161–170 of 352 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably downvoted because people don't like it. But it's the truth.
It's the "let's defect in a prisoner's dilemma" strategy that works great until others use it too.
For crying out loud, people, I know it's stupid, I know it's wrong, but it's the truth. It's an uncomfortable truth that your downvoting will not change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been riding out the quarantine in a less populated area, and I am surrounded by trucks so tall that the driver can't even see the roof of my car if I am stopped next to them at a light. It's already too late to avoid defection -- if I stay here for good, I will have to get a taller car just so other drivers can see me and so I can see through the windows of parked cars when turning.
I know; I've had the same experience. :( It's a shame. The pedestrians will have to find a way to get taller too.
The whole car safety topic is very confusing. Car accidents is top1-top2 death reason in US for people in 20-40 age group [1]. Probably less in Europe but still one of the leading ones. I was thinking about how I can make myself safer. Which car brand/model is better? Which seat is better for passenger? How much riskier it is to drive during the night? In the rain? How dangerous is it to overtake on road with 1 lane…
Car crashes where the top 1-2. I am willing to bet most of those involved DUI, and therefore negligence, and shouldn't be classed as "accidents"
#CrashNotAccident.
One thing I appreciate in supervised machine learning is that it's widely acknowledged that one should not test on training/tuning data. For both computer benchmarks and car crash tests, this is not the case. Both fields routinely work to optimize for a test, which leads to dramatic overfitting. This would be like passing out a standardized test years before students take it. This seems solvable. For benchmarks, ther…
The way you really "solve" the problem is to have a third-party test organization run the benchmark and only provide the final result--and you only get one shot for a given generation of hardware/software. (This is sort of how standardized tests work.)
The problem is that you're now benchmarking with a totally opaque test that you have to trust is reasonably representative of the type of workload it claims to represent as well as trust that the benchmark isn't favoring specific vendors or design decisions that are irrelevant to real world workloads.
I assume there have been benchmarks at various times that were similar to this. Certainly, I'm pretty sure source code for benchmark suites hasn't always been available.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a difference between memorizing enough information to ace a test and sneaking in notes that aren't allowed to ace a test. And people would also say it is wrong to steal a copy of a test and then memorize the answers to it to ace a test. But what if a professor uses the same test every year (maybe changing a few numbers but in a way that only impacts the calculations, not the way to solve it) and people study…
If you cheat in most such tests it just means you miss out on actually learning what you were supposed to. If it wasn't your intention to learn anyway I guess that's fine. Rarely the purpose of tests is to assure the public of your fitness (e.g. a driving test) and cheating those might be a problem, but if you cheat my CS 101 course and then struggle because you needed remedial classes but the cheated test means you…
The whole car safety topic is very confusing. Car accidents is top1-top2 death reason in US for people in 20-40 age group [1]. Probably less in Europe but still one of the leading ones. I was thinking about how I can make myself safer. Which car brand/model is better? Which seat is better for passenger? How much riskier it is to drive during the night? In the rain? How dangerous is it to overtake on road with 1 lane…
> Car accidents is top1-top2 death reason in US for people in 20-40 age group [1] Car crashes where the top 1-2. I am willing to bet most of those involved DUI, and therefore negligence, and shouldn't be classed as "accidents" #CrashNotAccident.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you know what 'residential fire' means? I'm imagining a scenario where my residence is on fire, which would seem to be high-risk (but is somehow the lowest risk).
It's a time-based rate based on (presumably) lifetime hours. Obviously if a residence is on fire, you're at high risk. But the rate of that happening is quite low.
The article reminds me of a story from a friend that was an engineer at a major water heater company. Modern electric water heaters are already fairly efficient, but every model gets tested by the government to be given an efficiency rating. The test consists of replacing the anode with a rod that has a series of temperature probes to measure the water at different levels in the water heater. Since water would form l…
Is that not outright fraud? Just because you can hack something doesn't make it right or legal.