News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:It takes a lot of energy for machines to learn by wongarsu on Wednesday December 30, 2020 @05:46PM (#25587164)
Comparing your pre-trained brain (that has a lot of structure (=training) through evolution) with the training costs of a new algorithm isn't really fair.

All in you require about 100W (2000kcal/day), maybe 3 times that when doing a lot of physical activity. Boston Dynamic's Spot uses about 400W. I can probably outperform it in some disciplines while it would beat me in some others. That would be a fair comparison.

Re:It takes a lot of energy for machines to learn by acdc4life on Wednesday December 30, 2020 @11:43PM (#25589667)
> Comparing your pre-trained brain

You’re making sweeping assertions that require domain experts in several different disciplines. The scientific evidence points to the contrary. It is demonstrated that humans have a general ability to learn wide range of things, without being genetically programmed to. None of us evolved to drive cars. Yet nearly everyone in my grandparents generation were able to learn this totally new skill despite being a new invention, where you couldn’t possibly have had time for evolution to act. They weren’t genetically evolved to drive, it was learned within their lifetime and generation. There are tribal humans in different parts of the world that haven’t developed written language. Yet you can teach them written language. Where’s your “pre trained brain” theory there?

Re:It takes a lot of energy for machines to learn by wongarsu on Thursday December 31, 2020 @02:26PM (#25596155)
Your ancestors might not have driven cars, but they used the motoric skills required for controlling one, and they had a vision system optimized for detecting and avoiding moving objects.