465 karma · joined February 22, 2007
It is a language model, so its job is to generate plausible-looking text. It does not use any external reference material during inference so it has to encode all knowledge it uses in its weights. So the weights are essentially its only long-term memory.
You could say that the task it was given here was “Provide plausible-looking links without using any reference material.” For that task I think it did a reasonable job.
(At the moment of writing this the yle.fi title is “Finland will be self-sufficient in electricity within a year or two, says minister” whereas HN title is “Finland will be self-sufficient in electricity within a year or two”.)
For each of the three work routines I have a short TODO list in Logseq. After I complete the list I mark the dot in Streaks.
Each item in the routine TODO lists is short and easy to do, such as “check email”, “do 40 pushups”, or “decide what’s tomorrow’s big task”. One of the items is the question “do I want to change any of my routines?”
The trick for me is to keep the real work separated from the routines. Routines should be simple. Real work at its best is complex and varying and does not lend itself easily to routines.
(I don't know anything about Kazakhstan politics so the similarities may be superficial.)
Did you mean to write DeepMind instead? If so, I don’t disagree.
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/27/youtube-could-soon-equal-net...
Ladder is a fundamental technique that is easy for humans but hard for both monte carlo and neural network static analysis. It is plausible that an equally strong but more ladder-aware player would have very different tactics from the current best computer players.
The original AlphaGo actually had a hand-crafted ladder feature input layer. It was removed in Alpha Zero. We know from Leela Zero and ELF Go game records that they don’t understand ladders very well, so likely Alpha Zero didn’t understand them either.
"Linguistic relativity, also known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis or Whorfianism, is a concept-paradigm in linguistics and cognitive science that holds that the structure of a language affects its speakers' cognition or world view."
Finland is suffering from a period of slow growth and rising unemployment. The three immediate reasons are the economic troubles of euro area, the decline of Nokia, and the trade sanctions against Russia, one of Finland's largest trading partners. Add to that the quick rise of wages until 2008, the aging population, an expensive social welfare system, and the inability to devalue the local currency, and the troubles seem very hard indeed.
The government's main goal is to adapt the Finnish economy to the new reality, by spurring growth and improving state fiscals. It has many options on its plate, basic income being one of them.
Currently, however, the government's focus seems to be in short-term. The current hot topic is the so-called "social contract", which is essentially government trying to make a deal with labor unions to increase the length of work week from 37,5 hours to 40 (or a similar reduction in wages). This plan, perhaps not so surprisingly, seems to be failing. After it is buried (probably within the next few days), the government may try "fiscal devaluation", i.e. moving tax burden from companies to citizens. And then some painful public finance cuts. And after that, who knows what?
Regarding long-term efforts, other pending reforms have more support than basic income, but still not enough agreement to be hammered out quickly. The two most important ones are health care reform and the change of municipality responsibilities. Both of these have been in talks for years without signs of being resolved.
All this is made more difficult by the fact that the rising populist party 'The Finns' is in government for the first time, still learning how it wants to play the game.
In summary, it isn't clear when the government will move from short-term considerations to longer-term restructuring, and if the basic income will still be on the plate then.
Edit: grammar.
Refactoring doesn't necessarily even mean that the original code was structurally bad. When new features are added, code gets more complicated, requiring more abstraction. I like to abstract code via refactoring when we need it, not before. Then refactoring changes good code to good code. It's just that the new situation presents different demands to the code than the old situation.
According to his theory, there are two types of innovation: disruptive and sustaining. Disruptive innovation creates new markets by applying a different set of values. Sustaining innovation merely improves a product in relation to competion in its current market.
So I believe the authors do know what the word disruptive mean and are very deliberate in using it instead of innovation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology
EDIT: Clarified my point in the wake of downvotes.
In addition, one of Nokia's big problems is its inability to produce good modern software. In order to make Symbian and MeeGo realistic contenders, Nokia would have completely needed to change its software processes' direction. It would not have been as risky as moving to WP7.
"Going into 2011 our order book is all-time high and it provides us with a good opportunity to increase sales, again operating more selectively. We will also continue to launch new product lines, increase prices and improve mix to offset higher raw material costs. Low inventories in the distribution channel and our growing production capacity offer a good starting point for further profitable growth in 2011."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-13/nokia-chief-elop-to...
With a bit of googling I found this quote from a Forum Nokia champion: "Series 40 (S40) is not based on Symbian at all, but a Nokia proprietary real-time operating system. Series 40 does not allow any native (C/C++) development (with or without Qt). The primary app development for Series 40 based phones is Java (JME, J2ME, MIDP/CLDC), or Flash Lite." http://discussion.forum.nokia.com/forum/showthread.php?21666...
Here's another link: http://eve-c.org/2011/syskwyawan/
Mobile Phones is S40 (not Symbian). This is the ancient Nokia platform, which is the only part of Nokia that is currently competitive in its price bracket.
The intention is to kill off Symbian as quickly and painlessly as possible. Good riddance. It was not a realistic smartphone contender to begin with. Finally Nokia stops throwing good money after bad. Only it may be too late.
One of Nokia's systemic problems is its uneven software culture. Nokia's diffrentiator was hardware. When competitors surpassed Nokia in software it was fighting a losing battle. From this point of view the move makes much sense. Remove the software that don't perform well: Symbian and Ovi service "platform", developer tools. Keep and streamline the parts that have a chance of success: S40, MeeGo.
The transition will be painful and success is far from certain, but the obvious alternatives would be even worse.
We are serial entrepreneurs for hire. A client gives us one week and a vision, and we try to create as much magnificence as we can in that time. And then if it's feasible and the client wants us to, we take it all the way to a finished product.
To me, it looks like the blogger makes a few wrong assumptions: He confuses Google Instant with Google Realtime. He assumes that "something like database triggers" is actually very much like database triggers and could be e.g. used to check the integrity of the data. He goes wildly off on a tangent with Internet DOM.
JBehave: text
RBehave (based on JBehave): code
RSpec Story Runner (based on RBehave): code, later also text
Cucumber (based on RSpec Story Runner): text
Steak (based on Cucumber): code
http://www.highstakesdb.com/1343-isildur1-loses-over-3m-to-a...
Edit: See also http://www.pokertableratings.com/fulltilt-player-search/isil...