Lol - the code example seems to imply that Zuckerburg's user id is 4.
421 karma · joined October 3, 2013
@ajtulloch's library provides what I imagined the feature would be at first glance - a comprehensible, elegant graphical representation of your NN model. And on top of that, all in Haskell, with Haskell DSL for running torch - so cool.
[1] - http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~sutton/book/the-book.html [2] - http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html [3] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1zDuOPkMSw
{run,don't run}
make coffee/tidy up/drink coffee
shower
make breakfast
eat breakfast over coffee and {math textbook, video lecture}
commute on bike
Maybe I'm projecting onto "the general public" when I make this generalization, but performing operations on a smartphone (aside from call/text) are oft accompanied by the very real risk of squandering your time away. Especially when a browser is involved.
There is something elegant about the interface of a dumb phone, especially a flip phone: You pull it out of your pocket, whip it open, type your text, send it. And then crucially, you flip it closed and stop thinking about it. This is the key. You're using it when you're using it, and you're not when you're not.
Even grander generalization and possibly controversial opinion: I hope that consumer technology begins to cater more to those of us who wish to use technology in this way - as a tool that you pull out of your pocket and promptly put away upon achieving your ends.
An audience member complains that this is unfair (i.e. unfair to the learning algorithm), and somebody nearby the cameraman retorts "life is unfair".
This is a fact that even algorithms cannot avoid.
As karpathy suggests below (and he's certainly much more qualified than me), an evolutionary method such as GA's, while apparently fairly effective, could well be wasting valuable information learned in real time through interaction.
Here is the link to the schedule of speakers, along with the slides that have been posted so far[1]. If anyone in attendance has comments about how the series has been in person, I'd be quite happy to hear details.
I knew nothing about programming, but I had taken an intro stats class that had a few assignments in R. A super simple R script did half of my day's work in seconds (plus some debugging because of course I did next to no error handling).
In retrospect, I've realized that if I knew a thing of two about regular expressions at the time, I would have been able to automate my whole summer internship.
So it goes.
But Paxos has gentler assumptions about adversaries than in the Byzantine Generals problem.
IIRC (forgive me, I read the paper a few weeks ago) the solution is at its core a reinforcement learning system, with the deep net only making up the component that predicts reward from a (state, action) pair. With that in hand, there remains the non-trivial RL problem of balancing "exploration vs exploitation" in learning good strategies to play the game(s). While NN's have been used in this capacity before, I believe that, as other comments have mentioned, using a deep net to learn to map a high-dimension state-action space (e.g,the state of the game represented as pixels of the screen at a particular time) to expected reward in real time was indeed an advance, both theoretical and technical.
And, oh yeah, I just remembered that a University of Texas research group is doing work in this area too (there was a recent paper [2] from Peter Stone and others).
(Edited for clarity)
(Edited again to suggest another paper).
[1] - http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.5602.pdf
[2] - http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~pstone/Papers/bib2html-links/TCIAI...
[1] http://mbtaviz.github.io/ [2] http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/images/0003zP-18547/VDQI_P...
The argument is that
|device|-------->network--------->|device|
may be secure, but that doesn't mean
|human|-->|device|-------->network--------->|device|-->|human|
is secure!
> "the biggest benefit with Scala is correctness."
...before the author goes on to say
> "When I say correctness, I mean the ability to easily and consistently write code that works as inteded (not the academic definition of correctness)"