bigred100

Get something like music theory for dummies and read it

Is any sizable portion of these jobs interchangeable with deep learning?

The best deep learning engineers with infinite hardware built Amazon’s recommendation algorithm, and it’s largely trash. I can’t imagine it’s magically thousands of times more capable for these other tasks.

When I was in Butte they had a random distillery that opened into the street.

Why is liquor ultra processed?

Which usually require a Ph.D (at least in my field).

Since I don’t live in a dangerous area or work as an MMA fighter that stuff wouldn’t help me. Frankly my opinion of what’s scary about people is self-centeredness, social connections, whether they have willingness to throw me under the bus for their benefit, etc. No help from jiu-jitsu unless it makes them bond with you. Or maybe a (my opinion) small but noticeable positive benefit looking athletic can give you.

Something I did as I did when younger that annoyed more ambitious friends: go to Wikipedia and find the incoming freshman class size for the top schools (say Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT). Add them together. Now look up the number of high schools in the US and assume there’s 1 valedictorian per school. There just aren’t enough spots to even fit them.

Now complicate things more: all the elite high schools like Groton or something are gonna be sending way more than their top 1 student to these programs.

My conclusion was that it frankly doesn’t matter how much you compete with your personal classmates unless you have some other angle.

However outcompeting your classmates might get you a full scholarship to the state flagship, which is actually massive if you don’t use it completely imprudently.

I can’t imagine any circumstance other than a Ph.D program where someone spends 5+ years studying in depth some tiny area of science and practicing research. And without doing that I’m having trouble believing almost anyone will do serious research. There are a few people who did it but to me that is extraordinarily unlikely.

“ 1. Start lifting weights and training Brazilian jiu-jitsu.”

Are people more likely to buy if they’re afraid you’ll attack them or something?

As an employee I’ve felt like it’s hard in the past to take initiative and do things that aren’t immediately and clearly justifiable as strictly necessary work. Reading a book might or might not be useful but doing something boring but mandatory is certainly not slacking. With that said any time I tried to take more initiative and take more risks (while making a sincere effort to work on the thing that’s going to move the group/project forward) and then just accept correction if I make the wrong call, usually work was more enjoyable and I was more productive (by estimation of me, other coworkers, and my manager).

We’re not compatible.

If I believed this were the case I’d be single for life.

At least in regards to your last paragraph, I’ll take that over freedom

Once you get to quadratic forms you can use it again.

Some folks in fact think you should do that quite a bit. For example, this guy wrote quite a well-regarded (in his community) book about it:

http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/1696-1787,_De_Ligo...

I’m not a lawyer but in this case that guy’s data getting sent to DoJ doesn’t really bother me...

Is this guy a political dissident or something?

A function is (at least formally) a relationship between two sets of things. It doesn’t matter whether there’s any sort of algorithm that lets you input an object from the domain and calculate the corresponding image under the function, or even an approximation. This came up when we were talking about Dedekind cuts or something like that so it’s very much not pedantry at all in that sort of context.

I agree completely. The only risk is that once you get to real analysis, your prof will yell at you for mixing notions of complexity and computability into your ideas of what a function is (happened to me).

This sounds like much more of a hell than sometimes having to chat with a coworker you don’t like (judges monitoring you and punishing you if you don’t work hard enough).

In my opinion just look around and see what the successful people are doing. Putting your head down and working is what I’d do for developing my own technical or something else skills. I.e. studying. Nobody I’ve met who gets high success in an office job does that.

I wonder if there’s not something to read into this a bit beyond my current abilities. Many people work on things that they consider somewhat boring, or at least not at the boundary of their skill set. People above you in the organization spent a lot of time building “synergies” and organizing a team of people frankly (in most cases) somewhat overqualified for the task. It seems like throwing all that out by not integrating enough into the social group is a terrible idea.

This jogged my memory—they did the same with Obama and Dijon mustard. I don’t think it’s unique to Trump.

There was a big furor over Donald Trump eating pizza the wrong way (by New York standards) quite some time ago.

Can someone tell me why it’s socially acceptable to have these mindfulness things in work? I’m sympathetic to the argument that religions should be largely kept out of the workplace, so this isn’t a “checkmate atheists” argument. But if some guy came into my office and started saying we’re going to recite the rosary with all the “Jesus” and “Mary” parts replaced with something generic like “the universe” I cant imagine he’d get away with it.

I think it must be something like stress and deteriorating mental health more than those frankly. They existed 30 years ago (and as I understand were more popular then) without as much negative effects.

At the end of the day it’s just a game. It exists for recreational value. As I see it a pro exists largely because 1) people enjoy watching these games played at the highest level 2) people think they can learn in some way from these people. I don’t see how AI interferes with either of these.

Are the results different from just doing something like L1 regularization?

Jack Dongarra of perhaps most specially BLAS/LAPACK fame.

I don’t know much about industry but it seems to me there are two ways to look at ML. First is you learn some of optimization, stats, math, parallel computing, numerical methods. The second is that you learn a hell of a lot about fiddling with different network architectures and applying things to specific problems. I wonder whether the first (more fundamental) approach doesn’t have different prospects. At least in this case it can lead to career paths like a national lab.

Not sure about the top part. I know several programmers, mathematicians, etc. who think they are geniuses and other fields are trivial.