Though, in the finest academic tradition, once you try to actually run it, you'll find that it silently depends on a separate library written by the author, which you'll have to find yourself.
I though I have removed all the dependency on 'tensorcv'. It turns out I forgot the dataflow part. Now it should be run without 'tensorcv'. Thanks for pointing out.
That's why it's called Machine Learning and not Artificial Intelligence. It was an intentional differentiation to avoid the pure research academics who start every presentation with 'assuming infinite compute resources'.
ML is an Applied Research discipline and all the better for it.
There's plenty of academic research in machine learning.
I've never been to any academic presentation where they start like that. In-fact, more often they complain about the huge compute resources in industry.
It's town vs gown. You have separate areas and generally don't mingle. There is an age difference as well as a cultural and class difference. Much of Cambridge is gated off into colleges that a town person can't go unless escorted by someone connected to the university.
I was in the gown group, but even within this group there are additional degrees of stratification.
I went to Cambridge as an undergrad, and indeed I interacted basically exclusively with other undergrads. Now as an adult I'm living in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and there are tons of undergrad students on the street, and I basically never interact with them at all (nor go into the the various university buildings that are scattered throughout the town).
But I wouldn't describe that as friction? If anything, it seems the opposite of friction, there are separate groups of people who are smoothly gliding past each other... I guess what I'm wondering is, do you feel there are any concrete problems or inconveniences caused by the town/gown distinction?
I always felt that agile processes were a means to give non-answers to performance measurement in order to allay the consequences of that measurement and allow developers to get on with the business of making software.
How big is the task; 10 story points
How long will that take; depends on our velocity
Can it be done by this date; we're not allowed to plan that far ahead. You can put it in the 'icebox'. We might get to it eventually.
If (1) everyone is highly effective in getting tasks done, and (2) working on tasks that are reasonably well prioritized by both technical risks and business value, why exactly do you need to know more?
There are legitimate reasons that a business may need a date. But making sure people are working harder than hard by beating them over the head with a date coughed out by a gantt chart is not one of the legitimate reasons.
The great depression, which was a period of high unemployment, was still fresh in the minds of many during the 1950s. The theory of the time was that WWII is what fixed the economy. Many people sat in many rooms trying to figure out how to achieve the 'wealth' effect of war without all of the destruction. Creating useless jobs was a common idea.
Let's finish that thought process, roll out UBI...
I've never quite understood how UBI fixes the 'problem'. Can you (someone) explain why current prices wouldn't simply adjust to reflect the introduction of the 'helicopter money'?
Isn't this the very issue found w/ exploding U.S. tertiary education costs?
Close cousins to the "bullshit" jobs in the OP are the "gotta" jobs that no one really chooses to do but they have to earn money to live on.
UBI is a compelling way to get lots of people out of that "gotta" hole and enable a much wider range of options and opportunities. Perhaps not a complete fix but certainly a helpful step.
> UBI is a compelling way to get lots of people out of that "gotta" hole
Right, can you say more about why this is "compelling"? What I'm pointing out is that the 'savvy' business people will likely view the introduction of the UBI money into the economy as a reason to raise/adjust prices, i.e. inflation.
Having spent (too) much time speaking w/economists and the occasional central banker, who regularly debate the merits of QE (effectively targeted at the asset-rich) vs. "helicopter money", I'm not sure that society wouldn't end up right where it is now based on what I mentioned above about the 'savvy' business people.
If you're interested, someone broached the 'UBI/helicopter money' issue w/ Bernanke a couple of weeks ago as part of a broader conversation. I've linked to the video in another thread.[1]
On the face of it this looks like a USS Liberty style false flag. It would make sense if, once again, Israel is facing enemies on its doorstep and is looking draw others into the conflict to come to their defence.
The novichok agents are not that hard to make and many labs around the world have the capability and the research licences to make it. The factors tying them to Russia would be trace chemicals, similar to how you can trace gold. It'll be easy to lie about the origin so long as no-one else has access to the chemicals to test them.
Theresa May is a very weak position politically. The industrial size gang rape cover ups that came out recently didn't help. The ongoing Brexit negotiation failures are not helping. It's only a matter of time before she's replaced. Picking a fight with Russia makes her look stronger. If you want another laugh, consider that the UK thinks it has a 'special relationship' with the US which will allow them to get a favourable trading deal afterwards.
Until I see more evidence, e.g. play by play surveillance, I will remain unconvinced.
My guess is that the 12 wing rotors are at a fixed angles similar to a quadcopter V-tail. Unlike a v-tail, and to hazard another guess, I figure the inner 8 rotors point outwards to help provide stability so that a roll ends up with the lower side pointing straight down providing more lift and the higher side points out the side providing less lift. This pushes the craft back upright. There are times when you actually do want to roll so the 4 outer rotors point in. They're further out so there is more roll leverage. The mechanisms to tilt the rotors would add extra weight to a craft that's probably already low on margins. I'd say it's better to be a little less efficient for a short part of a flight than carry the extra weight for the duration.
