This is why I've never thrown a party. I don't hate socialising, but I want to go home. I'll often leave without any fanfare when I've had enough. If I throw the party, I can't just go home or, worse, it's in my home, which is the only place I can go.
Honestly, depending on the party I just don't even go. The loud drunk type of parties that a lot of people are talking about here are absolute misery for me. I just wind up standing off to the side, too shy to strike up a conversation with any of the various strangers around, and eventually just leave. Eventually I stopped going to such parties because I just wind up feeling awful about myself afterwards. On the other hand, I love having dinner parties with friends or family, because then I actually can talk to people and have a nice time. Both of those things are parties, but they are both very different experiences for me.
This list is for little dinner parties held by women.
I could tell a woman write this at 11 "gender balance." No, just no. If you are a man thowring a party the one and only concern you have is throwing every bit of effort at making sure women will show up and not be outnumbered 2:1 or worse by guys. They will all leave and the reputation will forever ruin your chances of having women show up in the future. They talk.
If you are a man throwing a party you have to actively turn away other men. There is no other way. You have to rotate bouncing duty.
Hey Kyle, we didn't try anything more advanced than next-step sampling. You probably have a better sense than I do how much improvement such techniques are likely to yield. My unfounded suspicion is that we're close to the limit of generation quality from this dataset, and so I'm most interested in trying to gather 10-100x more skilled performances, one way or another.
There's also no consensus on whether the high- or low-temperature samples sound better. I've heard both opinions from several people.
Sageev did the final rendering, not sure what he used but I'm pretty sure it was nothing too fancy.
A bigger dataset of MIDI with velocity information and performance timing would be really, really great.
High temperature versus low is tough to compare - I find that sometimes low temperature seems better, then I change the random seed and my opinion flips.
Same for stochastic versus deterministic beam search, length/diversity scoring, and so on. I have been meaning to blog on this, will send it your way when I get it posted.
For character text, stochastic seems nicer broadly (maybe due to limited size of markov space, see [0] deterministic vs. [1] stochastic) but for music it depends on the representation I use. However at least in this cherrypicked example, I find the repetition of the deterministic beamsearch hilarious even though it is "worse".
Interesting, I will have to ask him what it was. With that render, at least my bad samples will sound prettier.
I'd wager approximately 0. If you mean, how many additional people are homeless in San Francisco because of the efforts here, then the number surely isn't negligible but the wealthiest area in the country seems like a decent place to extend a little humanity. What's the alternative? Treat our homeless like shit so other people don't want to move here?
By far my favorite use of Hangouts is the crossword puzzle app. It's much better than having 5 people try to collaboratively solve a crossword in person.
I have no idea why I haven't seen more games like this in Hangouts...
Other people being willing to pay for something doesn't necessarily make it positive-sum or economically productive. A lot of startups (certainly not all) seem to be trying to win tournaments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tournament_theory
In that sense, SF is is similar to Hollywood. And the result is that society devotes too many resources to the next big social network or the next big summer blockbuster, and not enough to, say, making comfortable chairs.
> If there is a 1% chance the world will end unless we do x, we shouldn’t do a cost-benefit analysis. Instead, assuming x is feasible, we should simply do it.
What is the chance the world will end even if we do x? What does feasible mean? Is killing 10% of the population feasible? Is this potential end of the world happening in a year, or in a thousand years?
I'd go on, but this is starting to look a bit like a cost-benefit analysis.
