|
Quote: Fei-Fei Li, chief scientist of artificial intelligence and machine learning at Google Cloud
Golly!
A high-ranking female programmer!
I wonder where she's from.
(Point of possible interest: her name is probably Li Fei, but it's common in China to repeat (one of) the given name(s), QED Fei-Fei -- my wife's given names are Yu Hua, so I call her Hua-Hua-Hua-Hua-Huaaaaa!)
(Then she hits me)
(People do that a lot)
Quote: It’s apparently impossible for anybody to talk about cloud services and machine learning without resorting to vague platitudes
Causality is a real thing.
Pissing on their candle aside: if they're doing this with pseudo-3D interpretation of 2D images, rather than with metadata, it's actually pretty cool, and I'd like to get my paws on it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It's written by Googler/MIT prof Eric Lehman, MIT/Akamai scientist F Thomson Leighton and MIT AI researcher Albert R Meyer, as a companion to their Mathematics for Computer Science open course. Because sometimes you need to know them numbers 'n' figurin'
|
|
|
|
|
I already know my guzinto's, pretty good start!
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: I already know my guzinto's, pretty good start!
I been ciphering for some time so's I could do this here mathmatics.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm doin real good I make it to this here grade
__ __
_ / V \
/ \| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
__| | |___|___
/ \ / \
| | |______ |
|\ | |
| '-' / |
\ ( /
\ /
| |
""",
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah knew it! Yous gonna be one a them thar brain sirjuns!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
The symbol N stands for the set of nonnegative integers: 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . (ask your instructor for the complete list).
Nice to see a math text with some humor. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
What, there still isn't a proof for Fermat's Last Theorem?
But it's obvious!
It's... urgh!
... My heart!
It's... Acghk!
<Thud!>
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: But it's obvious!
Ha! I had a math professor that used to write IOTTMCO in place of a lengthy portion of a proof he was going through. He'd explain "well, that part is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer", for some reason it didn't go over well when we put it on the exams.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
While the rush to keep pace with Moore's Law is getting rather "chaotic", researchers at IBM announced on Wednesday that they have drastically reduced the space required to store a bit of information down to that of a single atom. Symptoms of data storage may include: nausea, hair loss, and the arrival of giant lizards
|
|
|
|
|
Pretty soon they'll be using dark matter, or black holes or better yet alternate universe to store data bringing size down even moore.
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
|
|
|
|
|
I really hope they build it more stable as Samsung. I don't want to have a nuclear explosion when connecting the new drive
I'll go get my coat
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
International women's day.
Nevertheless, She Coded.
In my 20+ years of coding, I have had the privileged of working with less than 10 women; I wish it would be more.
Make it happen that more women get into technical jobs.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
dev.to wrote: stands in solidarity with the many women and non-binary individuals in our community
Is it now named "Women and Non-binaries day"?
Sorry, the choice in hormones is binary. You might not feel like it, but that doesn't change nature.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: the choice in hormones is binary
Are you sure about that?[^] 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
While I recognize the political side of this topic, and would rather not weigh in on it... I do find it rather silly that humans, supposedly being super intelligent, find cause for a course of action being derived from bugs. Which, is all fine and dandy I suppose, but if we really think bugs have it figured out then who's the smart one here... bugs or humans?
Maybe we should vote for bugs to be the next president.
Anyway, you gotta laugh at it I suppose. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: cause for a course of action being derived from bugs
I guess you stopped reading part-way through? Roughly half-way down, the part that starts "Oh, did you mean humans?" lists numerous examples of non-binary human biology - no bugs required.
(Unless you meant that these examples are "bugs" in our genetics?)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, I kinda skimmed it if I'm being honest... mainly because I'm just so tired of reading stuff without real thought behind it. I'm rather jaded on most stuff like this.
Oh well, back to work for me.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, to be fair, I went back through it again... I did in fact read the second part. And after since moving to Los Angeles, I even some personal experience in dealing with something along this lines. And the person I met was a genuinely good person, so my viewpoint isn't from one of hate or intolerance or whatever...
But, I can't help but look at the big picture with DNA and science. It seems to be only a few years ago we just finished mapping the genome... mapping not understanding. And if you look at it in the grand scheme of things, humans are still very ignorant in understanding the body. DNA is a new toy, and to me it seems like we're jumping to conclusions because everyone wants to be the next great Einstein to bring about a change.
That's my long winded way of saying it'll take more than some person on social media rambling to ever make me consider what's being said. But hey, I'm jaded.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: humans are still very ignorant in understanding the body
Agreed - the truth could turn out to be more mundane. But based on past experience, it will probably turn out to be far weirder than our current understanding.
Which is why we shouldn't claim to know with absolute certainty that "the choice in hormones is binary".
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. The science "teacher" is agreeing with me. Unless she is an insect or a bird, we're talking about either XY or XX. Oh, she also limits it to humans a bit further on? Where she explains that we are *NOT* talking about a new gender - just the existing genders with some characteristics that humans do not associate with the stereotype of said gender.
Talking about abusing science to win an argument; the fact that there is an extremely small gray area in SCIENCE does not mean that there suddenly is a justification for a yuge gray area in society. There's two types of shithouses, I don't care what you identify with, if you don't like either place you can always stop shitting completely.
1+1 is not *exactly* 2, but that does not mean that we move to be politically correct and reword that idea, simply because science introduced a gray area in definitions.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The science "teacher"
Why did you feel that you had to put the word "teacher" in quotes? Should I be surprised that you didn't add "so-called" before it?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Unless she is an insect or a bird, we're talking about either XY or XX.
Someone else who didn't bother reading to the end. Even if you dismiss the other abnormalities, you've still missed "XXY" and "X" from your list.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Talking about abusing science to win an argument
No, just clarifying that you can't use science to justify bigotry. As the post says, the real world is way too weird for that sh*t.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: the fact that there is an extremely small gray area in SCIENCE does not mean that there suddenly is a justification for a yuge gray area in society
The fact that there's no grey area in your religion does not mean there is ANY justification for contempt towards those who don't conform to your preconceived notions of gender.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: There's two types of shithouses, I don't care what you identify with, if you don't like either place you can always stop shitting completely.
Despite what you might think, nobody has yet come up with a way to avoid that basic human function.
And what, precisely, is your issue with where people sh*t? So long as they're doing it in a toilet, and not in your garden, what makes you think you have the right to dictate where that can and cannot evacuate their bowels? Who died and made you King Turd?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Why did you feel that you had to put the word "teacher" in quotes?
Because it is used there to give the post some authority. Still, anyone who can explain a concept would be a teacher.
Richard Deeming wrote: Even if you dismiss the other abnormalities, you've still missed "XXY" and "X" from your list.
I read it; perhaps you missed the comment that XXY is NOT a new gender?
Richard Deeming wrote: No, just clarifying that you can't use science to justify bigotry.
The entire post of the teacher is just that. It is whining about a PC version of genders.
Richard Deeming wrote: The fact that there's no grey area in your religion does not mean there is ANY justification for contempt towards those who don't conform to your preconceived notions of gender.
I did not refer to religion. It is also not contempt; but I will be pointing any "ze" to the nearest shrink
Richard Deeming wrote: Despite what you might think, nobody has yet come up with a way to avoid that basic human function.
That is a non-problem.
Richard Deeming wrote: And what, precisely, is your issue with where people sh*t?
None; I do have an issue with people requesting a special shittery for their new discovered gender.
Richard Deeming wrote: Who died and made you King Turd?
Since when do you have to resort to hitting on something that has nothing to do with the issue that we were talking about?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: perhaps you missed the comment that XXY is NOT a new gender?
No, but perhaps you've forgotten what you said yesterday?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: the choice in hormones is binary
NB: "Hormones", not "gender".
You started by saying that there is a simple binary choice of hormones. The message I linked to explains quite clearly that this is not the case. You respond by saying, "but it's not a new GENDER".
Eddy Vluggen wrote: It is whining about a PC version of genders.
No, it's "whining" about people who think they can use science to justify bigotry. Who think that science says there is only "XX" and "XY", and that those completely determine a person's gender, and therefore anything beyond that is political correctness GORN MAD!, and should therefore be dismissed out-of-hand.
And again, your choice of words shows that you think the whole idea is worthy of your contempt.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: I did not refer to religion.
No, but it's often the root cause behind this sort of transphobic argument. And even if it's not in this case, you still "religiously" believe that nothing exists beyond your own narrow point of view.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: I do have an issue with people requesting a special shittery for their new discovered gender.
And yet you clearly do have a problem with people using the shittery with which they're most comfortable. Why is that?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Since when do you have to resort to hitting on something that has nothing to do with the issue that we were talking about?
Sorry, perhaps the English expression doesn't translate well. It's quite common, when someone is trying to tell other people what to do, to ask them, "Who died and made you ...", followed by an exaggerated title related to the activity they're trying to control.
For example:
"You need to cut your grass" ⇒ "Who died and made you the Grass Fairy?"
"You can't park there" ⇒ "Who died and made you Prince of the Parking Spaces?"
"You can't use that toilet" ⇒ "Who died and made you the Sultan of Sh*t?"
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
