How does the compare with writing GPU code in Julia?
Readit NewsDjrhfbfnsks commented on Rust-CUDA: Fast GPU code fully in Rust github.com/RDambrosio016/... · Posted by u/amadeusine
Djrhfbfnsks commented on What elements does a plant need to grow? github.com/hydromisc/hydr... · Posted by u/lathyrus_long
Where would the plants store useless (to them) elements and for what purpose?
I don't know the biology, so I can't answer specifically, but surely there are many cases of "useless" and even detrimental elements being stored in living bodies. Just look at heavy metal accumulation in animals for example.
Replying as the author -- I do spend some time discussing hetereoskedastic noise (beginning in §2.2 and intermittedly throughout following chapters), although you're right that I don't discuss this particular modeling approach. Personally I think that inferring hetereoskedastic noise from data alone during Bayesian optimization is likely to be very difficult, as you'll need either a lot of data and/or to be in a very small dimension in order to identify the variable noise scale. (Note that the example in the hetGP writeup is only in one dimension.)
However, when the noise scale is either variable (but known) or can be modeled with a relatively simple (e.g., parametric) model, there may be some benefit to the added model complexity. Here you could include the parameters of the noise model into the model hyperparameters and proceed following the discussion in chapter 4. In doing so, I would be careful to ensure that the data actually support the heteroskedastic noise hypothesis.
Another approach that might be useful in some contexts is a heavy-tailed noise model such as Student-t errors (§§ 2.8, 11.9, 11.11).
Thanks for your suggestions. For my use case (tuning parameters of a financial market simulation), I'm essentially able to get good noise estimates for free by re-sampling a set of parameters multiple times.
So for example, rather than simulate an entire month in one shot, I'll simulate a day 30 times and therefore have a decent estimate of the noise for that result and be able to clearly distinguish the noise from the covariance of the Gaussian process.
The noise in these simulations can vary dramatically in parameter space (easily 10-100x), so it seems like it would be important to model.
For most of the problems for which I've tried to use Bayesian Optimization, I've had poor results because of unknown and heterogeneous noise in the underlying process that I'm trying to optimize.
I believe that modeling the noise directly using a 2nd Gaussian Process [1] could help, but I haven't gotten reliable results. I was hoping this topic would be addressed in the book, but don't see it.
Djrhfbfnsks commented on Sign arbitrary data with your SSH keys agwa.name/blog/post/ssh_s... · Posted by u/h1x
Why would you want to disable it? They're not 'scare-quote' public, they're just public - analogous (kind of craply but workably) to 'distributing' your face, but not your passport/driving licence/etc.
The private key part is secret of course, never shared (that's where the analogy above breaks) but the public part is fine and desirable for everyone to have access to - that's how they verify that you signed something with your private key, how they encrypt a secret message to you.
Because they may be used to learn the identity of an otherwise pseudoanonymous github account if one uses the same keys with another account that is tied to his real identity.
Djrhfbfnsks commented on How trains could replace planes in Europe economist.com/europe/2021... · Posted by u/edward
i love this philosophy. we can just tax and regulate away all the nice things in life
I'm as libertarian as they come, but if you're doing $x of damage to the environment, it seems totally fair to charge $x in taxes to cover that damage. That wouldn't stop you from enjoying an activity -- it's just making the price more accurately reflect the true costs.
Maybe not forcing, but if people did it as a curtesy to not get other people sick? Of course, that already happens in some places, and will never happen in others.
Pre-covid Japan had the right balance IMO. It was common to (voluntarily) wear a mask in public when you had a cold (or didn't feel like putting on make-up), but no one was going to force you to wear one.
The reason for this is that most legislation wouldn't pass without the amendments; the amendments contain 'pork' and special interest legislation that encourages legislators who are on the fence or even mildly opposed, to vote for the bill. Some of the most well-documented examples of this are the amendments to the ACA (Obamacare), which include the infamous 'corn-husker kickback'.
I don't think it's a bad thing that most current legislation wouldn't pass as-is. If it's not popular enough to reach the required threshold on its own, then it shouldn't become law.
With PoW you don't care about the software code. The rules are dominated by the PoW because it literally proves to you which is the chain where most people are interested in, because literally no single entity could burn that much electricity.
With PoS on the other hand you kind of need these checkpoints in the actual software and then you have to activate this entire new trust model where you have to trust the client code, and where it came from etc. I could literally come up with an entire fake chain on my computer and present it to you and without client-checkpoints there would be no way for you to not accept my chain compared to your current one.
With PoW I don't have to trust anything. If the majority next year decides to change the rules, so be it. The majority has spoken.