nolemurs

5 ms·

1.
by nolemurs 4y ago
I get so many contacts from recruiters that I'm never going to follow up on almost any of them. Is salary information absolutely essential? No. But if I'm not pretty confident talking to you is a good use of time, you'll neve
2.
by nolemurs 7y ago
Thanks for this. I read the title, and my thought process was: "I agree". Then: "There's no way the study backing the article is good enough to draw meaningful conclusions. This is clickbait." Then: "I guess if
3.
by nolemurs 8y ago
The issue I have is that when people talk about the dangers of automation they never compare them to the dangers of non-automated driving. They always make it sound as if automation is making things more dangerous. The current evidence sugg
4.
by nolemurs 8y ago
I feel like this angle is massively overplayed in articles about autonomous vehicles. Is automation paradox a real issue? Absolutely. But at present, all the evidence seems to indicate that the people automated cars will save far outnumber
5.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> This is a cohort study conducted over 15 years. You can't really criticize it only based on those numbers You absolutely can. Scientific studies should be judged on their potential to produce interesting results. This study has to
6.
by nolemurs 8y ago
This article is just fear-mongering and speculation. No facts are given to support the title, and the proposed solutions to the problem (which is never established) are vague to the point of meaninglessness. Skip the read.
7.
by nolemurs 8y ago
This is the best guarantee any company ever gives. For smaller companies if something becomes too expensive or hard, they just go out of business. For larger companies, they have to draw the line somewhere. You won't get stronger gua
8.
by nolemurs 8y ago
I'd add that there's a big difference between having a non-CS degree and having no degree at all. With a non-CS degree it may be a little harder to get an interview, but if you can interview well, it's not going to count much
9.
by nolemurs 8y ago
The tone of this article makes it sound like it's a bad thing that Facebook and Google won't be much affected by this law, but I don't really think it is. The reason the big players aren't much affected is that they&#x27
10.
by nolemurs 8y ago
The title of this article is pretty misleading. There is no confirmation that the cell-site simulators disrupt emergency calls. Rather: > Harris Corporation claims that they have the ability to detect and deliver calls to 911, but they a
11.
by nolemurs 8y ago
Repeating a study if, and only if, the study failed to provide the desired result is the most basic p-hacking technique there is. If this isn't p-hacking, I don't know what is! To give a simple model, suppose you decide an effect
12.
by nolemurs 8y ago
My own experience was that part of the problem was that there was no intellectual challenge. I actually suspect that if PhD programs were a little more intellectually challenging drop-out rates would go down.
13.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> PhDs are intellectually demanding, and not everyone will be able to finish. In the US between 41 and 78% of people who start PhDs have finished them after ten years, depending on their sub field. Computer and Information Science has th
14.
by nolemurs 8y ago
To be fair, input devices are a pretty serious issue here. Probably the single most common operation I do on code is search it. If I can't type what I'm searching for easily, that's pretty annoying.
15.
by nolemurs 8y ago
I've had the same thought. Where is the skepticism coming from? I've noticed a lot of articles lately that talk about how far off self-driving cars are. That said the articles all seem to rest on one of two arguments. Some (like t
16.
by nolemurs 8y ago
The substance of this article can be sumarized as "I talked to a bunch of people at a convention, and some had concerns, ohh, and I wrote a book about how I'm skeptical of driverless cars." Regardless of how you feel about th
17.
by nolemurs 8y ago
I'm pretty sure the scale of the problem is large enough to make a manual approach completely and utterly impractical.
18.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> I hope my feeling of relative safety is justified, but I'm not a security expert(?). If you want to be properly paranoid, you should consider getting a VPN. If you're not hiding your IP address, hiding all the rest is of limi
19.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> I wish that if they’re gonna downrank “good” pirate content then they should do the same (or worse) for the bad/malicious ones. I'm pretty confident they'd like to but it's a tricky problem. Based on this article, t
20.
by nolemurs 8y ago
I'm a little dismayed that someone would be willing to make use those factors and then claim it's about the best place to work. It's so obviously off point that I can't even buy that it's the result of stupidity - t
21.
by nolemurs 8y ago
Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're right. I've asked a dozen or so questions, of for every one of them I've gotten an answer that seems related to to the words in the question, but not in any logical way: Q: What's the di
22.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> It's a public standard that they're setting for themselves. I'd like to really draw attention to the "for themselves" part here. Yes, this is a public document, and of course it serves a PR purpose, but the fun
23.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> You see, when you make any argument, you always omit the infinite number of things that don't support it and focus on the few things that do. No. When I make an argument, I try to omit the infinite number of things I think are unl
24.
by nolemurs 8y ago
> Hi, it appears that "sensationalist garbage" triggered quite a bit of a discussion. Yes. Sensationalist. > I also omitted Cruise automation and a bunch of other companies, perhaps because they have more responsible backup
25.
by nolemurs 8y ago
I've always understood the claim that deep learning scales to be a claim about deployment and use of trained models, not about training. The whole point is that you can invest (substantial) resources upfront to train a sufficiently goo
26.
by nolemurs 8y ago
Seriously. Frankly, based on Uber's culture I would have been surprised if they didn't kill at least one person with their self-driving efforts. It's a total non-data point. The fact that Uber got as far as they did without
27.
by nolemurs 8y ago
Yeah... but they really don't like being told they're incompetent.
28.
by nolemurs 8y ago
If one incident can reverse your conclusion then the sample size isn't large enough to draw that conclusion. With only one death, the only conclusions you could reasonably reach from statistics are either "we don't know yet&q
29.
by nolemurs 9y ago
> Sure, with enough manipulation you can bring this down to the liars paradox, but that is the case for every paradox. As @nwjtkjn said, I'm pretty sure the Barber's paradox was literally just Russel's conscious and direct
30.
by nolemurs 9y ago
`alias rg='rg -S'` in your `.bashrc` will fix that for you. Out of curiosity, what sort of searches do you do that smartcase is desirable? A meaningful number of people seem to prefer it, but I find that most of the time I want

More ›