788 karma · joined April 20, 2012
So no, you will never see this unless you are a researcher. Academic gatekeeper strikes again
Anytime I see the business speak 'accelerate go-to-market initiatives', the company is at its end-game. Any time a leader has to call that out, they are admitting they need to spend a substantial sum of money to solve a problem a small group of kids in a garage can do with some Red Bull.
I messed with a combo of Whisper and ChatGPT. I took a whisper transcript and asked chatgpt to fix mistranscriptions using the context of the transcript and based on potential phonetic issues. I asked it to replace transcribed words that don't make sense with "[unintelligable]", which improved the output even more.
Transcription error rate was almost nonexistent, even on the smallest whisper model.
Who reviewed this?
As someone who has dealt with massive influx of requests caused by bad actors who use everything in their arsenal to mask their behavior, yes they do. It may not be ideal by any means, but DoS attacks can be very, very expensive and being extra trigger happy on the ban is the difference between an operational site to most to an unavailable site for all.
A very "I'm sorry you were offended" response.
https://twitter.com/Filmora_Editor/status/160918041318809600...
I can't stress how much #6 impacts what makes someone a 'lifer'. By the time you are in 35+ and you've been in tech your entire career, you lean a few important life lessons that you witness the less experienced (both career and life) do all the time.
The bar of compensation is almost always goes up as you progress early in your career. You get used to your standard of living. Next thing you know, you want more money. Getting a promotion or new job that bumps your income, that standard of living naturally goes up. It's hard NOT to go on fancier vacations, upgrade your Honda to a Porsche, hire landscaper/housekeeper/dog walker, buy a bigger house, etc. Eventually, you run into a situation that throws a wrench in disposable income and you have to lower that bar. Then you realize money isn't the most important thing in your career. You learn that the difference between a total comp of $150k to $250k isn't as life changing compared to going from $75k to $150k, so what is the purpose of fighting for more?
When you are 35+, job stability is super important. You might have a family, a hefty savings/retirement account, etc. Whats most important is that work/life balance and not that RSU grant next quarter. Once you find a company that makes you comfortable, and you reach a level of seniority that isn't overwhelming/stressful, stay.
No need to route them to a specific server, a court could just ask NordVPN to log the person's traffic
Nobody has called my bluff, but usually that call center stops trying that scam to your number. I guess that's enough to trigger a do not call by their supervisors or they don't want to get in trouble by even hearing that opportunity.
Unfortunately, I do occasionally get stuck in a system where I get a robocall, but once I get past the sweet robot named Mary asking for final living expense coverages, I now get a 'this number is no longer available' when transferred. After a couple of weeks, I do drop off that list too.
I trust seasoned talent being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in partnership with equally well paid healthcare professionals over PhD students scraping by on grant dollars, keeping their code and datasets in a private GitHub repo that will never see the light of day except for a citation in research papers of other scholars.
Not trying to be mean, but if Facebook is trying to fix their moral compass with dollars, go for it.
Here are the results from the paper:
The radiologists ranked our adversarial approach as better than the standard and dithering approaches with an aver- age rank of 2.83 out of a possible 3. This result is statisti- cally significantly better than either alternative with p-values 1.09 × 10−11 and 2.18 × 10−11 respectively, and the adver- sarial approach was ranked as the best or tied for best in 85.8% of 120 total evaluations (95% CI: 0.78-0.91). The dithering approach is also statistically significantly better than the standard approach. We also asked radiologists if banding was present (in any form) in the reconstructions in each case. This evaluation is highly subjective, as “banding” is hard to define in a pre- cise enough way to ensure consistency between evaluators. Considering each radiologist’s evaluation independently, on average banding is still reported to be present in 72.5% (95% CI: 0.62-0.82) of cases even with the adversarial learn- ing penalty. The radiologists were not consistent in their rankings; the overall percentages reported by the six radiol- ogists were 20%, 75%, 75%, 80%, 85%, and 100% for the adversarial reconstructions. In contrast, for the baseline and dithered reconstructions, only one radiologist reported less than 100% presence of banding for each method (80% and 85% presence respectively, from different radiologists). We believe these numbers could be improved if more tuning went into the model; however, it’s also possible that features of the sub-sampled reconstructions generally may be con- fused with banding, and so any method using sub-sampling might be considered by radiologists as having banding. Sub- sampled reconstructions generally have cleaner regional boundaries and lower noise levels than the corresponding ground-truth.
I think the biggest benefit, safety wise, is it gives the ability to put less mental focus in staying in the lane, and gives me the ability to spend more time focusing on my surroundings. Its easier for me to focus on keeping up with the traffic behind me (like if a car has creeped up into my blind spot) and any potential traffic that is about to cross my path (like a possible red light running coming in hot). In heavy traffic, its super helpful; the auto cruise control is very human-like and will build a gap when someone cuts you off instead of suddenly making one with a slam on the brakes.
There are AP users who prefer to use their time checking on that text message. Those people don't help the statistics / human gene pool.