Recent submissions

Comment · 10 years ago
Which can be changed at any time.
Comment · 10 years ago
More realistically: just import it from the rest of the world.
Comment · 10 years ago
Supply generates its own demand; by making captioning even cheaper, it can increase the demand for transcription services and people to check it over. There are a lot of podcasts and YT videos that could benefit from transcriptions but it's too expensive now.
Comment · 10 years ago
We have to hardwire architectures because we can't learn architectures yet, or to put it another way, backpropagation doesn't yet work on hyperparameters as well as on parameters. Hyperparameters should be learnable as in theory there's nothing special about them (it's models all the way down!) - a hyperparameter is merely a parameter we don't yet know how to learn - and this has been demonstrated: http://jmlr.org/proceedings/papers/v37/maclaurin15.pdf "Gradient-based Hyperparameter Optimization through Reversible Learning"

"Tuning hyperparameters of learning algorithms is hard because gradients are usually unavailable. We compute exact gradients of cross-validation performance with respect to all hyperparameters by chaining derivatives backwards through the entire training procedure. These gradients allow us to optimize thousands of hyperparameters, including step-size and momentum schedules, weight initialization distributions, richly parameterized regularization schemes, and neural network architectures. We compute hyperparameter gradients by exactly reversing the dynamics of stochastic gradient descent with momentum."

But it's not feasible yet. Once it is, you can imagine collapsing the whole neural net zoo: you merely specify the input/output type/dimension and then it starts gradient-ascent over all the possible models as tweaked by internal hyperparameters.

Comment · 10 years ago
If you want fine-grained tagging/categorization, you would be even better off with the -boorus.
Comment · 10 years ago
That was deliberate. I couldn't resist either.
Comment · 10 years ago
It could also reflect what is most distinguishable. Which is easier for a NN to confidently distinguish: black pubic hair on black skin, or black pubic hair on white skin? Darker nipples on black skin, or darker nipples on white skin? etc You're doing gradient ascent on confidence of classification, not simply trying to find a plausible input, but the maximal input. There's no reason to expect this to be racially unbiased as there are simple objective reasons that higher contrast would be useful. (Similarly, I would not be surprised if a face recognition NN worked better on Europeans rather than Chinese, for the prima facie reason that they have more variable facial features and other aspects like multiple hair colors other than black.)

And since Yahoo needs to detect porn of all races and there's plenty of black porn out there, it would be odd if their porn detector had such a huge gaping hole in it.

Comment · 10 years ago
> (He's at George Mason University, which is a right-wing think tank, and has to say stuff like that to get tenure.)

Hanson was an extreme libertarian long before he got tenure or joined GMU, or even before he invented prediction markets.

Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
Everywhere else on the Internet?
Comment · 10 years ago
What sort of performance can be expected compared to running in the terminal? How large NNs will this scale to in practice? I see a 50-layer resnet is mentioned; but not 1000-layers?
Comment · 10 years ago
It's interesting to read about the debate between doing editing/screen-drawing on the physical terminal ('smart' hardware) and doing it all in software. The wheel of reincarnation in action! Something we've seen in tech constantly, the balance between local vs distant computing determined by bandwidth/latency... Lately, smartphones, desktops and VR or sound: should the processing be done in the headphone/headset or away in in the PC/smartphone?
Comment · 10 years ago
How would you know if they have been? As the human population shoots up massively, car-miles have increased enormously over the past century, and rural areas become denser, the number of deer-car accidents would skyrocket even if they have successfully been evolving to reduce risk.
Comment · 10 years ago
The obsession with information theory here seems like a classic nail-hammer thing. The number of bits my tests convey is totally useless to think about and certainly not worth spending pages on. All I want from my tests from a code base I maintain for thousands of patches is a tiny fraction of a bit: did my latest change break an important behavior or invariant encoded in a unit test? If I only screw up once in every 100 patches, then formally, my unit tests are doing all that work to emit 0.01 bits of information (-log(99/100)), which is formally a totally irrelevant thing to know about my unit testing framework. ('Hey Joe, what have you been up to?' 'Fixing my unit testing framework - I'm up to 0.03 bits per patch!' 'I see.')

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton