|
i thought k-means requires you to specify the number of clusters you want ahead of time.
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:i thought k-means requires you to specify the number of clusters you want ahead of time. it does but you can run it a bunch of times with different clusters and pick the "best" one (also its been more than a few years since ive done recommender systems but kmeans would def. not have been the first thing i reached for)
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
fritz posted:it does but you can run it a bunch of times with different clusters and pick the "best" one i think that impulse is backwards though, in that k-means is pretty good as a first "is this good enough?" check. in that it is one of those that is sure to get you *somewhere* without worrying about convergence or parameters (the k itself being a pretty intuitive thing)
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
oh yeah k-means, that’ll solve mod decisions like ‘retitle this article’
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
There are clustering approaches that do not require you to specify the number of clusters before hand. But that doesn't change that clustering posts and only showing you the ones in your bubble is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 19:02
|
|
|
dreamcompiler 52 minutes ago [-] I grew up around Christianity in the American south and this is very true. The genius of Christianity is that it's a mind virus: In order to be a good Christian you have to convert others to Christianity. It's the GPL of religions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:i think that impulse is backwards though, in that k-means is pretty good as a first "is this good enough?" check. in that it is one of those that is sure to get you *somewhere* without worrying about convergence or parameters (the k itself being a pretty intuitive thing) the way i remember it is for recommender systems the thing to do is start with nmf-style factorizations, but again that was a while ago otherwise agree in the absence of any problem knowledge kmeans is a good first start
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
polyester concept posted:the author of n-gate sure cares a lot about what a bunch of people he dislikes say on a website he also dislikes. enough to register a domain, read and summarize every week of posts in a sarcastic tone. its almost like he's as insufferable as the people he complains about. YOSPOS, bithc?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:dreamcompiler 52 minutes ago [-] see there's a kernel of insight here, derailed by the author's complete lack of broader understanding or context. an excellent example of the more tragic variety of HN comments
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 21:54
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:dreamcompiler 52 minutes ago [-] I, too, remember reading Snow Crash when I was like 15? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
the average hackernews thinks of themselves as a temporarily embarrassed Enki
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
Won't someone please think about the poor startup founders and their $100 million dollar businesses maneesh 17 hours ago [-] Here's a thought experiment: You're a HN reader. You have had ideas to build a startup that can help the world solve a problem. So you create it. You decide to fundraise, and that capital will help you succeed. You pay yourself a salary of $100,000/year, and put everything else into the company. You raise $4 MM in a seed round, valuing your company at $20MM. 10-months later, your company is doubling growth YoY again, has a solid SAAS model, and low churn. You decide to raise again. This time, you raise some more money for your company, and you're now valued at 70MM. About a year later, you're growing just as fast -- but you see a new competitor is entering the ranks. It's time to scale even faster. So you go and raise again. In a fantastic series-B round, spread across TechCrunch and HN, you raise again, at a $200 MM valuation. As the sole founder, you now own 50% of the company -- making you worth $100MM. Your salary has remained constant at $100,000/year though. And then the wealth tax hits. The new wealth tax says you're responsible to pay an annual tax of 2% on all assets over $50MM. Starting this year. Which means that you, as a private founder with no liquid assets, are now responsible for $50MM * 2% = $1MM in taxes this year. Even though your liquid income is $100,000, and you have barely that much in your bank account -- you need to come up with $1,000,000 in liquid cash this year. And since your valuation probably won't go down, it'll be at least that much, every year, for the rest of your life, until you shutter the company. So you go and try to liquidate your shares. But unfortunately, it's not a public company --- and it's not that easy finding private secondary-market buyers willing to buy the half of the founder's entire stake. So what do you do now? As far as I can tell, this is how the wealth tax would work for startup founders. reply
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 15:29
|
|
|
i love how quickly they forget about their obviously fake premise that the company is supposed to be solving the world's problems
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 17:10
|
|
|
i'm crying in my cheerios because a fellow with $100M in paper assets is obliged to liquidate some fraction before they yield even greater paper valuations
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
also taxing illiquid wealth has a simple solution, you just put a lien on it for when it actually becomes sellable. if its value drops in the intervening time, fine, adjust it down. if it needs to get transferred for some other reason (death) then you just force it to be liquidated if nobody can pay the lien
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
What's all this about wealth taxes being unconstitutional
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:What's all this about wealth taxes being unconstitutional well, under maritime law...
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:18
|
|
|
you can just make them give shares to the government too
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
that's not how taxes work that's not how any of this works
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
DaTroof posted:that's not how taxes work hn.txt
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:What's all this about wealth taxes being unconstitutional the us constitution limits the sorts of taxes the federal government can impose in article i, section 9, clause 4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. that was modified by the sixteenth amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. taxes are considered direct if they're laid on people or property rather than transactions. there are scholars who think that the amendment was unnecessary, i think on the principle that income counts as a taxable transaction. that's the rule that allows inheritance taxes. but i don't see how you can stretch that to cover wealth; i'm in favor of a wealth tax, but i do think it probably needs an amendment. unless you can find a way to restrict it to be proportional to state population
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:the us constitution limits the sorts of taxes the federal government can impose in article i, section 9, clause 4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. that was pretty much the conclusion I had seen as well
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:also taxing illiquid wealth has a simple solution, you just put a lien on it for when it actually becomes sellable. if its value drops in the intervening time, fine, adjust it down. if it needs to get transferred for some other reason (death) then you just force it to be liquidated if nobody can pay the lien
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
a13n 21 hours ago [-] These actions may look anti-competitive, but these companies are all foreign (China, South Korea, Japan). China does anti-competitive stuff to US companies all the time. I doubt there's any legal case for FB abusing monopoly powers based on this email. If anything, this is just very competent business decision making. reply
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
SamReidHughes 9 hours ago [-] Spineless? KubeCon uses a system of racial preferences when giving out free tickets [1]. The leadership isn't spineless, they're evil and they believe in this stuff. (Hell, they also have preferences for gays, as if they're a marginalized or underrepresented group. That's batshit crazy.) [1] https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/events/kubecon-cloudnat... reply
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 13:26
|
|
|
fritz posted:SamReidHughes 9 hours ago [-] 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
shrughes'd again
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
christ what founder still has a majority by the time they’re swinging around hundred million valuations any more, what terrible vcs are lining up for that
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:shrughes'd again is this the same shrughes that used to post here
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:christ what founder still has a majority by the time they’re swinging around hundred million valuations any more, what terrible vcs are lining up for that please cite your quotes
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 05:15
|
|
|
tomp 1 day ago | parent | favorite | on: It’s Not Enough to Be Right – You Also Have to Be ... No, it's just an example. Probably a poor example. In reality I don't often meet vegans, but people get upset for all kinds of reasons / statements, most commonly for political ones which are to be avoided on HN (and real life) (and are quite easy to avoid, if you want to). Another (non-political) one that comes up fairly often, is that I don't think it's reasonable to congratulate people when they decide to get married... it's a decision after all, nothing to do with achievement and/or luck (for most people I know at least, who aren't extremely lonely to the extent that finding anyone that tolerates them is an achievement... in which case, "congratulations" would be more in order), and if anything, they should be warned (as many marriages end in failure). But if you say that, you're the rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 14:40
|
|
|
"but that would keep me from just sitting on assets forever while their value appreciates!" if the company is worth so much what's the issue with making some of it for sale? unless the valuation was super inflated and didn't reflect what your company was actually worth 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:is this the same shrughes that used to post here what's the chance of there being two?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
given that stock price and the health of a company have zero bearing on each other it should be illegal to even own the stock of a company you work at
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 18:03
|
|
|
fritz posted:tomp 1 day ago | parent | favorite | on: It’s Not Enough to Be Right – You Also Have to Be ... Shocked that the ability to feel genuine happiness for someone else is beyond a hn poster.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:is this the same shrughes that used to post here ya
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
Well, I'm glad it's past tense
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 19:02
|
|
|
fritz posted:tomp 1 day ago | parent | favorite | on: It’s Not Enough to Be Right – You Also Have to Be ... that whole thread is amazing. "i often make Factual Statements and people get mad at me, therefore they're immature"
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
It's important to have your priorities straight:
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
I don't see the problem tbh? At least if I give the benefit of the doubt and read the unstated part as "and that is bullshit", rather than "and that's why sw engineers are better".
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2019 14:55
|
|