Hacker News Reader

alouisoson The End of Starsky Robotics

It doesn't matter which ones had public implementations. If you are stuck to this comment it is obvious you never tried to productize any implementation of whatever

alouisoson Actuarial science ranked as most valuable college major

Beware, actuarial science will be replaced by AI and the incentives of insurance is high to replace this workforce with AI. Believe me, I have been doing an AI startup in exactly this space

alouisoson Ask HN: Who is hiring? (April 2017)

We have been humbled by your response and we are grateful for it. Position is now covered. Thank you

alouisoson Ask HN: Who is hiring? (April 2017)

Galaxy.AI is building artificial intelligence solutions for insurance and healthcare. We have been featured in Inc magazine as one of the most promising startups for 2017.

We need talented full stack developers that will connect our AI with the web services to create scalable solutions for our clients. You will work on the forefront of AI technology that provides valuable solutions to our clients (images, genetics).

Favorite tools nodejs, python, SQL, Angular and React for front end. All the AI is built on python.

Our CTO is a veteran of HF trading with more that 20 years of experience and our data scientists come from Oxford and Montreal. We have a very open culture where people are encouraged to experiment and fail and have lots of personal growth and initiative. Our mantra is that we want to empower each other to become the most successful person they can be.

Process: tech screen - tech interview - cultural fit - offer

get in touch : connect@galaxy.ai

alouisoson Superintelligence: The Idea That Eats Smart People

I would love to see more articles like that from people building our current AI to discuss real problems on current AI systems so we can start working on solutions. For example human level interpretability as required by law in EU for AI systems eg targetted ads is a limiting factor to AI progresss because some of the most advanced currents AIs are not interpretable and maybe shouldn't because we can now engineer intelligence different from ours but not necessarily dangerous (or work on making it safe). To my opinion this is a more pressing matter than a divine future paper clip AI killer. Making an assumption of a so called "self recursive superAI" and taking it from there is actually diminishing the power of arguments towards the dangers of AI which is an important discussion sometimes abused by people that have never actually built one and extrapolate Gant mind philosophy arguments towards a dangerous future, which is impressive but avoids any proposal of solution to current potential AI dangers which should maybe included as part of the arguments. Important matters as AI safety can be collectively discussed by engineers and philosophers together based on current state and near future potential and not only as a sci-fi future of a god like entity that has nothing to do with our current AI situation. My two cents, hope I am not offending anyone.