to thousands of hours seems completely reasonable to me. Have you ever done IT for your family or friends, or seen a coworker completely helpless in the face of an unrecognized file extension? Say they're, I don't know, a

More ›