FZ1

5 ms·

1.
by FZ1 6y ago
Still incorrect. And I would urge you to read one of these books you reference - they ALL aim to achieve that agent's action ON ITS OWN - i.e., by learning from its environment, and NOT by being explicitly programmed. Yes, there are m
2.
by FZ1 6y ago
Every program that has ever existed does this. So, you're saying that all programs that have ever existed, then, are all AI. You make no distinction whatsoever. I would say that the more a program thinks on its own which actions to t
3.
by FZ1 6y ago
A* search, any kind of heuristic estimation, learning, or simulated reasoning. All of those things would count. We don't need mathematical optimization to call it "AI", but there SHOULD be more than a simple if-then. At leas
4.
by FZ1 6y ago
A* search counts as academic AI. If-then statements do not.
5.
by FZ1 6y ago
> AI does not mean ML Hence the 'or' in my statement. Neither are present here.
6.
by FZ1 6y ago
> the (possibly unattainable) ideal would be having everything expressed as "pretty much an if-then statement" indeed. This is flatly incorrect - the point of AI is to have a machine achieve intelligent behaviors without explic
7.
by FZ1 6y ago
Why are they calling it "AI", though? There isn't any AI or ML. You leave a trail for the enemy to follow, and they follow it. It's not even path-finding, it's path-following. Which is pretty much an if-then state
8.
by FZ1 6y ago
Adding the obvious numpy vectorization - I presume that counts as an 'open source project'? Or maybe this is limited to little personal projects, and not major libraries ?
9.
by FZ1 7y ago
You're right that there is not any official standard. But almost every major library follows a convention that's very similar to the cpython docs. If you're making a language reference, shouldn't it look like the languag
10.
by FZ1 7y ago
A key hallmark of Python is readability - which this cheat sheet has managed to royally screw up. It looks more like an XML cheatsheet at first glance. I work in python full-time for a living, and found myself having to re-examine several t
11.
by FZ1 7y ago
The origin of the "standup" is just a regular daily coordination meeting - like thousands of organizations have always had. Ever heard of a "morning sales meeting"? They've existed for decades - short, to the point
12.
by FZ1 7y ago
Just letting you know the link to the 10X article gives a 404. I tried to read it, but "page does not exist". ---- Edit for clarification: First link in first paragraph after "10X" section header. About "visited t
13.
by FZ1 7y ago
The think I don't like about scrum is that they teach that you literally don't need to know a single thing about the underlying business - in fact, that is discouraged - following the process to the letter is what counts. It is so
14.
by FZ1 7y ago
Thank you for chiming in and clarifying. I was thinking of that 2013 page specifically - good to know it is now out of date.
15.
by FZ1 7y ago
"Elasticsearch has no concept of a user. Essentially, anyone that can send arbitrary requests to your cluster is a “super user”. " https://www.elastic.co/de/blog/found-elasticsearch-security This documen
16.
by FZ1 7y ago
Yeah, I read this link also - before posting above. There is no 'username' or 'password' term on that page - nor any positive checkmark in any security column for the open-source tier. 'Basic' tier does have &
17.
by FZ1 7y ago
According to the docs, it's a 30-Day trial: https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/curr... Are these docs out-of-date ? Does anyone know if any features remain after 30 days if you
18.
by FZ1 7y ago
No - I'm trying to say that people often don't even know what the DE really needs to do. They know they have back-end problems, and need someone to clean them up. But often the hiring manager believes it's probably mostly SQ
19.
by FZ1 7y ago
SE usually at least knows what language they're expecting you to mainly work in. Not always the case for DE.
20.
by FZ1 7y ago
hmm ... I didn't think about that. I wonder if the term is building a negative connotation?
21.
by FZ1 7y ago
> It's the job of the job post to clarify the requirements. I couldn't agree more. That's the exact thing I'm saying is a problem here. When stuff is wrong, and we don't have enough people, and don't have a
22.
by FZ1 7y ago
I feel the term "Data Engineer" gets used for a lot of catch-all "we have problems that need an owner" situations. There's not much consistency across job postings and interviews for this kind of thing. I just inter
23.
by FZ1 7y ago
What else are they supposed to do? Apply to the same job again? There's little you can do if you never make contact or hear back. You just apply to other positions. But what if you don't hear from those either ... ? Open to su
24.
by FZ1 7y ago
How many people respond to your job ads? Where I live (major US metropolis), it's about 200-700 per job (according to linkedin, anyways). The biggest trouble for a soft. eng is getting to a real person. Once that is done, convincing
25.
by FZ1 7y ago
Thank you. Probably not felony, but definitely illegal. Not to mention high civil liability.
26.
by FZ1 7y ago
> my age has never been brought up. Not even once IIRC No one will ever bring it up. Do you really think someone will take on the liability of discussing your [age|race|sex|sexual orientation] in an interview? ESPECIALLY as a reason to N
27.
by FZ1 7y ago
> Sure you can. You just choose not to. Much in the same way that you can jump in front of a moving bus if you want to - you just choose not to. The implication is not that it's _impossible_ to walk away - it's that it just doe
28.
by FZ1 7y ago
> Young people starting out in the labor market often have The Fear that they will never find a job or never find a good job or another good job. Young people fear it. Older people know it. > Quit. Not everyone is a 20-something sili
29.
by FZ1 7y ago
UUOC is a pedantic ford-chevy argument.
30.
by FZ1 7y ago
I don't disagree that the "thinking" process is entirely a physical process (electro-chemical, etc.). However, we're not even at a point yet where we can articulate specifically what that physical process _is_ - much les

More ›