missingrib

Where do you get the money to fund repeated attempts? I'm confused at stories like this.

This all seems very obvious?

I incorporated logic for finding dominant colors into a program I had written, and from my research clustering algorithms were the best way to get the dominant color in a way that most users would expect.

K-means clustering seems to have a good tradeoff between performance and results. Interestingly, I found that when doing this in the RGB color space you'd get dominant colors that seemed off. They were usually too dark or muddled.

The best option I found was using k-means clustering in the LAB color space. So you convert the image to RGB, convert that to LAB, run k-means, then pull out the biggest clusters. I don't know enough about color theory to really explain why this works so well, but there are plenty of papers and research on it.

I was also considering using DBSCAN or a different algorithm, but most other clustering algorithms are significantly slower. I personally wonder what programs like Spotify and iTunes use to find the dominant color for something like album art, but I assume they cache the result of the best clustering algorithm they have, potentially even including human input at some point in the process.

This is a pretty weird view of it I think. Ranking people in that way.

> My reply is that, if it acts as if it understands Chinese in every situation, then there’s no measurable way of distinguishing it from understanding.

I'm not sure if you understood the argument. The argument isn't asserting that there is a measurable way of distinguishing it, it's actually claiming that regardless of how well it seems like it understands Chinese, it doesn't actually understand Chinese. It's about intentionality and consciousness.

How can it be deeply tangled up in his biology if it can be changed by taking a drug?

Do you think this happens often? What about people with "Reverse Imposter Syndrome" who eventually get into the elite company?

What's an example of a place without "zoning issues" with really expensive real estate?

Bread probably isn't very healthy anyway, so it's okay to cut it out of your diet.

Classic

I don't have much to add except that I've also experienced brief but seismic shifts in my perspective and my view on social interactions. It's been surreal to say the least, and in both of these different states I had a hard time seeing how I ever could have been in the other one.

> I also received an IQ test result which was strange to see, and I actually would have preferred not to see it.

Why is that?

What if it is something that is impossible for you to improve?

It's most likely just climbing technique, keeping with it for a few more months would have yielded pretty good results I think.

>There are professional climbers who are 'heavy'.

Who? The heaviest I can honestly think of would be Chris Scharma, Magnus Midtbo, Jimmy Webb and maybe Jan Hojer, but all of them would be considered pretty skinny by normal standards. Scharma and Webb are probably around 6' 160-170 lbs, Jan is around 175 I think but he's 6'3", and Magnus is 5'8" and 158 lbs or so but has incredibly strong fingers.

Climbing is a strength to weight sport, so being heavier will almost always be worse than being lighter no matter what. It's why you don't see as many tall professional climbers as you would expect.

They're horror shows because...they're boring/awkward/spend a lot of time online? I think you need a reality check.

He would not have committed the crime if the FBI hadn't set up the fake persona that was allegedly going to get caught and get Ulbright arrested and charged with a life sentence.

Nobody does this stuff to those kinds of scientists.

How did that happen?

>But there are still philosophers like Dennett who take an even harder position, saying that functional knowledge is identical to experiential knowledge.

If you deny the existence of consciousness or qualia then you are making that claim. Strict physicalists all are committed to that claim.

I think philosophers get a bit annoyed about this because they've spent literal years and years thinking about something that might be quite esoteric/tricky, and then someone comes along and just assumes the answer as if there hasn't been decades of discourse about this exact thing.

The subtext in your comment is that everyone does philosophy all the time, and there's no difference between professional and amateur philosophers.

He's literally one of the best selling music artists who single-handedly pioneered multiple substyles within hip-hop over a 20 year career. He's released some of the most critically acclaimed albums of all time.

Strictly as a rapper he might not be listed as "the best rapper ever", but as a musician he's easily up there.

It directly responds to the comment even without the quoted sentence.

Well, that fact that the dairy industry is very inhumane and involves killing animals.

Dismissing academic philosophy as a whole with a link to a PG article is possibly the most HackerNews thing I've ever seen.

>He starts with a "Webster's dictionary defines" kind of premise

We are talking about diversity in academia, so it's helpful to have some history of the word and how it started becoming used the way it's used today. Do you disagree with the history?

>Not one single "woke social justice warrior" values philosophy?

He didn't say this. He said that not one "woke social justice warrior" (this should have been expressed differently) values philosophical diversity within academia. That said, citing himself on this was a bit ridiculous.

>I had no idea reading this that the author was nominally an intellectual and a philosopher.

I admit to some bias, but Huemer has some good academic papers (which you can find here: https://www.owl232.net/papers.htm).

This tone is very common in academic philosophy. I would characterize it as being low in rhetoric and extremely blunt. I don't really see how it sounds like "a high school sophomore".

Thank god you can't bold.

Your last sentence is confusing, rather than starting what from scratch after age 30? An ML career or trying to become a great engineer/programmer/IT person?

I'm confused as to how this is at all uncharitable, here is a direct quote from the commenter: "I guess that would work for a lot of people, but I'm personally not attracted to bald men. So I think I'd prefer if my husband got the transplants, I think our only problem is money... but the more I think about it, it'll probably be worth it for our marriage in the long run."

Is it being uncharitable to assume that she thinks that her marriage will be negatively affected by her husband going bald? She specifically states she's not attracted to bald men, and says she'd be willing to spend money they don't currently have for him to get a hair transplant in order to save their marriage "in the long run".