obviuosly

5 ms·

1.
by obviuosly 7y ago
This result failed replication in 27 ethnic groups along the matrilineal belt in Central Africa: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/slowes/files/lowes_competi...
2.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Equivalently, you can look at divorce statistics of couples that meet online vs offline. A study from 2013 suggests that the divorce rate is lower and marriage satisfaction is higher for couples meeting online, but only slightly. This seems
3.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Indeed, lots of people also care about stories. Meeting online by algorithm does not make for a very good story.
4.
by obviuosly 7y ago
I don't think this is true. Attractive people in particular have a massive amount of opportunities in online dating which is a huge incentive for them.
5.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Note that "meeting online" includes things like social networks, games and chats, along with actual online dating. In 2017, 39% of new couples met met online. Online dating itself only accounted for about 24% of all new couples.
6.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Baumeister had a pretty interesting idea on where antigay bias comes from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016748701... > Men compete to amass material resources, with the goal of gettin
7.
Ask HN: What Happened to Artemis PCell?
1 points by obviuosly 7y ago|0 comments
8.
by obviuosly 7y ago
I dimly remember reading on Reddit that these machines were not the boy's invention.
9.
Ask HN: Have search engines become hard of hearing?
3 points by obviuosly 7y ago|1 comments
10.
by obviuosly 7y ago
> The resulting model maps raw sequences to representations of biological properties without labels or prior domain knowledge. A couple of questions: 1. What are those representations? 2. Also what is "biological function"? 3.
11.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Yeah, it is some kind of god, which is a completely far fetched, utopist, naive and futurist idea. We already know how to deal with the problem of corrupt leadership: Burn it down and replace it. It is suspicious that this is not considered
12.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Uhm, no: The piece claims we are subjected to inhumane incentives set by competition for resources (rather than by corrupted individuals and groups who have become too cozy in their armchairs). It claims that only centralized control by an
13.
by obviuosly 7y ago
I always get a justification of the elitist exploitation vibe from these kinds of writings. "We can't do anything about it, it's just prisoner's dilemmas all the way down. Move along, nothing to see here".
14.
by obviuosly 7y ago
It's both. Of course there is value in such bullshit. It rewards the status drive of those who can play the game. Those who don't, get only negative value out of it. Overall, productivity probably suffers. But those in charge do n
15.
by obviuosly 7y ago
I do not get why cooperations make it so hard for people who simply want to do their job with minimal bullshit. You would think the free market gets rid of such inefficiency, but evidently the free market is not efficient enough for that. W
16.
by obviuosly 7y ago
The fact that a criminal record cannot be revised if it contains false allegations and convictions seems to be about as flawed as facial recognition software leading to a false arrest. Seems like a good opportunity to fix both.
17.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Thanks for this overview. > Meshroom has a nice feature that allows you to add images into your model incrementally VisualSFM also does not recompute when adding photos later, IIRC what I read in the manual.
18.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Am I overlooking something or is the "cantenna" not considered a fundamental antenna type? It does not seem to be listed in the page about different antennta types. It seems to be quite easy to build once you find a suitable can (
19.
by obviuosly 7y ago
How do COLMAP, Meshroom and VisualSFM compare to one another?
20.
by obviuosly 7y ago
> People deserve credit for taking an idea and running with it. Yes, as popularizers. > deep learning would have never seen the explosive growth This is extremely unlikely to be true. I think the explosive growth occured because neuro
21.
by obviuosly 7y ago
> but what really sets them apart is that they made it all work [citation needed] Werbos and others were very aware that the method worked and also of the implications of it: > This approach makes it possible to develop generalized,
22.
by obviuosly 7y ago
Various researchers, e.g. Werbos, Linnainmaa, Bryson and Yu-Chi Ho have been doing backprop in neural networks before Hinton et al. Hinton was merely a popularizer of the idea.