search results matching tag: strategy

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (338)     Sift Talk (21)     Blogs (26)     Comments (1000)   

US History: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

bobknight33 says...

"the Southern Strategy" Yet another false narrative that radical liberal school system pushed.
You sure are gullible. Someday hopefully you will actually learn some truth.


newtboy said:

You need to learn about the Southern Strategy, when Republicans went full racist and Democrats went full pro civil rights for everyone. Democrats were courting liberals, Republicans were courting white southern racists.
Actually, you know it, you don't need to learn it, you just need to quit being so dishonest by pretending it didn't happen.

You, of all people, will never convince a single thinking person of your contention that Democrats are the party of racism today. It's so laughable, moronicly feigning ignorance of history and present day politics while trying to convince people you know history.
Learn history, start in the 60's-70's since you are claiming to be 100% in the dark about what happened then.
Also, maybe look up what racism is, you might find a picture of Republican Barry Goldwater.
Derp.

US History: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

newtboy says...

You need to learn about the Southern Strategy, when Republicans went full racist and Democrats went full pro civil rights for everyone. Democrats were courting liberals, Republicans were courting white southern racists.
Actually, you know it, you don't need to learn it, you just need to quit being so dishonest by pretending it didn't happen.

You, of all people, will never convince a single thinking person of your contention that Democrats are the party of racism today. It's so laughable, moronicly feigning ignorance of history and present day politics while trying to convince people you know history.
Learn history, start in the 60's-70's since you are claiming to be 100% in the dark about what happened then.
Also, maybe look up what racism is, you might find a picture of Republican Barry Goldwater.
Derp.

bobknight33 said:

Its not that Slavery was a white issue. Not all whites were slave holders. You need to look at which group identified with slavery.
Learn history,

How it Starts

newtboy says...

Duh.
Police departments and federal agencies have both determined nationwide that the riots, arsons, shootings, assaults with vehicles, bombings, etc are being perpetrated by right wing extremists, not by antifa. They've said so both publicly and privately.

The violence is largely being CAUSED by federal agencies and local law enforcement...not stopped by them. They instigate violence by attacking non violent protests repeatedly. Americans know it, and are overwhelmingly on the peaceful protesters side.

If this was some brilliant strategy to prove federal intervention is needed, why hide who they are? No identification at all is not how you sell the idea that the feds are above board, helping. It's great evidence of the opposite, that they're doing so much damage they don't even want their department identified, much less the thugs themselves.

I can only imagine the outrage if Obama sent in the troops against the wishes of the governor and mayor, unidentifiable troops in unmarked vehicles rounding up right wingers and dragging them away to who knows where. You would be calling for another civil war.
Just duh.

Police fire (paintball?) at residents on their front porch

SFOGuy says...

I think, after some research, they were using "Simunition"---chalk marking ammunition for exercises and training courses.
https://simunition.com/en/products/fx_marking_cartridges

that's a risky strategy.
One officer, one person, grabs the wrong clip, reloads, the wrong rounds, and suddenly---you have a crowd of dead civilians scattered on their front porch.

Risky, risky, risky.

BSR said:

I'm sure testosterone played a roll in it. You know, showing off in front of the women.

simonm (Member Profile)

AI - Neural Network Learns to Play Snake

moonsammy says...

Interesting to see how it selected that upper-left corner as an integral part of its strategy, despite its inefficiency. I'm guessing it wouldn't have developed that had there been a lower number of moves allowed - would cause it to favor strategies which optimize movement a bit better.

Multi-Agent Hide and Seek

L0cky says...

This isn't really true though and greatly understates how amazing this demo, and current AI actually is.

Saying the agents are obeying a set of human defined rules / freedoms / constraints and objective functions would lead one to imagine something more like video game AI.

Typically video game AI works on a set of weighted decisions and actions, where the weights, decisions and actions are defined by the developer; a more complex variation of:

if my health is low, move towards the health pack,
otherwise, move towards the opponent

In this demo, no such rules exist. It's not given any weights (health), rules (if health is low), nor any instructions (move towards health pack). I guess you could apply neural networks to traditional game AI to determine the weights for decision making (which are typically hard coded by the developer); but that would be far less interesting than what's actually happening here.

Instead, the agent is given a set of inputs, a set of available outputs, and a goal.

4 Inputs:
- Position of the agent itself
- Position and type (other agent, box, ramp) of objects within a limited forward facing conical view
- Position (but not type) of objects within a small radius around the agent
- Reward: Whether they are doing a good job or not

Note the agent is given no information about each type of object, or what they mean, or how they behave. You may as well call them A, B, C rather than agent, box, ramp.

3 Outputs:
- Move
- Grab
- Lock

Again, the agent knows nothing about what these mean, only that they can enable and disable each at any time. A good analogy is someone giving you a game controller for a game you've never played. The controller has a stick and two buttons and you figure out what they do by using them. It'd be accurate to call the outputs: stick, A, B rather than move, grab, lock.

Goal:
- Do a good job.

The goal is simply for the reward input to be maximised. A good analogy is saying 'good girl' or giving a treat to a dog that you are training when they do the right thing. It's up to the dog to figure out what it is that they're doing that's good.

The reward is entirely separate from the agent, and agent behaviour can be completely changed just by changing when the reward is given. The demo is about hide and seek, where the agents are rewarded for not being seen / seeing their opponent (and not leaving the play area). The agents also succeeded at other games, where the only difference to the agent was when the reward was given.

It isn't really different from physically building the same play space, dropping some rats in it, and rewarding them with cheese when they are hidden from their opponents - except rats are unlikely to figure out how to maximise their reward in such a 'complex' game.

Given this description of how the AI actually works, the fact they came up with complex strategies like blocking doors, ramp surfing, taking the ramp to stop their opponents from ramp surfing, and just the general cooperation with other agents, without any code describing any of those things - is pretty amazing.

You can find out more about how the agents were trained, and other exercises they performed here:

https://openai.com/blog/emergent-tool-use/

bremnet said:

Another entrant in the incredibly long line of adaptation / adaptive learning / intelligent systems / artificial intelligence demonstrations that aren't. The agents act based on a set of rules / freedoms/constraints prescribed by a human. The agents "learn" based on the objective functions defined by the human. With enough iterations (how many times did the narrator say "millions" in the video) . Sure, it is a good demonstration of how adaptive learning works, but the hype-fog is getting a big thick and sickening folks. This is a very complex optimization problem being solved with impressive and current technologies, but it is certainly not behavioural intelligence.

When white supremacists overthrew a government

newtboy says...

Your brain has turned to mush.
Seek medical attention.

The Southern Strategy was in response to Kennedy's civil rights act, which passed after his assassination....a strategy implemented largely after it's passing.

Although the phrase "Southern Strategy" is often attributed to Nixon's political strategist Kevin Phillips, he did not originate it[15] but popularized it.[16] In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, Phillips stated his analysis based on studies of ethnic voting:

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats".[1]

So, if by "sensible Democrats" you mean the racist ones angry that non whites now have rights, you're partially correct, except that it did work, he did peel them off and won the presidency because of their support.
*facepalm

bobknight33 said:

Yet another fool drinks Kool Aid.

Bogus Dog whistle you listen to. They don't exits.

Nixon tried to peel off the sensible democrats and it did not work. That Racist Democrat south held tight.

Racist Democrats kept the south. Republicans pushed for Civil rights bill of 64. 80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats.

Democrat party are the party of racism not Republicans.

Even more so today Democrats are spouting that racism is worst that ever. Such BS.

When white supremacists overthrew a government

What song makes a girl smile?

White Lie: The Cruel Abuse of a Starving Polar Bear

newtboy says...

I have to agree, since they also claim NO other starving polar bears were seen in 2017, and that sea ice didn't break up early, but in fact it was measured at around 5000km3 in September 2017 and the mean volume since 1979 is around 12000km3 in September, and average ice thickness was the lowest ever recorded for most of the year in 2017....when these articles were published.

The truth is, that IS what climate change LOOKS like, very few articles actually attributed this particular bears condition to climate change. Only those wishing to intentionally misread in order to contradict their own intentional misunderstanding didn't understand that. Lies indeed.

It reminds me of my brother denouncing the numbers on mass school shootings because in some, only one person was killed (but multiple shot), claiming that "mass shooting" meant "mass murder" was his way of debunking the argument and then denying there is a problem.

Right wing debate strategy....Step one, misrepresent a claim. Step two, prove that misrepresentation wrong. Step three, claim that debunks the entire argument the claim was supporting.

notarobot said:

*lies

Even if the plight of this individual bear was misrepresented, this still sounds like some climate change denialism.

Swan cleaning up human waste.

Fantomas (Member Profile)

We Believe: The Best Men Can Be - Gillette Ad

BSR says...

I don't see it as wrong. I see it as a strategy created by caring, loving, intelligent and brave people. I think you may feel attacked and accused by this ad. You don't want people looking at you and falsely judging you as scum on the basis of this ad.

I'm not sure you have faith in your foundation.

bcglorf said:

As relates to this commercial, it clearly generalizes most(arguably all) men as complicit with the peoblem. Thats wrong!

Drunk History: Trump Edition

KrazyKat42 says...

Grant was a terrible general. He won the war with attrition. The North had more men and more supplies. Instead of thinking up great strategies, he just threw bodies at the South, knowing that his greater numbers would win eventually.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon