rpglover64

6 ms·

1.
by rpglover64 7y ago
Haven't read the paper yet, but have read the blog posts (which are awesome, BTW!). I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on Frank McSherry's old blog post expressing his distrust for approximate-DP [1]. He seems to have dif
2.
by rpglover64 7y ago
While this is true, there's some nuance. First of all, there's a lot of recent (and not so recent) work in Local Differential Privacy [1], which uses the "untrusted curator" model. Although this software doesn't use
3.
by rpglover64 7y ago
Hi Colton! Having worked at LeapYear for just over 3 years now, I can confirm that it's a good place to work and is solving interesting technical problems. I can also answer questions, if anyone is interested.
4.
by rpglover64 9y ago
> It's the same thing Firefox does with Linux distros who want to add their own patches. "did", I think. I don't know which distros still run into this, but Debian now ships Firefox (RIP Iceweasel).
5.
by rpglover64 10y ago
> After using the language for two years I find that the types are actually enough to understand a new library, however, am taking for granted that it's an acquired skill. I think this overstating it, unfortunately. I'm an inte
6.
by rpglover64 10y ago
> it's just a formula. I also know it doesn't do any logging, or "launch nukes", and that it is thread safe. So the type claims. Without looking at the implementation or using `-XSafeHaskell`, you don't know if t
7.
by rpglover64 11y ago
Thank you for doing an AMA! I know I'm late to the party, but I have an experience-report/feature-request/question: I tried to use GitLab in a classroom setting, and it went okay. One of the reasons we decided against using i
8.
by rpglover64 11y ago
I don't know if this is a definition other people use, but here's one possibility. Intelligence (in a domain) is measured by how well you solve problems in that domain. If problems in the domain have binary solutions and no extern
9.
by rpglover64 11y ago
Are you happier with the state of symmetric crypto, which, despite relying on conjectures (like the existence of pseudo-random functions) tends not to rely on _algebraic_ ones? Personally, I don't have particular worries about the hard
10.
by rpglover64 11y ago
Except that herd immunity is a thing.
11.
by rpglover64 11y ago
Any chance of an RSS feed?
12.
by rpglover64 11y ago
This comes up often, but it turns out to be pretty crappy, in practice, for a few reasons. First, although it's not ambiguous, it's vague. It's considered good practice to leave empty places that are not immediately relevant
13.
by rpglover64 12y ago
I think the problem is not "if you find a frequentist (as opposed to bayesian) statistician", but "if you find a frequentist (as opposed to bayesian) e.g. biologist". Non-statisticians have been trained using bad, freque
14.
by rpglover64 12y ago
You might like to check out Brandon Sanderson's work (if you haven't yet). It's all fantasy, but it tends to avoid the "and then something magic happens" problem. I'd interpret the thing you dislike about fanta
15.
by rpglover64 12y ago
If you like math (I mean stuff like set theory and abstract algebra, not arithmetic and high-school math), then Haskell is wonderful. I find programming in it to be more enjoyable than in any other language. It will also make you think diff
16.
by rpglover64 12y ago
(Late to the party; sorry) > you can't dynamically check something of a function type Another approach, besides contracts, (one that my lab is working on) relies on whole program type-checking and path-sensitive program analysis.