The UI is so 2003. Not doin' it. They need to port this cross-platform with Xamarin and get it a modern desktop and mobile interface. I'll just keep my monthly subscription office for now.
In other news...Adderal causes the electrical energy in the brain to fire stronger and faster....but you can't have that, it's dangerous and the scarcity through regulation makes me too much money.
Don't worry...they are hiring 7000 people who have been vetted to monitor the system and preserve privacy for the new feature. It would have been really funny had we learned about this before the congressional testimonies.
Right now AI == Pattern Recognition == Machine Learning. No one is professing that we will create autonomous intelligence or "real intelligence." If we did it would have rights just as we do. The media, in their purest form, is just befuddling words to make headlines. AI is now machine learning...you know, that thing that Facebook is allowed to run amok with. We have it. For better or worse.
"too much trust will be put into them for critical and/or dangerous things"
With all of the hype surrounding it, this is a real concern. Everyone has access to machine learning tools right now but it is very tricky to get actionable results and far too easy to come up with some conclusion that proves ultimately unfruitful. This isn't really a danger in business because if you get something wrong you just miss a chance to connect with customers or sell more stuff. However, when government starts using it to adjust policy and make decisions then you really expose yourself to catastrophe.
I think he changed his name to defeat or inhibit well-known AI algorithms but has sacrificed his own intellect in the process. Have a little compassion.
Facebook is far enough along that they can't even answer with certainty how thier system behaves. How did Facebook identify me for a particular offer, potential fiend contact, or adjust my feed? No one person at Facebook can answer the question accurately.
I thought the OP comments looked insightful because they are true. I was never under the delusion that something could be done about it. Having a nice place to work for everyone is a result of good personal choices made by a majority of the individuals there. I thought that looking at this issues from the OP comment point of view might help people make personal decisions or at least think about their actions and bias that they contribute to the group.
Whew....just noticed this...I think this is what really got him fired...
"Communism promised to be both morally and economically superior to capitalism, but every attempt became morally corrupt and an economic failure. As it became clear that the working class of the liberal democracies wasn’t going to overthrow their “capitalist oppressors,” the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics. The core oppressor-oppressed dynamics remained, but now the oppressor is the “white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy.” 8 Ironically, IQ tests were initially championed by the Left when merit"
One of the comments in that article was very insightful:
(1) Workplaces are invariably structured for how men like to interact (hierarchical authority), not women (peer authority, different than Japanese workplace consensus). This immediately puts a big burden on women, to act like men regardless of how awkward or wrong it feels to do so... and then to be scolded from time to time for being too masculine. Men NEVER face a similar problem, so their stress level is invariably MUCH LESS from the job. Even bending over backwards to recruit women is not going to solve this problem, because of the male-normative default. (2) Society always feels entitled to evaluate a woman's moral behavior, but generally refrains from scrutinizing a man's moral behavior (or lack thereof). This is exacerbated, in male dominated fields, by the presence of a "neutral" that a man can adopt (clothing, demeanor), but there is no such neutral for a woman. So, every little thing that a woman does or does not do is subject to scrutiny by EVERYONE, since everyone thinks they are expert on how women should be, but very few demand men to be a certain way. This creates a much more stressful situation for women. Because of (1) and (2), Damore was right, women are more stressed. But, it's not because we're genetically less able to deal with stress, it's because the workplace is configured for men, and women have to conform yet not "act masculine". WTF??? Often, women solve this dilemma by smiling constantly, which reassures men that she is not an ANGRY UGLY woman, but increases stress. When a man has a temper tantrum, other men get helpful at him, so he will calm down. When a woman has a temper tantrum, men assume she is poor at being calm and ask her why she is so angry, instead of helpfully fixing her environment. Aaaah, the benefit of the doubt that men get is huge.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. You can't fix that.
Doing well under these conditions is not a good sign.
VBA support? No? Didn't think so.
How are these multinational insurance companies supposed to build their risk models?
The UI is so 2003. Not doin' it. They need to port this cross-platform with Xamarin and get it a modern desktop and mobile interface. I'll just keep my monthly subscription office for now.
Had a stint of bed wetting in my early thirties. Wife was somehow understanding though I was not.
Bayonetta. Thanks man....I will never un-see that.
Trump is not a republican. He is an opportunist.
In other news...Adderal causes the electrical energy in the brain to fire stronger and faster. ...but you can't have that, it's dangerous and the scarcity through regulation makes me too much money.
....and how do you test that the feature actually works?
All the public will get from this is "naked chicks" and "hash." There probably will not be much backlash.
Don't worry...they are hiring 7000 people who have been vetted to monitor the system and preserve privacy for the new feature. It would have been really funny had we learned about this before the congressional testimonies.
Right now AI == Pattern Recognition == Machine Learning. No one is professing that we will create autonomous intelligence or "real intelligence." If we did it would have rights just as we do. The media, in their purest form, is just befuddling words to make headlines. AI is now machine learning...you know, that thing that Facebook is allowed to run amok with. We have it. For better or worse.
You have attained level one hundred....your sword is now imbued with AI.
"too much trust will be put into them for critical and/or dangerous things"
With all of the hype surrounding it, this is a real concern. Everyone has access to machine learning tools right now but it is very tricky to get actionable results and far too easy to come up with some conclusion that proves ultimately unfruitful. This isn't really a danger in business because if you get something wrong you just miss a chance to connect with customers or sell more stuff. However, when government starts using it to adjust policy and make decisions then you really expose yourself to catastrophe.
I think he changed his name to defeat or inhibit well-known AI algorithms but has sacrificed his own intellect in the process. Have a little compassion.
Facebook is far enough along that they can't even answer with certainty how thier system behaves. How did Facebook identify me for a particular offer, potential fiend contact, or adjust my feed? No one person at Facebook can answer the question accurately.
The point is that no one fucking knows how it happened....not even Facebook.
So he foresees his work causing another great depression? What is the value proposition?
I thought the OP comments looked insightful because they are true. I was never under the delusion that something could be done about it. Having a nice place to work for everyone is a result of good personal choices made by a majority of the individuals there. I thought that looking at this issues from the OP comment point of view might help people make personal decisions or at least think about their actions and bias that they contribute to the group.
First it was hair spray...now its car emissions. What's next? Cow farts?
First it was hair spray...now its car emissions. What's next? Cow flatulence?
First it was hair spray...now it's car emissions. What's next? Cow flatulence?
Been looking for a down-mod badge for a while. Thanks!
Whew....just noticed this...I think this is what really got him fired...
"Communism promised to be both morally and economically superior to capitalism, but every attempt
became morally corrupt and an economic failure. As it became clear that the working class of the liberal
democracies wasn’t going to overthrow their “capitalist oppressors,” the Marxist intellectuals transitioned
from class warfare to gender and race politics. The core oppressor-oppressed dynamics remained, but
now the oppressor is the “white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy.”
8 Ironically, IQ tests were initially championed by the Left when merit"
One of the comments in that article was very insightful:
(1) Workplaces are invariably structured for how men like to interact (hierarchical authority), not women (peer authority, different than Japanese workplace consensus). This immediately puts a big burden on women, to act like men regardless of how awkward or wrong it feels to do so ... and then to be scolded from time to time for being too masculine. Men NEVER face a similar problem, so their stress level is invariably MUCH LESS from the job. Even bending over backwards to recruit women is not going to solve this problem, because of the male-normative default.
(2) Society always feels entitled to evaluate a woman's moral behavior, but generally refrains from scrutinizing a man's moral behavior (or lack thereof). This is exacerbated, in male dominated fields, by the presence of a "neutral" that a man can adopt (clothing, demeanor), but there is no such neutral for a woman. So, every little thing that a woman does or does not do is subject to scrutiny by EVERYONE, since everyone thinks they are expert on how women should be, but very few demand men to be a certain way. This creates a much more stressful situation for women.
Because of (1) and (2), Damore was right, women are more stressed. But, it's not because we're genetically less able to deal with stress, it's because the workplace is configured for men, and women have to conform yet not "act masculine". WTF??? Often, women solve this dilemma by smiling constantly, which reassures men that she is not an ANGRY UGLY woman, but increases stress. When a man has a temper tantrum, other men get helpful at him, so he will calm down. When a woman has a temper tantrum, men assume she is poor at being calm and ask her why she is so angry, instead of helpfully fixing her environment. Aaaah, the benefit of the doubt that men get is huge.