Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — 995533

995533

HN member
Joined
Thu, Dec 20, 2018, 3:09 AM UTC
HN karma
-1
Public activity
14 items

About 995533

No profile information was provided.

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #18774181

    Oh, baby don't hurt me. Don't hurt me. No more.

  2. comment
    Comment #18772757

    Thanks. I think you are a correct exception to what I said. I should have known that using words like "nobody" would not go over well on HN (but tedious to type "a very large perce…

  3. comment
    Comment #18772554

    It was not possible to increase speed by getting more powerful compute?

  4. comment
    Comment #18772389

    I would not retrain such a model on all data, just do online updates. Also I still think for that use case training times and latency are negligible (nobody cares or nobody notices…

  5. comment
    Comment #18772324

    Nobody in business cares if you are doing proper AI or dumb curve fitting. What matters is the complexity (engineering debt) and performance (accuracy, robustness). Online learning…

  6. comment
    Comment #18772276

    If you are building large-scale systems that take weeks or months to train, you are at a point where you shouldn't care about this. Throw more compute at the problem, it will pay f…

  7. comment
    Comment #18771091

    Nobody cares how long it takes to train a model. What matters is prediction speeds, which are comparable (and NLP less likely to require high frequency, where a few more millisecon…

  8. comment
    Comment #18755152

    Ibuprofen may cause ulcers, bleeding, or holes in the stomach or intestine.

  9. comment
    Comment #18730368

    Something can be possible, while still technically not feasible. I agree our knowledge currently is lacking, but see no reasons why this will never catch up. There are fundamental …

  10. comment
    Comment #18726723

    You are correct, in that AI experts may not be the best predictors for AGI. For one, they spend their lives working towards the goal of AGI, so it would require a huge amount of co…

  11. comment
    Comment #18726467

    Clearly, AGI-level intelligence is possible, because human brains exist. So unless you pose that a function has to rely on its materialization (there is something untouchably magic…

  12. comment
    Comment #18726360

    Shane Legg (co-founder DeepMind) and Marcus Hutter (Schmidhuber pedigree) defined machine intelligence in this canonical paper from 2007: https://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3329 > Universa…

  13. comment
    Comment #18722374

    Your reasoning does not follow. To see why, take something humans already clearly created: Flight. Kerosene-type jet fuel propulsion has not been observed in nature. It is flight n…

  14. comment
    Comment #18722241

    If AGI is possible, it already happened. If even AI experts put it a 100-1000 years out, where some human monkeys banging on digital typewriters could eventually create it, then, i…