VodkaHaze
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
387
Submissions
86
Member since
May 13
Recent submissions
Comment · 9 years ago
Comment · 9 years ago
Now, now, I doubt FF has 700! ~= 10^174 CVEs
Comment · 9 years ago
The next step up from those CPUs really is going to be dual xeon boxes, which is a huge jump.
Intel tried to do enough market segmentation that the curve from a Pentium all the way up to dual CPU workstations was fairly continuous in price, with zen it's not the case anymore.
Comment · 9 years ago
I wonder when the fixed costs of upgrading will be less than the operating costs of inefficient 15 year old hardware
Comment · 9 years ago
Importantly, a very strong communicator of scientific work.
His passion shined through in the videos he made, which any non-expert could understand.
Comment · 9 years ago
> The only question that remains is: Stupidity or malevolence?
Stupidity. On your end. Let me address your claims one by one.
> the end of Bretton Woods
Ending Bretton Woods was voluntary. The gold standard leads to volatile inflation; look at the graph in [1]. Volatile inflation is bad because it makes transactions that take time to repay uncertain, see this video [2] for a layman explanation
> the early 80s recession, the 2000 and 2008 economic crisis
If economists at a central bank can foresee a crisis, the crisis doesn't happen. Full stop. What you are left, is, by definition, the ones people who work in regulation didn't see coming. Also note that those crises weren't foreseen by almost anyone, because of the nature of markets.
If you want to prevent crises, you need to put regulation up front that discourages the kind of short-sighted and reckless managerial and shareholder behavior that leads to those.
Hinging the stability of the economic system on the ability to catch an upcoming crisis in the making is doomed to fail, because you need a 100% accuracy (like making a system unhackable -- negative goals are much harder than positive goals).
> the currency race to the bottom
Do you mean low positive inflation, or are you buying into Donal Trump's talking points? Because if it's the former, it's intended, if it's the latter, I'm sorry to say you'll need sources to convince anyone that that's indeed something that exists.
All in all, what your post translates to is "I don't understand any of these things but I'm angry", which is not the right way to advise policy.
[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/US_Infla...
Comment · 9 years ago
I mean, even the Google style guide says to avoid complicated template metaprogramming, unless necessary
Comment · 9 years ago
The best I found are CppCon youtube videos, really
Comment · 9 years ago
Just so you know, there are really powerful "classical statistics" classifier models! Like ordered or multinomial logit/probit which you can incorporate latent classes into, etc. Reference book for those is here[1]
[1] http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~wgreene/DiscreteChoice/Readings/...
Comment · 9 years ago
Thanks!
Comment · 9 years ago
In multiplayer zero sum game, it still works to Nash.
Intuitively, in a zero sum game, running CFR on one player will find him best responses for the strategies he's playing against. Doing this for multiple players finds corresponding best responses, which is the definition of a Nash Equilibrium.
In non-zero sum game CFR only converges to correlated equilibrium, which is a much weaker equilibrium than a Nash equilibrium.
Comment · 9 years ago
CFR is based on the method of "regret matching", which is a policy update method. Roughly, it says every iteration, the probability you take an action is equal to the fraction of its cumulative counterfactual regret over total cumulative counterfactual regret for all actions.
The cool thing about it is that it provably converges to nash equilibrium in zero sum game, and to correlated equilibria in non-zero sum games.
Comment · 9 years ago
Not really, because CFR is not only taking regret as the loss function, but also the method of "regret matching". That is making the mixed strategy probabilities in the next iteration equal the cumulative counterfactual regret (which you keep track of while iterating).
Comment · 9 years ago
I agree. If you are going to bash C#, call it by its proper name, Java++
That said its still a fine language. Not a fan of the dogmatic OO design concept in Java and C#, but it's perfectly good at what it does.
Comment · 9 years ago
So you cherish the memories, not the thing
Example: up until recently, many young girls in the west grew up on Disney princesses. Rewatch the movies, and pay attention to the female protagonists in those movies being active vs passive agents. Most are passive -- they're simply dealt a series of events (which generally happen only because they are beautiful or otherwise intrinsically valuable, not because of how they act).
Being exposed to those narratives from a very young age surely has an effect on identity, personality formation, etc.