fear91

SVM is great, it's often stacked on top of neural networks to do classification.

But it can't really deal with extracting features, especially from things like images and sounds. If you fed images ( pixel by pixel ) straight to the SVM and tell it to classify them, it would do extremely poorly - especially with big images.

A better thing is to have a deep ( layered ) network that will get pixel data from the input and pass it through layers that will then extract some useful features from it - for example, learn to recognize lines.

Then, after this information passes through the whole network, you are finished with smaller amount of features that are more useful for classification. Then you an send this information to SVM and it will deal with it a lot easier than if you tried to feed it straight pixels.

The thing is, we don't really have problems with classification algorithms - SVM does extremely well. What is the biggest hurdle is simply extracting features that then can be fed to well-working classification algorithms.

There's a whole industry in Eeastern Europe that does just this and resells the link-space. It's nothing new but don't be surprised when your whole domain gets deindexed.

Google seems less and less connected to reality the bigger they grow.

It's a shame that the search engine market share isn't split evenly by several different engines. I think it would be beneficent both to the users and website owners. Right now everyone tries to court Google and they seem to do whatever the fuck they want.

SSD drive saved my life when I had to query a 300 GB MySQL table that couldn't fit in my RAM. Since the data was organized by the primary key ( which was random in the SELECT queries), both reads and writes had to come from random places and the whole process became IOPS bound ( ordinary HDD can query only around 75-150 different disk areas per second). So while a normal HDD can achieve good sequential read speed, it SUCKS when it comes to reading data spread randomly.

I was amazed how much improvement I've seen just by getting an SSD - and how cheap it was compared to all other solutions.

Here comes Google, the Internet police! Do as they want or say goodbye to 80% of search traffic.

People tend to click first links with way higher frequency than those located below.

Additionally, when a beginner sees this page, he sees two versions - of which one is 3 and one is 2 - I think most of people will choose the "newer" ( newer = better? ) version because they don't really know about the differences between the two.

The second part of the problem is the fragmentation of tutorials on other websites - which can't be fixed by changing the download page.

It's also really off putting for beginners that try to learn the language. Python 3 is being served as the main download when you search for it. And while you search for tutorials, most of them are in python 2 - and 80% of them DO NOT state whether they are for python 2 or python 3 ( because most were made during the python 2 times? ).

So people try to learn to code with python 3.x and get frustrated because simplest things don't work.

They should seriously rethink the whole 3.x thing. I must say, introducing it probably did more harm than good for the future of this language.

It's like comparing invention of a new hemorrhoids drug to the discovery of DNA.

One has niche uses and the other creates new industries and revolutionizes science. It's hardly the same.

I am tired of Google behaving like they are untouchable/above others.

Follow the rules everyone follows, you aren't above the law and certainly do not deserve to be treated as a special entity.

Pay your taxes, respect privacy and stop pretending to be saint.

I guess since Google got a court verdict stating that their search results are their "opinion" and thus "free speech", they cannot be really attacked from this point. Add to that the fact that their algorithm is top-secret and probably heavily compartmentalized and it becomes even harder.

I am not arguing whether Google breaks a law or not, I simply say that they hurt the smaller players. Getting rankings is getting harder and harder with each update. Soon, paying for AdWords will be the only affordable option.

I guess the June search-algorithm updates really worked. (Kicking out everyone that earns without giving Google it's piece of the pie).

Google keeps removing small business websites from its results, forcing them to use Ad-Words. This strategy cannot be sustained unless they want 100% commercial / 100% junk results. I wonder what will they do in the future.

This is wrong thinking.

Those loopholes are there because Google pays(lobbies) for them to be there. As far as I know, they've paid more in lobbying last year than Microsoft, Apple and Facebook combined.

Those loopholes will never be closed, Google and the like will make sure of that.

I've used chrome because it was faster than Firefox ( and didn't crash so often ).

I've switched to Firefox a few weeks ago and couldn't be happier. It seems that all the stability issues were resolved.

I urge everyone to do the same.

The problem with search is that nowadays, people judge results quality by their similarity to Google results. So anything that doesn't look like Google output looks "off".

Yes,

Because large companies(with nice Ad-Words budgets) are treated extremely nice both by the Ad-Words folks and the organic search algorithm folks. They are being favorized at the cost of small businesses that spend too little or nothing at all.

With each passing algorithm update Google is removing more and more small business websites and replaces them with bigger companies ( so called "brands" ) that often times offer worse services but spend more on marketing ( AdWords ).

What people are upset is that Google siphons majority of commercial web-traffic and denies anyone else access. This kills small companies.

Google is a saint, don't you know?

They are one of the biggest corporations, spy on you on every possible occasion, fuck over thousands of small businesses, extract every bit of wealth out of e-commerce ecosystem, but they are saints!

Never badmouth google again!

I can't wait what Larry will think of in the next 2 years. He has to increase the profits but can't be fucking small website owners indefinitely. What will he do then? Replace the first page of organic results entirely with ads? Remove any website that doesn't use Ad-Words? Replace all online shops with its own more pricey alternative? Offer selling your neighbour internet data for $199 per year?

Fuck Google, they are toxic to e-economy. Entities this big shouldn't exist.

A classic psychopathic behaviour. Blind your victim with carefully spun web of lies. Distort the reality and then when the time comes, abuse them.

Psychopaths are so good at lying that they self-deceive themselves. They believe their own lies. That's why it's so easy to fall for what they say.

They always fly to the top - be it at corporations, governments, crime organizations. The more psychopathic they are, the higher they get.

I am waiting for Facebook to start their own AdSense alternative. There is a lot of money there.

It's always amazing to hear senile (but still sharp) people talk.

97 years of existence must teach a lot about life and what is really important.

I wonder what could be achieved in one particular field of expertise if you devoted all that time to it. It's over 500,000 hours of possible learning ( for a 90 year old ). Some say that 10,000 hours is what takes to gain mastery ( I know this is controversial ).

I like to imagine myself mysteriously falling into some other dimension where I am forced to live for 1000000 years and practice one craft, then returning and comparing my skills to those who had only one short life :) It helps to push the boundary of what seems "impossible" a little bit more.

Contrary to what they say about themselves, they can't really innovate. Search is what makes them. Can you imagine Google without it?

They'd be nothing.

All their existing products are copycat/published with the search leverage.

Imagine a rich kid who starts his own business. He thinks he's successful but it's his parents who feed him cash and make it easy for him. He never had to really fight for it.

It's the same with Google products - they can't fight for themselves, instead they rely on their daddy(search) to achieve success.

Now look at Apple or Samsung - they have many different products that are relatively successful. Meanwhile the big G only has one cow to milk - the search and they burden it with more and more ads with each quarter. They can't do it ad infinitum because too many people would run away from them. And it's not really improving, just abusing the previous success until it's still possible.

Larry Page should stop doing what he's doing. It's going to destroy this company sooner or later.

Does the stock price has to always rise? How much money do you really need? Just ignore cash and try to build something great, maybe then you will be able to truly innovate?

Yeah as long as they collect personal data, we can't trust them. Government can always demand it from them. If not by PRISM then with something else.

Does it always has to be the same in all cases?

The results of technology advancement are various and complicated. It's not all white and black.

Yep, no matter how much PR bullshit they spew out, no one resonable is going to trust them with sensitive data.

There are many Googlers here, you know :) You either talk about G positively or not at all.

The glass is the most Orwellian thing I've ever heard of. The only thing that could beat it would be direct brain interfaces, capable of stealing thoughts.

This "blog" has one post and was specifically started to bash DDG.

I don't use the duck (yet?) but to me it looks like an attempt at black PR.

Even if the duck doesn't give full anonymity, I would still prefer it to Google - the new leaked slides revealed that NSA has direct access to Google, whereas with ddg, they'd have to snoop upstream.

Good. Google monopoly is bad for everyone except their shareholders.

I'd love the search market to be split into 3-4 entities with similiar market share - not one getting 80-90% of the cake. Google extracts way too much value out of web traffic, killing the small business - and this phenomenon increases quarter by quarter in its intensity.

"; we will lose the opportunity to monitor and protect our privacy; "

I laughed so hard at this one.

Great move by the Firefox team. It made me donate for their cause.

It depends how serious you are on the project. If you expect it to be something big and really successful, go with branding name. If it's a small side-project, go with the SEO domain name.

This can be debunked by running this query in google.com:

site:finance.google.com sell "quotes & news"

The top results is what you would get if it was a neutral algo, used by main google service.

The apple redirect is not neutral and is not a result of any algorithm.