But it would also require an algorithm to score "progress" toward a multi dimensional training goal and encode that into binary reward/no reward signals.
1,961 karma · joined February 19, 2013
But it would also require an algorithm to score "progress" toward a multi dimensional training goal and encode that into binary reward/no reward signals.
Unless a new treatment can demonstrate that it can reduce these consequences as well as medication does in the majority of cases, let's stick with the treatment that works, shall we?
I don't think the mosquito-killing gene editing technology is ready for deployment yet...
Some MOOCs create video content totally "from scratch", but usually they build on the lecturers' ability to hold a lecture in the topic, often honed through years of repeated lecturing on the same topic.
I also don't subscribe to the theory that individuals have to procreate to boost the survival of their genes. In reality it's a bit more complex than that, and even very old people can and do contribute to the survival of their children or their close relatives.
And in the new TV-Adaptation there are fascinating little details like sparrows flying/hovering in 0.3G inside a tunnel inside an Asteroid (Ceres) with an artificially induced spin.
Developing a drug is an economically difficult thing: Spend billions for the chance to win billions. The only alternatives to big pharma in developing these drugs are big government and big charity (Gates' Foundation et al).
That process wouldn't handle all the details of the task, but it can wait for notification of the task via other means (celery, rabbitmq, redis, whatever...).
Personally I think REST is the best paradigm for most microservices. There is one exception: Data streams are inherently stateful and some kind of websocket/message passing is a lot more useful in that case.
And I did not say this is the only problem with poverty.
$1.9 doesn't afford you a comfortable life anywhere, but in the developing world, it's enough to not fear starvation. And that fear is a big part of being "extremely poor".
On the other hand there will always be a power differential between those who strive to political leadership (often sacrificing a lot on the way) and those who don't participate at all. And even in a completely equal power share, the power of an individual in a nation of millions is so small that it is easy to confuse it with zero.
The more troubling thing about the U.S. is, that the public demands qualities from their leaders which bear no meaningful predictive power on their leadership skills. At best, these politicians are a "costly signal" for the competency and reliability of the party behind that leader, whose members or employees are duing the actual work of governance.
And with the kind of international "attention" it's getting lately, this won't change soon.