joaorico

Joined 13 years ago

Karma
1,354
Submissions
122
Member since
Sep 19
<mylastname>.joao.m at theemail.com that paul buchheit created
View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 2 years ago
Kafka [1] on which types of book to read:

"I believe one should only read those books which bite and sting. If the book we are reading does not wake us up with a blow to the head, then why read the book? To make us happy, as you write? My God, we would be just as happy if we had no books, and those books that make us happy, we could write ourselves if necessary. But we need the books that affect us like a disaster, that hurts us deeply, like the death of someone we loved more than ourselves, like if we were being driven into forests, away from all people, like a suicide, a book must be the axe for the frozen sea inside us." [2]

[1] Brief an Oskar Pollak, 27. Januar 1904. , https://homepage.univie.ac.at/werner.haas/1904/br04-003.htm

[2] Literal translation by ChatGPT. Original:

"Ich glaube, man sollte überhaupt nur solche Bücher lesen, die einen beißen und stechen. Wenn das Buch, das wir lesen, uns nicht mit einem Faustschlag auf den Schädel weckt, wozu lesen wir dann das Buch? Damit es uns glücklich macht, wie Du schreibst? Mein Gott, glücklich wären wir eben auch, wenn wir keine Bücher hätten, und solche Bücher, die uns glücklich machen, könnten wir zur Not selber schreiben. Wir brauchen aber die Bücher, die auf uns wirken wie ein Unglück, das uns sehr schmerzt, wie der Tod eines, den wir lieber hatten als uns, wie wenn wir in Wälder vorstoßen würden, von allen Menschen weg, wie ein Selbstmord, ein Buch muß die Axt sein für das gefrorene Meer in uns."

Comment · 2 years ago
I suppose it's quite off-topic, but some weeks ago I read a small book by Mary Gaitskill, the writer of the piece.

It's called "Lost Cat".

I highly recommend it. Ironically, it might be an approximate opposite of Pale Fire. It's very short, with simple yet beautiful prose, filled with intense, raw emotions.

Comment · 2 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
Incidentally, if you’re looking to start reading in French, there is hardly a better book in terms of (impact on literature) times (simple, accessible writing) [2]. It’s also a short book.

Regarding the literary merit of Camus, Nabokov had this to say [1]:

”I happen to find second-rate and ephemeral the works of a number of puffed-up writers—such as Camus, Lorca, Kazantzakis, D. H. Lawrence, Thomas Mann, Thomas Wolfe, and literally hundreds of other “great” second-raters.”

“Brecht, Faulkner, Camus, many others, mean absolutely nothing to me, and I must fight a suspicion of conspiracy against my brain when I see blandly accepted as “great literature” by critics and fellow authors Lady Chatterley’s copulations or the pretentious nonsense of Mr. Pound, that total fake.”

“Incidentally, I frequently hear the distant whining of people who complain in print that I dislike the writers whom they venerate such as Faulkner, Mann, Camus, Dreiser, and of course Dostoevski.”

“It is a shame that he [Franz Hellens] is read less than that awful Monsieur Camus and even more awful Monsieur Sartre.”

[1] Strong Opinions

[2] Although Le Petit Prince beats it in all three (impact, even simpler language, shorter).

Comment · 3 years ago
Opportunity costs. The real debate has been whether it makes sense for string theory (whatever the prevailing definition is) to dominate funding for theoretical research of the "bridge". There are alternatives besides strings for the bridge, and there should be even more, in theory...
Comment · 3 years ago
Simpson’s paradox should be taken into account.

If you group the population into only 2 groups: all of the vaccinated and all the unvaccinated, regardless of age; then the vaccinated had a higher death toll.

But age is a hidden factor. The older have more risks and are more vaccinated.

If you group by vaccination AND by age bracket, the opposite happens. For example, the 60 to 65 vaccinated have a lower death rate than the 60 to 65 unvaccinated.

Comment · 5 years ago
Comment · 5 years ago
Comment · 5 years ago
The new edition has been split in two parts. The pdf draft (921 pages) and python code [1] of the first part are now available. The table of contents of the second part is here [2].

From the preface:

"By Spring 2020, my draft of the second edition had swollen to about 1600 pages, and I was still not done. At this point, 3 major events happened. First, the COVID-19 pandemic struck, so I decided to “pivot” so I could spend most of my time on COVID-19 modeling. Second, MIT Press told me they could not publish a 1600 page book, and that I would need to split it into two volumes. Third, I decided to recruit several colleagues to help me finish the last ∼ 15% of “missing content”. (See acknowledgements below.)

The result is two new books, “Probabilistic Machine Learning: An Introduction”, which you are currently reading, and “Probabilistic Machine Learning: Advanced Topics”, which is the sequel to this book [Mur22].

Together these two books attempt to present a fairly broad coverage of the field of ML c. 2020, using the same unifying lens of probabilistic modeling and Bayesian decision theory that I used in the first book. Most of the content from the first book has been reused, but it is now split fairly evenly between the two new books. In addition, each book has lots of new material, covering some topics from deep learning, but also advances in other parts of the field, such as generative models, variational inference and reinforcement learning. To make the book more self-contained and useful for students, I have also added some more background content, on topics such as optimization and linear algebra, that was omitted from the first book due to lack of space.

Another major change is that nearly all of the software now uses Python instead of Matlab."

[1] https://github.com/probml/pyprobml

[2] https://probml.github.io/pml-book/book2.html

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton