614 karma · joined September 13, 2012
Except they showed their AI the 3 most important frames (rock paper scissors) and not the hundreds in between.
Task 1 for AGI: Optimize your own system so you don't cost 50 million dollars to train.
> "Just to train a large model once will eat up 20% of this money."
Aren't these 2 statements conflicting?
That said, I'd also guess there's a countdown timer before they get deleted permanently.
I hope you can get a human from YouTube to talk to you.
It may benefit you to post a link to the youtube channel so someone can proactively investigate. Lots of google employees read this forum.
So, the phrase "a tremendous amount of game code doesn't benefit from multithreading" is actually true since most game code is in unreal/unity, but it's not a hard constraint for all game engines.
Can you clarify? Isn't the currency going to be owned by a consortium of various global businesses [1]? Are you unaware of that?
Is this standard practice in machine learning? This sounds more like regular programming to get exactly the outcome you want.
1) Y = set of words in every definition of the words in set X
2) X = Y - X (all words in Y that are not in X)
3) Repeat from 1 if the set of words in X has changed
Does that reduce all words down to the actual minimal set of words required to define other ones? Since you can build upwards from the resulting set X to get the original set of words.
Also, this reminds me of the knapsack problem a little bit (for example what is the minimum set of coins required to be able to make $X).
The cynical part of me thinks that when a big purchase like this happens, the buyer knows something we don’t.
Then again, they bought 5% of Tesla as well this year.
If you read their S-1, they list a dependence on Google cloud as one of their big risk factors. Yet they then go ahead and make this commitment instead of working towards eliminating it.
There's so many advantages to owning your stack and if Snap thinks that it's going to need 2 billion dollars to pay for cloud infra, they're at the scale where it makes sense to build your own infra. Just look at Facebook, they're able to create tailor made data-centers that fit precisely what they need. The success of Snap relies on huge scale on the consumer side, if they want to scale their infra to support that 5 years down the line then this sounds like a poor move since they will either need to play catch-up later on or prepare to pay serious dough to Google.
Paying for cloud services seems like a great idea when you are not able to predict your needs in the coming years, given a deal like this I don't think that's the case.
Though, in my opinion I think it's kind of insulting to be asked something like "What did you learn?". The question isn't really necessary. You know that you screwed up.
That kind of dynamic between an engineer and a team lead is off-putting to me.
I think the proper way for a team lead to handle it is to instead work with the engineer to help find ways to eliminate the human error by implementing tooling or processes. The conversation should go something like this:
Lead: "I wonder how we can make sure none of us break XYZ widget again"
Engineer: "We can build out ABC and run that, also generally just test better before pushing to prod".
Lead: "Cool, do you want to go ahead and take care of that?"
You mention a potential strategy for manipulating the market like pushing prices to hit stops, well if these strategies are common then it seems there exists a potential strategy to take advantage of this.
It seems like so long as the market's next tick price is not completely uncorrelated from its previous tick price, then there will always be a way to 'beat' the market. The market price is not completely uncorrelated (as you mentioned, there's price manipulation driving it to certain prices throughout the day).