308 karma · joined October 22, 2018
Like those laborers who went jobless after the waves of industrial evolution, they should have been planning earlier for other jobs and skills, rather than focusing solely on the fulfillment from making goods.
This presentation is pretty inspiring to me, but at the same time there is just no obvious way to leverage the claim. How can any management allow subordinates to do things without any objectives to justify?
Generally I buy the reasoning, but maybe that's just I cannot identify any fundamental flaws now.
Surprised to know nobody mentions reinforcement learning here.
Bought three books (in their transitional Chinese edition), whose original titles are,
* Reinforcement Learning 2nd, Richard S. Sutton & Andrew G. Barto
* Deep Reinforcement Learning in Action, Alexander Zai & Brandon Brown
* AlphaZero 深層学習・強化学習・探索 人工知能プログラミング実践入門, 布留川英一
None of them teaches you how to apply RL libraries. The first is a text book and mentions nothing about how to use frameworks at all. The last two are more practice oriented, but the examples are both too trivial, compared to a full boardgame, even the rule set is simple for humans.
Since my goal is eventually to conquer a boardgame with an RL agent that is trained at home (hopefully), I would say that the 3rd book is the most helpful one.
But so far my progress has been stuck for a while, because obviously I can only keep trying the hyperparameters and network architecture to find what the best ones for the game are. I kind of "went back" to the supervised learning practice in which I generated a lot of random play record, and them let the NN model at least learn some patterns out of it. Still trying...
Two exmaples. (1) grammars in natural languages. You can just see in another commenter here uses "a local maxima", and then how people react to that. I didn't even notice becuase English grammar has never been native to me. (2) Mostly, prepositions between two languages, no matter how close they are, don't have a direct mapping. The learner just has to remember it.
However I would like to mention that sometimes we do think so, as in "the will of the party", at least in some language's context.
Fun fact, when I tried to find similar sentence like "the will of Democratic/Republican Party", google returns 5 results for the former but followed by voters/members and thus not what I want, for the latter, there is no results at all. But as I find "the will of the party", I find an abstract of some paper from my area.
Maybe party is too small for this. It seems like "the will of the nation" is widely used.
Not saying competitive programming contest easy or something, but just pointing out that in a contest with timing constraint, the requirement realization phase cannot be fitted in.
Another analogy: martial art vs. military.
At least now I know that, at the end of the day, burnout can only be fixed by other means.
Sounds intuitive, but there are gaming researches working on that regard. Two related terms (learnt from IEEE Conference of Games) that come to mind:
1. Game refinement theory. The inventors of this theory see games as if they were evolving species, so this is to describe how game became more interesting, more challenging, more "refined". Personally I don't buy that theory because the series of papers had only a limited number of examples and it is questionable how related statistics were generated (especially the repeatedly occured baselines Go and Mahjong), but nonetheless there is theory on that.
2. Deep Player Behaviory Modeling (DPBM): This is the more interesting one. Game developers want their game to be automatically testable, but the agents are often not ready or not true enough. Says AlphaZero for Go or AlphaStar for StarCraft II, they are impressive ones but super-human, so the agnet's behavior give us little insight on how the quality of the game is and how to further improve the game. With DPBM, the signature of real human play can be captured and reproduced by agents, and thus auto-play testing is possible. Balance, fairness, engagement, etc. can then be used as the indirect keys to reassemble "fun."
The reason is that, Google can support my quick checks about English usage that can be minor to native users, such as
"as a result" vs "as the result"
or
"looking for the X factor" (I feel like I can write this phrase but not quite sure I understand what X factor really is or if there is anyone really using this term)
or
"someone advocating for implementing" (I want to use this phrase to indicate some colleague but I want to know if saying this is natural enough (or has more search results))
Silly but I do rely on Google to do this for me. Sometimes I feel guilty about this because I know these search requests costs energy and increase carbon emission.
DuckDuckGo is nowhere near the performance of Google for this. Also, it frequently returns NSFW websites at the first result page.
Or will you claim that all machines that are capable of such tasks are already compromised?
For compiled languages it is handled with calling convention, and most architectures (ARM, PPC, RISC-V, ...) have register-based calling convention. Only when all the argument registers are consumed, the function call pass the rest arguments on the stack.
Take Linux, a giant user of C language, as an example. Allocating a large chuck of memory on stack is just not useful, even given unlimited amount of memory. You note the most critical reason yourself in the post: (assuming that data doesn't need to be returned outside of the current stack frame) However, large data structures are almost always for others to use. Just consider sys_clone (that the kernel eventually generates a body for the new thread) or sys_mmap (that the kernel manipulates existing virtual memory area structures from elsewhere). Allocating them on the stack seems pointless.
Obviously there are mostly mechanical engineers, which is not my main interest.
All the teams are constantly collecting data from every part of the car during the races. There must be many sensors throughout the cars, right? They must need some software engineers to provide a good monitor/analyzer and embedded-system software engineers to do the firmware stuff.
Can any one share some F1 experiences?
As someone not a U.S. citizen, the impact of PC is ridiculously huge. I know slavery and how bad it is. It appeared in my culture, and it is still there in some form too. However, the ENGLISH word "master" means not much to me. It is just a multi-purpose symbol, like many other words. As the meaning being a main branch, why bothering the renaming?
You claim that you are just spending your energy on something else, but in reality you are giving up the right to use your own language and to maintain the definition the meaning of a well-understood and frequently-used word.
As an satisfied Arch user, I always find AUR has already included something I need. Better, sometimes I just found them already in community repo.
Disclaimer: I am Taiwanese. We have been doing well handling the COVID-19, but we did far worse on traffic accidents prevention than our neighbors.
The design of Taiwanese Roads leaves no room for bikes and passengers. Taipei does this better because it has MRT and so U-bike is widely used there. Other cities are not so lucky.
For example, Linux introduces some fixes for Y2038 problem during the past few years. I suppose the community of this C library should do something for those changes, right?
Although the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown is not as severe as Hallownest, the whole atmosphere does make me feel similar.
Also I wonder what was it like in the last few years of Pale King and his bugs who slowly losing their social functions, technology and cognition.
So now life will be more like a game. The fact that you don't know if the judge is there indicates that you are somewhat freed from any known rules (I don't recommend you breaking any social rules or laws though). It is you and only you can decide what direction to go. Therefore death, well, any game always ends no matter what it is.
A never-ending game will probably end in some unexpected and unwilling ways. If there is no natural death anymore, then everyone can only die by accident. Other answer mentions reverse aging techniques which I feel quite skeptical of because I don't think you would want to live on a planet where inter-planet transportation is not ready but nobody dies anymore.
Regarding the cloud solution, Gmail outage can happen, why will Gbrain never be? Says 500 hundred years later no physical person can claim your brain are still in use online, why don't they remove you from the database silently? Too many uncertainties there.
Dalai Lama once said, to find joyfulness is to take care of others and be empathy about others' pain. Such imagination helps you to realize that there are painful things and miseries happening and they are far more worse than death.
Anyway, devote yourself to something you passionate about, keep seeking mortality and don't blame yourself for it. You either succeed and last to the end of all the universes, or you do something meaningful to people and die like all others. Both are good.
My interpretation of these concerns from OP is that human in general has lost his/her own control on him/herself. The existence of Internet/Online services overwhelms each individual's cognition and emotion from every possible angle. Almost no way to escape unless you quit SNS.