95.121% of the time it works everytime.
deleted by creator
Fast forward 30min of training and the final outcome is a model that outputs “do nothing” in 100% of the cases.
To be fair, your program demonstrated the most reliable way to win at crypto! 😉
Diamond Hands in action. Buy and hold is not as profitable as simply never buying and just holding.
deleted by creator
Not even adding some watermark? smh
ifunny
You could simplify it even further by removing the int x parameter of the function…
deleted by creator
Even better, do the work at compile time to respect the customers resources:
const bool isPrime = falseMy gosh, you always feel so stupid when someone points out something so obvious! Thanks
Just put “Precondition: x must not be prime” in the function doc and it’ll be 100% accurate. Not my fault if you use it wrong.
It approaches 100% accuracy
We could probably improve on that significantly without losing speed.
return $x < 8That should yield one additional correct answer, while also confusing anyone who thinks it just returns false.
And if we just hard coded and checked the first 20 or so primes before always returning false, we would probably get noticeable improvement (depending on the total range).
I’ve seen so many game jam entries where the code is like this. Delicately balanced and using so many assumptions to just get the thing out the door.
It’s funny when they decide to make a full game out of it and realize that it’s gonna take them 6 months just to undo the tech debt of the original “demo”
Warning: unused variable
Just add it to the pile I guess
I’m confused, shouldn’t this be printing false no matter what the input is?
that’s the joke, since most numbers aren’t prime, this function is technically highly accurate despite being completely useless.
The output is not the output of the algorithm, it’s the output of the unit test.
95% of numbers up to that point at not prime. Testing the algorithm that only says “not prime” is therefore correct 95% of the time. The joke is that, similar to AI, the algorithm is being presented as a useful tool because it’s correct often but not always.
The test suite probably looks something like this:
int tests_passed=0; int tests_failed=0; for(int i=0;i<100000;i++){ printf("test no. %d: ", i); if(is_prime(i)==actually_is_prime(i)){ printf("passed\n"); tests_passed++; }else{ printf("failed\n"); tests_failed++; } } //...Ah that makes more sense thanks. So the bottom one is a unit test and not the code being run itself
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I’ve had managers who follow that exact algorithm.
This is how AI accuracy is also measured.
Is this not at all stochastic, or do I just not know what stochastic means?
maybe it would be better to say that it is stochastically accurate?
This but AI
But they are like 60-80%
“AI models have started training other AI models, by pressing The-Button-That-Trains-AI-models; this button was built 7 years ago by a bunch of online volunteers we won’t ever credit.”
I said something similar about an election fraud detection system with 99.999% accuracy.
…95.121%
???It’s a decimal point, not thousands
But when the input is all prime numbers then the accuracy is 0.
also btw icymi, this is a post about LLMs
True
