This. It's a "sandbox" game, you can set your own objectives

Maybe you could post the whole sentence then? Hard to give a good translation without context

It would not recognize those and that's exactly overfitting, learning ONLY it's dataset, but not the pattern within the dataset that is general and can be applied to new data.

If this happens does also depend on how complex your ML model is though (compared to the amount of input data). The simpler it is, the more resistant it is to overfitting (but also the less complex the pattern is allowed to be).

There is a scientist joke: "If you want to perfectly fit a linear regression just give it 2 datapoints". The linear regression is pretty much the simplest model, but giving it a too small dataset makes even that useless.

Overfitting means the system learned not the pattern you want it to learn, but rather just knows it's training data completely.

If you give it 100 pics with 50 cats and let it learn wich ones are cats without any stop criteria it will overlearn that exactly those 50 pictures are cats, but not by what the pictures have in common. It will learn stuff like "oh yeah the one with the dark blue background is a cat pic"

To prevent that you use some part of your data not for training but for quality control. You feed it only 80 pics to learn from, and use 20 only to check if they are also recognized without ever being shown to it during training.

"Once the working class realizes it's being exploited"

But the revolution he predicted came, and it turned out way different than he expected (the russian revolution)

>Marx believed that there should be a revolution

Slight correction:

Marx believed that there inevitably MUST be a proletarian revolution as logical next step after the bourgeois revolution (french revolution and later the 1848 springtime of nations) kicked out the aristocracy. He thought it was a natural law that this second revolution would eventually come when the proletariat that originally supported the liberal revolution realized that they didn't gain anything from it yet.

It's just inheretly complicated to seperate the financial life of two people again. You owned everything together, and now suddenly you have to decide who gets what.

And they are often one-sided because at marriage you signed that you'd care for your partner financially. If you break up then that duty doesn't immediately stop. Maybe one partner stopped their career to care for mutual kids and is now has financially much worse prospects than if they never had married.

The government has to match the secondary market. If they bring out bonds that perform worse than existing bonds then noone will buy them and instead grab existing ones from the secondary market instead.

Laws and investments.

Medieval people survived the cold by making fire inside their homes, today you have to fulfill regulations to do that (I.E. you need a proper fireplace and chimney). Just adding those to an existing home can be expensive, and at least in my area they are pretty much sold out.

In medieval times population was much lower, so it was viable to just heat every home with wood. If you tried that now we'd run out of forests quickly, and dense cities would be dark in the smoke

The issue with spacetravel is that A: getting off planets is extremely difficult, and B: distances are extremely long.

All technology that exists right now forces us to burn a high multiple of fuel in your weight to get away from earth (if you weight 100lb then you need about 1500lb of fuel just to get you off the planet, and the same applies for everything you want to take with you, on smaller planets it's a little better though). Escaping gravity is a tough task.

The other issue is that space is huge. To get to Mars with the current in technology we take about 3 months. To get to the nearest other star at the maximum physically possible speed you take 4 years!

That's to prevent people from falling for their sweet lies again. Dictators become dictators because they are charismatic and good at convincing people, and that can even work after their death.

Their speeches don't sound like crazy dictator. They sound very convincing when you don't analyze them thoroughly. They are very good at presenting seemingly great solutions that are only radical when you think through all the implications.

TOR is far from completely secure. Both governments and hackercollectives have identifid people in the network. (It's a bunch of effort though)

And if governments planned to stop the existence how would they do that? It's completely decentralized, you can't just order the nodes to be shut down, they are all around the globe.

Also as others have mentioned the US government created TOR, and is actively using it

The force that the wagon pushes on the child is called "inertial force", it is simply the resistance to being accelerated instantly.

It was pretty much the first search engine that works really well. And that allowed them to be the first thing everyone has in mind when they want to search something, to the point where it became it's own word (to google something).

People who are less tech literate possibly don't even know alternatives exist.

So it's basically early bird bonus

Thanks you, that makes a lot of sense.

And now I wonder what a "mice swim effort rating sheet" looks like

I mean, wouldn't that experiment potentially actually measure how long they can physically keep going? Or do we know they could swim for longer and just don't because they give up on the psychological level?