Yup, Google now has two teams publishing the very best ML papers alongside FAIR, Toronto, Montreal and some other places. The teams or Deep Mind and Google Brain.
Biological analogies are too often misleading and confusing when talking about deep learning[1]. We currently have very little knowledge of the way the brain works and most analogies are only wild assumptions. The ones contained in this article are blunt and based on strictly nothing but the author's feelings. Please read with care.
It's a type declaration saying that the & operator takes two Picture as arguments and returns a picture.
So, if "a" and "b" are pictures "a & b" is typechecking.
To be more precise, if you account for currying, it says that the & operator takes a Picture and returns a Picture -> Picture function. This function can then be applied to a Picture to yield a Picture. It's as I explained above but with an intermediate step.
Well, I come from a CS master's of the university of Nantes and I don't feel _at all_ like I have a lower level than if I went to one of those schools. It's clearly the other way around.
I'm not sure with OP doesn't address SilkRoad use cases on top of the ones he mentions, that are clearly a minority if we consider what is likely to happen.
I used to feel Java was a pain to write when working with Java 6. Many 250 characters lines and everything.
Java 7 kinda divided the line length by a factor 2 with the diamond operator, the try-resource and so on.
I've programmed some Java 8 since yesterday and it actually feels like a pretty decent language to express ideas. Nothing like Java 6.
I know most of the Java haters have been struggling using it day to day in settings were it was awful (over engineering + Java 6, hello, here is the gun).
But I feel like those haters should really try to think fresh on this one. Try Java 8 and its new features and decide for yourself _afterwards_.
Just wanted to say that being asked not once, but twice in a very intrusive manner if I want to suscribe to the blog is a pain in the ass for me. Please adjust that.
I tried it for a few games with friends and I'm not sure at all that with the standard rules defenders can win. With many rule sets you can lock the board pretty easily and make it a draw or lose situation for defenders. I'm not aware of any demonstration of attackers winning every time or not but it's my strong suspicion.