chimi · HackerTrans

chimi

no profile record

Submissions

Dog Learning to Talk by Using a Custom Soundboard to Speak

1 pointsby chimi7 tahun yang lalu0 comments

SoftBank Unveils $9.5B WeWork Rescue, Gets 80% Stake

1 pointsby chimi7 tahun yang lalu0 comments

Court says FCC’s net neutrality repeal can’t stop state laws

180 pointsby chimi7 tahun yang lalu58 comments

Ask HN: How do you know if you can trust?

1 pointsby chimi7 tahun yang lalu1 comments

comments

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

One of the columns of sanding parameters is the sound of the sander.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

I agree and rather than post a sibling response, I'll add that I think it's necessary today, simply because we don't have AGI, yet. And also point out that we are talking about determining if AI is snake oil or not. There may be some scenarios where we can teach a computer to do something we can't teach a human to do, I can't think of any off the top of my head, but if we can't, then I'm going to be super doubtful that an AI software can do it better than a human, if at all.

AGI, in the singularity sense, will be solving problems before we even identify them as problems. Experts in a field can do this for the layman already and I think it's possible. Some don't. I do.

It'll be super interesting when it flips! When the student becomes the master and we, as a species, start learning from the computer. You can kind of get a sense of this from the Deep Mind founder's presentation on their AI learning how to play the old Atari game Breakout. He says when their engineers watched the computer play the game, it had developed techniques the engineers who wrote the program hadn't even thought of.

Even still, the engineers could teach another human how to play Breakout, so yes, I do believe they did in fact create a software to play Breakout better than they could.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

You're touching on the "difficulty" in verbalizing it. I see what you mean, because you did learn that the heuristic was changing with just a yes or no. I said you can't teach that way, but you clearly learned that way, so I wasn't exactly correct, but I'm not practically wrong either still I don't think.

I wonder, how would an AI perform on the same test.

What is the mathematical minimum number of questions on such a test, subsequent to the heuristic change, that could guarantee that new heuristic has been learned?

I'm curious about the test. Did it have a name? What were they testing you for?

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

> Supervised learning in machine learning is nothing remotely like a human teaching anyone anything.

I disagree, I think it's exactly the same. As an example, a human teaching a human how to use an orbital sander to smooth out the rough grain of a piece of wood.

The teacher sees the student bearing down really hard with the sander and hears the RPM's of the sander declining as measured by the frequency of the sound.

The teacher would help the student improve by saying, "Decrease pressure such that you maximize the RPM's of the sander. Let the velocity of the sander do the work, not the pressure from your hand."

That's a good application of supervised learning. Hiring the right candidate for your company is not.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

nah, it's on line 33 of player.js

   if(this.isShooting){
     this.bullet.y -= 0.1 * dt;

Changing that 0.1 to 1 would make the bullet move 10x faster. It'd be neat if you could have multiple bullets on the screen at the same time, but then the developer would need to maintain an array of bullets and update all of their .y values.

In this case, a new bullet is created when the .y value gets to zero, so there isn't an easy way to increase the firing rate except to increase the speed of the bullet.

By "easy" I mean, can be done in under 5 keystrokes to the code and without introducing potential bugs. Adding an array of bullets moving at the same rate, but able to be fired with less time delay between each bullet, would require at least an order of magnitude or two more than that amount of effort and also a not insignificant amount of testing.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

It suggests that's possible, but we know that's possible already.

The hard part of plastics recycling which is already being done at various scales is isolating the plastic. How do you get foodstuffs out of plastic containers? How do you separate the components of waste, basically?

It's like cleaning metal by burning off everything that burns until all you have is metal. You're just moving the waste from one place to another.

In this case, the gasses are getting into the atmosphere just like they would at a traditional incinerating waste facility and there are lots of those already. They are not a good solution for the long term.

When people are being "coy" about something as the article indicates, there's usually a reason. In this case, I think it's because the solution solves the problem, but not better than existing technology and they don't want that to be revealed to the open market that would tear it apart.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

Please don't troll. I'm happy to engage, but not with trolling.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

It's hard to verbalize this, most of it is "intuition" but I think it boils down to "supervised learning is BS."

Humans are smarter than computers. How can a human teach a computer how to do something when the human itself can't teach another human that something?

We haven't solved that problem. The snake is eating its tail.

You can't teach a human how to do something when the methodology to do that is the student trying something and the teacher saying "Yes" or "No".

Well.... why? Why is it yes or why is it no? What is the difference between what the human or the computer, or in general, the student, did and what is good or correct? And then you still have to define "good" and many times that means waiting, in the case of the PDF linked to above, perhaps many years to determine if the employee the AI picked, turned out to be a good employee or not.

And how do you determine that? How do you know if an employee is good or not? We haven't even figured that out yet.

How can we create an AI to pick good employees if human beings don't know how to do that?

Supervised learning isn't going to solve any problem, if that problem isn't solved or perhaps even solvable at all.

In other words, over the years, my heuristic has turned into, "Has a human being solved this problem?" If not, then AI software that claims to is BS.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

Please don't troll.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

This is one of those situations where I have to hold two conflicting ideas in my head at the same time and am reminded of the difficulty of doing that.

You both make good points. China is doing a lot of bad stuff here, but it is their land and their right to exert their power over it how they see fit.

If China tried to tell another sovereign nation how to handle their internal disputes, they'd be just as wrong as the west is in this.

This is really something China needs to handle. It's not the west's place to butt in.

At the risk of whatabouting it, most of all the tactics you're saying China is using in Hong Kong have been used by western governments as well. It's not right.

You know, China gave away Hong Kong to stop the bombing from the west and now China is trying to wrestle back control of it... kind of still, in a way, from the west.

It was the west that caused this problem in Hong Kong. It's time the west stopped meddling in it and I think that'd be best.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

I did edit to elaborate where I thought there was ambiguity.

Yes, I agree, if ASCAP, ICE_CS laid claim to the GP's work, then that needs to be fixed. I would suggest any money paid to ASCAP, ICE_CS for that video be returned to the GP, with interest paid by ASCAP, ICE_CS and perhaps some punitive damages so they don't make the same "mistake" again.

To be fair, or give the benefit of the doubt, this could be a Hanlon's Razor scenario where ASCAP, ICE_CS just doesn't understand how to do it right. Or they could be too heavy handed in which case the punitive damages should soften their hand.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

That's not what I understood when I read it the GP saying:

>And yet, they have claimed copyright on my music and monitized it.

By "they," I think he meant: ASCAP, ICE_CS, not YouTube. The problem is that ASCAP, ICE_CS has claimed copyright to something, which they are right to do and that is their performance of the public domain work. Since it sounds like the same work that the GP uploaded, the GP's music was locked.

I am no fan of YouTube's profiting off copyrighted material, I think it's unethical, and in this instance I do not believe that is what they are doing. I believe they have written algorithms to prevent copyright infringement and it is over-fitting on the GP's works.

The GP said they are "claiming copyright on my music" but I don't see any evidence for that. I do see evidence that ASCAP, ICE_CS claim copyright on their performance of the same music as the GP.

Yes, the solution is to have a person in there to be smarter than the AI, but YouTube has said it's not worth it to them to do that and so I believe that is their right.

In this case, the GP's claim is that ASCAP, ICE_CS is doing something wrong, but I don't think that is the case. I think everyone here is doing something right and a bad thing has come from that.

Theft is wrong. There is no wrongdoing here.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

You and the GP should have both stopped before saying "It's theft." It's not theft, not even close.

You gave them the video and they said they do not want the video -- for whatever reason. You don't have a right to upload content to YouTube. You do have a right to your property, your video and music you've created. They didn't take it from you. They aren't making money on it and not paying you. You don't have a right to force YouTube to display and distribute that content on their website.

Imagine if Columbia records was forced to distribute any and all music sent to it on a demo tape. Columbia saying, "No, we won't distribute this" is not theft.

Columbia would be within their rights to say, "Your music sounds too much like Taylor Swift to us. Sorry. It's too big of a risk for us to distribute it."

That's exactly what YouTube is doing. They are saying, your music is too much of a risk for us to distribute based on our algorithms.

You can still go to Vimeo or soundcloud or build your own website to distribute your music, just like the aforementioned artist that sounds too much like Taylor Swift could go to Arista or upload it to youtube or or soundcloud.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

I came here to say the same thing as the GP. I don't understand why some words are red or green.

For example, you can type in non-brand words as well. I typed in "houses" and the word "homeless" came up in green!

With a brand, facebook, I got this word "amiriteguyze" in red and clicking on it

Negative 11/19/2019, 12:13:31 PM

facebook is bad amiriteguyze?!?!?!?

Why is that even a word that would show up in the word cloud? I can't imagine it was entered a bunch of times. I can't intuit any correlation between the colors, sizes, or words themselves that show up in the clouds.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

> What’s the “magic” behind this? Executives are coy, but biotechnology expert Oded Shoseyov, a Hebrew University professor who has consulted for UBQ, says melting plastics and waste creates a homogeneous substance strengthened by fibers in the organic ingredients.

The article then goes on to describe a typical waste recycling facility plus:

> a multi-chamber reactor that sits behind a closed sliding door to block prying eyes. Temperatures up to 400 degrees break down the organic matter into its core elements, and then it and the plastics are re-engineered into a matrix through chemical and physical reactions that UBQ keeps secret.

I fear there is really no story here. There is a lot of energy being put into this system. Something comes out, yes, but is it worth it? How is it better than a garbage incinerating facility?

There is no evidence presented that the material output is as good as the material input. Or that the energy required is less than traditional recycling methods.

This is way too early and way too long of an article to spend a lot of time on at this point.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

To add: The music needs to be loud enough to drown out every other aural stimulus. You want to hear the music and only the music, not everyone's side conversations, not your clothes rustling around while you're dancing, not the sound of people's hard healed shoes on the dance floor.

Just. Music.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

HN is a marketing channel for startups who might want to pitch ycombinator, then market the startups they pick, then find employees for those startups, then repeat.

The value isn't in selling ads.

I see this whole line of reasoning that thousands of people isn't enough to be newsworthy a symptom of valleythink where all that is valued is growth.

There are other factors that indicate success and the community for the most part has lost sight of those for the tunnel vision of "must get funding!"

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

> Once you start distributing your HTML5 game on PC distribution platforms like Steam or GOG, you need an actual executable that people can download to play the game offline as well.

Can someone elaborate on this? Why is this needed? Is it a market penetration decision? Does steam not allow HTML5 games?

Due to virus issues, etc, I would prefer playing an HTML5 game in the browser. I don't want to install something that could contain viruses or be a vector or increase my attack surface.

I'm missing something, but not sure what it is. I don't use Steam or install games on my computers, but I do play HTML5 games.

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

I always wonder about claims like this where one nation says a ship was within their borders and the other nation says it was in international waters. This USS Pueblo is one incident. Israel attacked a Turkish ship in international waters. Iran attacked oil tankers in international waters.

All these incidents ... I can't help but think we never grow up as human beings all the way until becoming international super powers.

It's like a geopolitical "I'm not touching you." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgXDYiHhp5Y

It's bullying behavior. It's an aggressive provocation.

Will we ever grow up?

7 tahun yang laludiscuss

If any browser can be a camera, why do you require me to register to try it out? I'm not ready to give you my personal details. You say below privacy is your primary concern, but you require us to give up our privacy just to try it out.