HN user

closetCS

24 karma
Posts1
Comments20
View on HN

I think the main question I have about these smaller, "lottery ticket" networks is that they are being trained over and over on the same problem as the bigger network, and are being evaluated on the same dataset as the big network, which leads me to believe that the model will fail to generalize to different but still related problems. Like if the model was trained on Imagenet an the winning ticket was found that had ridiculous accuracy for a relatively small network, I would think it would be heavily overfitted

I wonder if a pullback by WeWork would potentially close the "window" for IPOs meaning other tech companies that want to go public but haven't so far will have to wait longer.

Its pretty smart to use neural networks to exploit the non uniformity of the data, but I thought they were going to have replaced just the hash function part of a bloom filter, instead of the entire algorithm. I wonder if it could preserve the speed of the bloom filter while exploiting potentially non uniform data.

Just how some criticize Bezos and Zucherburg for building massive fortunes with either terrible workplace practices or the invasion of privacy of millions of people. not all wealth was gained this way, some was gained through honest hard work, diligence, and prudence, but you also can't blame some for being overly cynical about whether most of those with great fortunes did so be committing great crimes.

This is probably extremely cynical, but does floydhub have a vested interest in promoting genetic algorithms because they can take long times to train, especially with neural networks hyper parameters as the search space. These kind of beefy, complex training processes would be fantastic for its business.

While I see the point of being financially independent and generating positive-sum wealth, some parts of this argument are bullshit. Most people I have talked to attacking those with lots of money do so because the money gained was made by depriving others of an opportunity to achieve their own wealth. I also disagree with his idea of a journalist reporting for the people being a "status game" and a "nessesscary evil" when he is attacking those who made money illicitly.

This isn't completely on topic but ...

I wonder what happens to a company's culture once the employees see the stock absolutely tanking. The probably aren't fully vested, and so are just watching their payday shrink and shrink.

This might be a naive comment, but isn't that predatory pricing. By dropping prices to zero and trying to purposely hurt your competitors, you effectively gain a monopoly on that industry.

I think we are seeing this drain already occuring actually. The popular news sources are all reporting that millenials are struggling to buy homes and build savings, though this may be due to low wages rather than debt servicing costs

I don't see this here, but could a student debt bubble result not in a wave of defaults but as a contributing factor in a market slowdown or recession because the average borrower will have less disposable income to spend on other goods and products due to the insane debt payments? A wave of defaults most likely won't hurt any major institution except the federal government, but the lack of consumer spending seems like a potential problem for our consumeristic economy.

As much as a Google replacement would be great for competition, it would be extremely difficult. Google was able to scale with the web gradually through anti spam and proprietary software, but a new competitor would struggle to reach such a needed scale so quickly

Tl;dr: High cost of entry for newcomers

I don't see why this would be smart move for Google/Larry Page at all. If He goes, either he will fail, which would be disaster similar to Facebook for Google, or he will come out clean, which wouldn't change anything. The majority are still going to use google products regardless of public image, so not going best maintains that image.

This.

The amount of social anxiety and peer pressure from constant liking causes so many people on insta and fb to conform to popular opinion or get into harsh arguments with hateful language instead of having meaningful conversations. I think we need to encourage major social media platforms to remove quantitative features from social media such as likes and follower counts. It is just an emotionally destructive feature

Is that such a bad thing?

The web has allowed the sharing of high quality content across the world for little to no cost, but has also created so much noise for the average user that they have little to no hope of finding the high quality content on their own. Comment sections across the web fix this problem by promoting producers that offer a superior product. This encourages everyone to make better content.

I'm not quite sure about this, but aren't the products you have mentioned also have the same problem as Netflix. Spotify is able to provide lots of music options, but for how long? They are being effectively strangled by music labels and competitors, which will eventually lead to a content fragmentation between music streaming services. Then people will turn back to pirating music just as fast and they have for video. I'm not sure about steam , but I'm sure that eventually the gaming industry will face the same problem, it's only a matter of time.

Hey, just skimmed the news article. Seems really interesting, but the lack of information on compute requirements is concerning. Also I wonder what the latent factors and the specific layers in each model are? I tried to dig deeper in the paper but the description was pretty ambiguous?

AWS is already a large and fast growing business.

But isn't AWS the same as Amazon, just instead of selling a new vacuum, its selling cloud compute? Its still e-commerce, just rebranded as "cloud provider."

Maybe a possible partnership with Waymo for level 4 driving tractor trailers.

If I am not mistaken, Waymo is already an offshoot with Google, so Google already has a strong foothold in autonomous vehicles