> No, but the text you quoted doesn't say that [deep learning achieves human-level performance
Uh, it says DNNs are indispensable for achieving human level performance. That clearly implies that this level of performance is achievable, despite all evidence to the contrary.
> Deep neural network (DNN) is an indispensable machine learning tool for achieving human-level performance on many learning tasks.
Not to be pedantic, but words matter. Is anyone actually claiming that deep learning achieves true “human-level performance” on any real world open-ended learning task?
Even the most state of the art computer vision/object classification algorithms still don’t generalize to weird input, like familiar objects presented at odd angles.
I get that the author is trying to write something motivating and inspirational, but it feels like claiming “near” or “quasi”-human performance, with disclaimers, would be a more intellectually honest way to introduce the subject.
Let me get this straight. A company deeply embedded in the Democratic establishment (0) that has worked directly with Buttigieg — the candidate with close ties to Facebook aka the company undermining democracy since 2016 — managed to totally screw up, potentially undermining the campaign of Sanders, the anti-establishment candidate.
“In countries like the United States, it's being built by corporations in order to influence our buying behavior, and is incidentally used by the government.”
No, he’s not right about it being “incidental”. The use of facial recognition by police is widespread and widely reported (0). Unlike other forms of digital surveillance, this one has serious and potentially deadly consequences when misused. Banning it at least temporarily is a major win for civil liberties and I would wager that anyone thinking this is a step backward is privileged enough to never have experienced police brutality.
If by “some” you mean the government of France, then yeah.
Another little known fact: Landmark was based on the IP from Werner Erhard’s Est seminars in the 70s, which in turn incorporated specific techniques from Scientology [1]. Some of these fun Scientology influences still exist in today’s forum trainings.
PSA, Landmark Forum was banned as a cult in France after the release of an investigative documentary [0] which they tried vigorously to suppress.
The group is a magnet for vulnerable people who respond to authoritarian style leadership and coercive psychological techniques including public shaming and gaslighting. They strongly discourage participants from taking notes. Anyone with a history of trauma, abuse or adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) should know that attending this kind of group can cause severe psychological harm.
There is a way to do deep personal transformation safely, but this group isn’t it.
The entire idea of an “AI arms race” that we are losing to China is fear-mongering by those with a vested interest in defense spending, ie military industrial complex.
This is a human rights issue more than an arms race. The fact that SF is banning facial recognition tech while the Chinese state is going all in (as another commenter notes) is a win.
> The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission “found reasonable cause to believe that Uber permitted a culture of sexual harassment and retaliation against individuals who complained about such harassment.”
> Uber agreed to a settlement by establishing a $4.4 million fund to pay current and former employees who were sexually harassed at work.
Wow, a $4M fine for a $50B company with a corrosively toxic culture. That'll teach 'em a lesson! /s
Sure, if you're pitching this as "a simpler way to learn chess", I can get behind that. Anything to make chess accessible to more people is great in my book.
But he's selling it as a way to save late-stage classical chess from the era of boring draws and endless opening theory. We already have a better solution for that in Chess960.
Yeah, I don't find these arguments particularly convincing.
> In particular, the nontraditional starting positions make it difficult for many amateurs to enjoy the game until more familiar positions are achieved.
Actually the nontraditional start is part of what makes it fun. It's fresh and forces you to start using your brain from move one. I don't buy the claim that the main enjoyment of chess is due to familiar positions.
> The same is true for world-class players, as many have confessed to me privately.
I can't speak to Kramnik's private conversations, but as a serious player what I can say is that my competitive advantage over an amateur diminishes considerably in Chess960. Perhaps what Kramnik's friends are complaining about is the fact that it's harder for them to win at Chess960 than standard.
> Finally, it also seems to lack an aesthetic quality found in traditional chess, which makes it less appealing for both players and viewers, even if it does occasionally result in an exciting game.
Yeah, there's a difference in aesthetics for sure. But who is to say that it is "worse"? Some piece configurations do feel a bit "ugly" but to me this is more than balanced out by the beauty of new patterns emerging where they weren't expected.
> the alternative is making facebook the gatekeeper of political truth
This argument is so played out. If it cared enough, or was forced to by regulation, Facebook could deploy enough fact checkers to greatly reduce the problem.
Former world-ranked youth chess player here. 100% agree with the desire to reduce draws and get people out of opening theory. Not sure though why Kramnik felt the need to invent a new variant when Chess960 already exists, is thriving, and changes the game far more drastically than no-castling rule.
The post reads more as an submarine advertisement for DeepMind (0) than a serious article for chess players.
> Mr. Thiel has argued that Facebook should stick to its controversial decision... to continue accepting [political ads with no fact checking]
Okay, so just to recap:
1. Thiel is the investor who made billions off of Facebook before becoming a high-profile Trump supporter.
2. Trump is the guy who became president thanks in no small part to misinformation campaigns at scale made possible by Facebook's ad platform.
3. Thiel is now one of the strongest voices arguing that Facebook should remain in the political misinformation-for-profit business.
I couldn't read the entire article due to paywall, but forgive me for having doubts that Thiel's convictions are based on a desire to do what's right for democracy.
Agreed that most electronics have China influence. But there’s a pretty big difference between influence and actual state control.
I have no insider info but from reading the news it appears that what China is doing is several levels sketchier than Amazon/Ring when it comes to infringing on civil liberties.
Protecting your self is one thing; supporting that kind of regime with your money is another.
In other news, interest in online chess has never been higher despite Kasparov going down in flames in 1997 in what was billed as “the brain’s last stand.”
Can we please stop flogging this tired “man vs machine” narrative? Not only is it totally unnecessary, it also takes away enjoyment and appreciation for the flourishing in games like chess, go and poker that can occur when man and machine work together.
In private meaning directly to Zuck, who he claims is his friend. His stated unwillingness to confront Zuck directly means that his entire public narrative is grandstanding at best.
Uh, it says DNNs are indispensable for achieving human level performance. That clearly implies that this level of performance is achievable, despite all evidence to the contrary.