How do we know that older patients don't just like going to older doctors?
We know that by clicking on the link to TFA, and then clicking on the link to the actual paper, and reading about how they corrected for that in the data by comparing same-age patients.
If they didn't ask the question, it's not a very useful study.
They adjusted for patient age. This is explained in the actual paper. They also adjusted for gender, ethnicity, household income, day of week of admission, etc.
They also considered many characteristics of the doctor besides age, including gender, medical school attended, etc.
Ending the war is simple - the "rebels" should surrender. They have no chance of winning, not anymore.
They have no chance of taking Damascus and deposing Assad. But they have a good chance of holding onto territory and negotiating for autonomy. Wars seldom end in total victory for one side.
Russia is Assad's main backer, but they have little to gain from an outright regime victory. Assad will no longer need them, so they will have less leverage. If the war drags on and on, the Russians can benefit from the continuing chaos, which they are skilled at exploiting.
1. Give the rebels enough support to fight but not enough to win. 2. Insist that a precondition for peace is that Assad has to go. 3. Refuse to acknowledge that Assad is winning the war and has no reason whatsoever to agree to #2. 4. Watch the war drag on as Syrian refugees flood into Europe, spreading discontent and instability.
The obvious solution is a partition. The Syrian Kurds can join with the Iraqi Kurds in an independent Kurdistan. The Sunnis can form their own statelet or join up with the Iraqi Sunnis. The Alawites can keep Assad and the land along the coast and the Lebanon border.
Done. If there are any other world problems that you need me to solve, please let me know. I am happy to help.
Yes it has and it's also resulted in suppressed wages in the US and thus moving the middle class in the US closer to poverty.
Manufacturing job losses in America have been driven more by automation than by outsourcing. Lower wages are offset by lower prices for products made by machines or Asians. So the cost to Americans has been far, far less than the gains in Asia. Living standards in China have gone up eight-fold over the last 30 years.
My point is that if we keep going on at this pace that it will make us all equally poor.
My point is that this is nonsense. Improvements in productivity do not lead to poverty.
It has this crazy feature where you can write one version of code and deploy it on iOS, Android, and Windows.
That sounds pretty cool, but how portable is it really? It is easy to make a "Hello World" program portable, but what about portable access to UI features like the camera or accelerometer? Can I detect orientation and tilt in a portable way?
What you want, what we all want, is a suite of languages, each with their own strengths
I am ok with one language for apps, another for quick scripting, and maybe another for 8 bit embedded microcontrollers.
I am NOT ok with one language for Android apps, another for iOS apps, another for Windows, and yet another for the Linux desktop. That makes no sense. All of these require the same strengths.
All Google is doing here is giving us yet another one-platform language. So now Apple has Swift and Google has Kotlin. I won't be using either, and neither should you.
Also, their claim to be "listening to what the community wants" is bullcrap. What people want is a language that can run on Android, iOS, and desktop. Currently, the only language that can do that is Javascript, which sucks.
The past was not as rosy as you believe, and innovation stifling monopolies in telecom are nothing new. I remember trying to negotiate a peering agreement with MCI/Worldcom/UUNet back in the 1990s: "We own 60% of the Internet, and as long as you also own 60% of the Internet, then peering is no problem. Otherwise, pay up."
Sure. But ANNs generally produce far better results, and are rapidly replacing older algorithms. For instance, at recognizing digits, the best non-NN algorithms running on the standard MNIST database get about 85% correct, for an error rate of 15%. The best modern deep ANNs get 99.8% correct, for a 0.2% error rate. That is an error rate reduction of almost 99%.
Given the timeline, most check reading is not inference after ML training.
I don't think so. ATMs began switching to ANN software more than 10 years ago. Many, especially in the developing world where human labor is cheap, don't do image recognition at all, but of those that do, the vast majority use ANNs.
Ditto for a lot of face recognition.
I would be astonished if you are correct about that. Can you provide a citation for any non-ML face recognition algorithm that is not at least an order of magnitude worse than an ANN?
OpenWorm and the evidence of emergent learned behavior leads me to believe all of the AI naysayers are going to be in for a shock.
Openworm is a fascinating project. I have a friend in bioinformatics who works on the project, and I have helped him with some coding a few times (biologists are even worse than physicists at writing readable/maintainable code). But, to be frank, I think the project will teach us more about biology than about AI. C. elegans only has 302 neurons, and ANNs have moved way beyond that. It is sort of like airplanes and birds: while birds were the original inspiration for flying machines, I don't think watching crows fly will help you make a better F-35.
would love to connect on LinkedIn as I am out of the bay also.
Sorry, but I keep my online persona separate from my real life. I am an Aspie, and don't always have the best judgement in social situations, so I carefully avoid opinionated topics at work and with friends. Slashdot is my outlet, where I can just say what I think, and not worry about political correctness or offending anyone.
I do reject the notion of "AI" becoming a thing in my lifetime.
AI is already in your life. When you insert a handwritten check into an ATM machine,the correct amount pops up on the screen. How do you think that works? Hint: There is no little man inside the machine.
First of all, what's being hyped as AI is not AI, as AI has been defined.
You might want to recheck the definition. The term "Artificial Intelligence" was first used by John McCarthy in 1956 to describe the work being done 61 years ago. You should get your definitions from people working in the field, rather than from Hollywood movies starring Will Smith.
Would you say that physicists aren't doing "real physics" since they can't explain how a warp engine works?
At most, we're talking about "machine learning", not the same thing at all.
No, people involved should stop misusing terms to make their work sound more impressive.
The "people involved" coined the term, so it is not they but Hollywood that is misusing it. The term "Artificial Intelligence" was first used by John McCarthy in 1956 at a conference at Dartmouth Univ. They were working on playing checkers and chess, image and voice recognition, and other stuff that you are claiming is "not AI".
Artificial Intelligence: Machine learning, object recognition, natural language processing, etc. Science fiction: Human level consciousness
Hollywood gets these confused, but you should not.
Handwriting, speech recognition, and image processing along with their machine learning foundations do not impress the older/. crowd because they are not new technologies.
Current handwriting, speech recognition, and image processing based on deep NNs is dramatically better than a decade ago. Error rates have gone down by an order of magnitude. If you are not impressed, then you are not paying attention.
Slashdot Mirror
No. He allegedly revealed specifics from an operation in a particular location in Syria
But who was the idiot that gave Trump that information in the first place? He has no "need to know" those sorts of details.
I'm pretty sure they specified the limit weight as 250 grams.
More likely they said half of a jin.
1 jin = 500g
Chinese units for Mass
Of course drones have pilot you numpty. The pilot is just elsewhere.
Some drones are completely autonomous, without even a remote "pilot".
The headline is inaccurate. It is the owner of the drone that has to register it, not the operator.
Do doctors who take many patients mostly do the easy stuff?
The study adjusted for severity of injury or illness. So, no, that is not the explanation for the age disparity.
doctors with lighter patient loads lose their 'edge' and have higher patient mortality rates compared to doctors who see more cases
Or the admissions nurse only sends patients to the "bad" doctor when all the "good" doctors are too busy with other patients.
The study adjusted for severity of the illness or injury. It also adjusted for the age of the patient.
Disclaimer: I RTFA and then clicked on the link and read the actual paper where all of this is explained.
Why would the United States government agree to such a partition?
I would be willing to let them keep Texas.
How do we know that older patients don't just like going to older doctors?
We know that by clicking on the link to TFA, and then clicking on the link to the actual paper, and reading about how they corrected for that in the data by comparing same-age patients.
A young Dr can also be very selective in the areas they want to practice ... An older doctor might serve a poor area
The study compared doctors working at the same hospital, and adjusted for patient household income.
If they didn't ask the question, it's not a very useful study.
They adjusted for patient age. This is explained in the actual paper. They also adjusted for gender, ethnicity, household income, day of week of admission, etc.
They also considered many characteristics of the doctor besides age, including gender, medical school attended, etc.
Ending the war is simple - the "rebels" should surrender. They have no chance of winning, not anymore.
They have no chance of taking Damascus and deposing Assad. But they have a good chance of holding onto territory and negotiating for autonomy. Wars seldom end in total victory for one side.
Russia is Assad's main backer, but they have little to gain from an outright regime victory. Assad will no longer need them, so they will have less leverage. If the war drags on and on, the Russians can benefit from the continuing chaos, which they are skilled at exploiting.
American policy in Syria has been a disaster.
1. Give the rebels enough support to fight but not enough to win.
2. Insist that a precondition for peace is that Assad has to go.
3. Refuse to acknowledge that Assad is winning the war and has no reason whatsoever to agree to #2.
4. Watch the war drag on as Syrian refugees flood into Europe, spreading discontent and instability.
The obvious solution is a partition. The Syrian Kurds can join with the Iraqi Kurds in an independent Kurdistan.
The Sunnis can form their own statelet or join up with the Iraqi Sunnis.
The Alawites can keep Assad and the land along the coast and the Lebanon border.
Done. If there are any other world problems that you need me to solve, please let me know. I am happy to help.
Yes it has and it's also resulted in suppressed wages in the US and thus moving the middle class in the US closer to poverty.
Manufacturing job losses in America have been driven more by automation than by outsourcing. Lower wages are offset by lower prices for products made by machines or Asians. So the cost to Americans has been far, far less than the gains in Asia. Living standards in China have gone up eight-fold over the last 30 years.
My point is that if we keep going on at this pace that it will make us all equally poor.
My point is that this is nonsense. Improvements in productivity do not lead to poverty.
It has this crazy feature where you can write one version of code and deploy it on iOS, Android, and Windows.
That sounds pretty cool, but how portable is it really? It is easy to make a "Hello World" program portable, but what about portable access to UI features like the camera or accelerometer? Can I detect orientation and tilt in a portable way?
What you want, what we all want, is a suite of languages, each with their own strengths
I am ok with one language for apps, another for quick scripting, and maybe another for 8 bit embedded microcontrollers.
I am NOT ok with one language for Android apps, another for iOS apps, another for Windows, and yet another for the Linux desktop. That makes no sense. All of these require the same strengths.
All Google is doing here is giving us yet another one-platform language. So now Apple has Swift and Google has Kotlin. I won't be using either, and neither should you.
So you'd actually expect temperatures increasing by a few degrees to lead to more insects, not fewer.
You misunderstand. There are not fewer insects, but fewer species of insects. Their number has not diminished, their diversity has.
A much more likely culprit is Neonicotinoid pesticides.
Unlikely. Neonicotinoid pesticides were banned in Germany almost a decade ago.
Roundup ready crops has enabled the farming industry to nearly eradicate a lot of habitat. Particularly the milkweed used by monarch butterflies.
Roundup-Ready crops are not, and never have been, grown in Germany.
Also, their claim to be "listening to what the community wants" is bullcrap. What people want is a language that can run on Android, iOS, and desktop. Currently, the only language that can do that is Javascript, which sucks.
The past was not as rosy as you believe, and innovation stifling monopolies in telecom are nothing new. I remember trying to negotiate a peering agreement with MCI/Worldcom/UUNet back in the 1990s: "We own 60% of the Internet, and as long as you also own 60% of the Internet, then peering is no problem. Otherwise, pay up."
Not all machine vision is ML.
Sure. But ANNs generally produce far better results, and are rapidly replacing older algorithms. For instance, at recognizing digits, the best non-NN algorithms running on the standard MNIST database get about 85% correct, for an error rate of 15%. The best modern deep ANNs get 99.8% correct, for a 0.2% error rate. That is an error rate reduction of almost 99%.
Given the timeline, most check reading is not inference after ML training.
I don't think so. ATMs began switching to ANN software more than 10 years ago. Many, especially in the developing world where human labor is cheap, don't do image recognition at all, but of those that do, the vast majority use ANNs.
Ditto for a lot of face recognition.
I would be astonished if you are correct about that. Can you provide a citation for any non-ML face recognition algorithm that is not at least an order of magnitude worse than an ANN?
OpenWorm and the evidence of emergent learned behavior leads me to believe all of the AI naysayers are going to be in for a shock.
Openworm is a fascinating project. I have a friend in bioinformatics who works on the project, and I have helped him with some coding a few times (biologists are even worse than physicists at writing readable/maintainable code). But, to be frank, I think the project will teach us more about biology than about AI. C. elegans only has 302 neurons, and ANNs have moved way beyond that. It is sort of like airplanes and birds: while birds were the original inspiration for flying machines, I don't think watching crows fly will help you make a better F-35.
would love to connect on LinkedIn as I am out of the bay also.
Sorry, but I keep my online persona separate from my real life. I am an Aspie, and don't always have the best judgement in social situations, so I carefully avoid opinionated topics at work and with friends. Slashdot is my outlet, where I can just say what I think, and not worry about political correctness or offending anyone.
I do reject the notion of "AI" becoming a thing in my lifetime.
AI is already in your life. When you insert a handwritten check into an ATM machine,the correct amount pops up on the screen. How do you think that works? Hint: There is no little man inside the machine.
First of all, what's being hyped as AI is not AI, as AI has been defined.
You might want to recheck the definition. The term "Artificial Intelligence" was first used by John McCarthy in 1956 to describe the work being done 61 years ago. You should get your definitions from people working in the field, rather than from Hollywood movies starring Will Smith.
Would you say that physicists aren't doing "real physics" since they can't explain how a warp engine works?
At most, we're talking about "machine learning", not the same thing at all.
Machine Learning is absolutely a branch of AI.
No, people involved should stop misusing terms to make their work sound more impressive.
The "people involved" coined the term, so it is not they but Hollywood that is misusing it. The term "Artificial Intelligence" was first used by John McCarthy in 1956 at a conference at Dartmouth Univ. They were working on playing checkers and chess, image and voice recognition, and other stuff that you are claiming is "not AI".
Artificial Intelligence: Machine learning, object recognition, natural language processing, etc.
Science fiction: Human level consciousness
Hollywood gets these confused, but you should not.
Handwriting, speech recognition, and image processing along with their machine learning foundations do not impress the older /. crowd because they are not new technologies.
Current handwriting, speech recognition, and image processing based on deep NNs is dramatically better than a decade ago. Error rates have gone down by an order of magnitude. If you are not impressed, then you are not paying attention.