kn1ght · HackerTrans

Hey I've also worked in a previous company that was doing exactly this for DK, UK, etc. As far as I remember one of the bigger things there was tissue density and masking effects where it might become not as clear cut for a radiologist. We saw a lot of opportunity in that area and in prognosis- the whole health economics aspect of frequency of visits.

kn1ght

5 anni fadiscuss

The whole protocol was designed very cleverly from the start to avoid all the privacy blocks that might inhibit people from using it [1], because the main drawback in this is that it's completely useless unless you have a critical mass of users that actually use it.

It is very difficult to explain to people that are not curious about the technology and all they hear is 'tracing = tracking = no privacy'.

I imagine this is why this app has been silently pushed, but in my mind just having it available and active on phones does not help you that much if the same users are also not aware and actively reporting their infections. So you will have a very small group that consciously install it and when they get infected they report; a lot larger group will get a notification that they have been close to an infected individual. I suppose they hope that by showing those notifications then people that subsequently get tested positive will be curious enough to find out how they should report in, etc. It's risky especially seeing this backlash about silent installations...

[1] https://covid19-static.cdn-apple.com/applications/covid19/cu...

kn1ght

5 anni fadiscuss

I worked in a small research company that had a method (segmentation + CNNs, etc) a few years back. We had some exciting stuff also on masking effects, but as soon as we got into SaMD and the main revenue stream (grants) dried up, engineering closed down.

kn1ght

5 anni fadiscuss

Thanks for the articles. I definitely don't do it the same way I process language. To use the same example- I describe a task unambiguously, which makes it a translation from written text to memory regions or execution paths. It gets more concrete than just what I know about the task. A better parallel would be to writing mathematical formulas. When I process language, I believe, more of my brain is engaged in empathy, in trying to match context, in allowing ambiguity, storing ideas and concepts to be disambiguated at a later point.

kn1ght

5 anni fadiscuss

One of my Uni professors was working on Proof-carrying code *(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-carrying_code). I got a cursory involvement. Although I agree with you, the fact that there is a way forward and is entirely based in mathematics (on the formal side) makes me also agreeable with OP. I don't see a contradiction. If you talk about the more informal side- the way something is used does not necessarily define its nature.

kn1ght

5 anni fadiscuss

Programming languages are not full linguistics, at least not yet. We focus primarily on syntax, semantics and pragmatics. All of this, though, is firmly rooted in mathematics, defining grammar as expressions and mathematical relationships. This then enables formal mathematical proofs where we can reason about outcome. I don't know if there exists such search that you mention, or it is more of an optimization of language features to problem space. Perhaps in a future where we're able to program our machines by having a conversation with them...

comments