compactmani

This is a nice project. I think it would be great to add references used for the implementations and some tests that demonstrate they return what is expected (or perhaps the same result of sklearn maybe).

I think it's the best part. The definition is left for the student to learn.

Their data scientists will now be building features like "tried to watch a movie from a VPN IP" for their churn models.

And another note: there are also people who simply do not allow comcast to filter their traffic and therefore always have a VPN. These people despite their efforts to watch netflix content approved for their own country, would be blocked.

I tried it with my favorite, Alex Webb. It didn't break 5/10 and received solid #mess and #boring tags on all of the photos. Fun none the less.

The main finding from my perspective is that we can score and rank friendship likeliness and see signal in a hold out dataset.

I can almost hear Facebook clamoring to offer free genotyping.

I see the optimization problem they face. Promote non-personal content to generate short term revenue versus promote personal content to minimize long-term churn. It looks like their data scientists and business analysts have identified significant risk to pursuing the former and advocate the latter, for now.

In other words this has nothing to do with a return to claimed core values, but a shift in strategy to remain afloat for as long as possible.

That's also the base salary. Yearly bonus can easily be 100% of the salary. Partners at decent firms are of course clocking ~2M or more.

Can you give some concrete examples of the benefits of wrangling in python over R and a general sense of how much time this would save a user?

This is consistent with my impression of how sales work. You sell a feature, product, capability, etc that won't be ready for at least 6 months (for example). Then you kindly encourage an engineer to build it.

I agree. The title should read 'Where Can a Ph.D. Take You? Forward to More Research, Usually'

Which is the entire point getting a PhD in the first place. More research. Forever.

I (along with many others) cringed at the phrasing of postdoctoral degree. A post-doc is not a degree. The article's comparison of a post-doc to law school for liberal arts majors was equally egregious. Sloppy writing.

Now, to be fair to their point. What they are observing is a cultural phenomenon in academia which is to stay in academia until you can't stay any more. Industry is for those who fail at academic research, whether that failure occurs at the post-doc stage or pre-tenure stage. This is in contrast to the sentiments of the real world (the perspective of the article author) which wonders why these "students" take so long to get a real job.

Allow me to make a more general conjecture: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving word_x or word_y approaches 1.

I think it's more like: made a decision about god? if yes and believe there is one then theist else if believe there isn't one then atheist.

A lot of people I think don't care to form a belief one way or another. I'm not sure what that's called.

You've highlighted one of the many advantages to browsing with javascript off by default. I think at this point it should really only be used for must-have cases.

This is a project developed by a high school senior. Yes he made rookie choices as have been pointed out here. If you like the direction of the project, contribute! It will help him learn.

600 million PC users discovered that running a lightweight unix distribution/DE and not allowing javascript made the life expectancy of their computers triple.

Or so I dream.

I see Europe in the future adopting many of the (some call paranoid) security measure of Israel. For example security checks before entering all malls.

"I don't have one because of principles" is an excellent answer. It's the answer I give whenever someone asks me for anything social media related whether the context is social or professional. You may be surprised to hear that I've experienced zero consequences for it.

The issue I see with changing so many alleles is that we may not know all of the phenotypic consequences of each allele. Moving 10,000 alleles to the best intelligence settings might make people smarter, but genes are highly pleiotropic. Mutating 10,000 genes could have 10,000 phenotypic side effects.

How do you optimize: maximize intelligence subject to not messing up the organism too much. How would you do this for multiple phenotypes? Maximize height and intelligence subject to not messing up the organism too much.

You're right that the author (unless I missed it) didn't say what proportion of variance in IQ is explained by additive genetic effects (narrow sense heritability) . I think a quick search would likely answer that.

This is not at all my observation. I've noticed that the uncommonly (technically-scientifically) intelligent people I've been exposed to tended to lead very socially balanced and normal lives. They have also been some of the funniest people I've met too.

TV's are specific case of computer monitor. They benefit from devices sending them signals which they can interpret and display on their screens. They benefit from things sending them signals which may or may not have originated from the internet.

Personally, the only thing attached to my TV is a computer. I said previously that a computer benefits from the internet, so I suppose you might say my TV benefits from the internet?

I can't see how any appliance would be required to be online for use or configuration. Even every laptop off the shelf doesn't have such a requirement. The only device I know that does is a smart phone (maybe?).

I know IoT sounds scary and privacy invasive (it is), but in reality, most of the IoT devices are not dependent on the internet. For example, my toaster, refrigerator, washing machine, dish washer, coffee machine, TV would never benefit at all from using the internet, so I would never connect them.

The only device that actually benefits from the internet is a computer, and maybe a mobile phone (because there is this app craze). The rest I predict will fade when consumers discover the devices were fine the way they were.

Yes that may be true. Instead of trying to reproduce it, they attempt to build upon it. The projects which successfully build on previous projects become original research articles and the cycle continues.

If the work you are doing isn't reproducible, then it won't be cited as the building blocks for future work. The system is cleans itself out as a side effect. Therefore I prefer students to work on cutting edge research.

You can construct a Klein bottle using a rectangle with two edges with the same orientation and two edges with opposite orientation (K^2 is a good notation for this). Naturally identifying the same orientation edges gets you a cylinder. When you identify the remaining two edges in R^3 you have the classic Klein bottle we're familiar with. But there is no embedding of K^2 into R^3, but there is for R^4. This is intuitive because the map from K^2 to R^3 is not one-to-one because two circles of K^2 have the same imagine circle in R^3.

You can also look at it from the Möbius strip perspective, the Möbius strip being a twisted product (in contrast to the annulus being just the product) of S^1 x R^1, in which case some of the work is already done for you.

Do it to max out the education attribute on your char build. Plus, school is cool.

In all seriousness, it's a great time to learn how to think and get comfortable thinking. That said, there are likely many other ways to achieve this.

If only there really was universal expectation of free software. Then we'd really be getting somewhere.

I'm not sure why distaste in x86 suggests one prefers pre-computing environments unless you really internalize x86 as computing, which many people don't.

Pretty good. Likely more appealing than the one I had: People in SV are less stupid.