Hi everyone,
\nWe would like to inform you that the BirdCLEF2024 competition is part of an exciting set of competitions affiliated with the LifeCLEF and the 11th Workshop on Fine-Grained Visual Categorization [CVPR 2024]. The majority of these other competitions are also hosted on Kaggle. Many of them have similar data formats to make it as easy as possible for interested competitors to try their hand at multiple different competitions!
\nYou can find the full list of competitions here:
\n\nHave fun!
\nOn behalf of the LifeCLEF and FGVC organization committees.
\nLukas
Hi everyone,
\nWe would like to inform you that the BirdCLEF2024 competition is part of an exciting set of competitions affiliated with the LifeCLEF and the 11th Workshop on Fine-Grained Visual Categorization [CVPR 2024]. The majority of these other competitions are also hosted on Kaggle. Many of them have similar data formats to make it as easy as possible for interested competitors to try their hand at multiple different competitions!
\nYou can find the full list of competitions here:
\n\nHave fun!
\nOn behalf of the LifeCLEF and FGVC organization committees.
\nLukas
Thank you for such good competitions
", "rawMarkdown": "Thank you for such good competitions", "votes": null }, { "id": "2758735", "postDate": "04/18/2024 10:16:46", "content": "These look great but they do not award points nor medals. Given the amount of work top kagglers invest when competing they focus where there is some rewards, i.e. medals (and prizes for happy few ones). It is why you don't see Kaggle grandmasters on these other competitions.
\nThe competition topic and its data are not at stake. It really is why would people invest time there rather than on featured competitions.
\nAs a host I would see if it was possible to award points and medals, even if there was no prize money.
", "rawMarkdown": "These look great but they do not award points nor medals. Given the amount of work top kagglers invest when competing they focus where there is some rewards, i.e. medals (and prizes for happy few ones). It is why you don't see Kaggle grandmasters on these other competitions.\n\nThe competition topic and its data are not at stake. It really is why would people invest time there rather than on featured competitions. \n\nAs a host I would see if it was possible to award points and medals, even if there was no prize money.", "votes": null }, { "id": "2759459", "postDate": "04/18/2024 17:15:24", "content": "Hi @cpmpml ,
\nThank you for your comment. I'm very glad you shared it with us. I see it a little bit differently. Therefore I have a few questions for you.
\nWhy do people care about points and medals? Isn't scientific contribution much more than some virtual medals? Does the higher number of participants mean you will get a better solution? Does Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?
\nIn CLEF competitions, we seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published. Therefore, we would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.
\nBest,
\nLukas
I think people care about points and medals because that is a measurable means by which we contribute.
", "rawMarkdown": "I think people care about points and medals because that is a measurable means by which we contribute.", "votes": null }, { "id": "2759854", "postDate": "04/19/2024 00:08:39", "content": "I find your post condescending to be honest. I'll answer still given you do not seem to have understood my first response to you. The short answer to your question these questions:
\n\n\nWhy do people care about points and medals?
\n
Indeed. Why are there Olympic games? Why are there scientific prizes like Turing award, Nobel prize, etc? Because some people like honors and recognition.
\nBack to us here, Kaggle medals are hard to get, and collecting them is a recognized way to prove your value as a data scientist or machine learning practitioner. I personally got my current job because I was a top Kaggler (7th at the time of hiring). In that way Kaggle points and medals are very valuable. Working hard to get some kaggle medal makes sense.
\n\n\nwe seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published.
\n
If you think that one can get a top result in a Kaggle competition that way then you should reconsider. Just think about the flaw in you assumption: given anyone can do it, how would one emerge that way. To emerge in front you need to do something no one else has shared. You need to improve over state of the art.
\n\n\nwe would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.
\n
I suggest you read top solutions in any featured competition of your choice and you will see that it advances the state of the art.
\nLet me conclude with this: I got a prize for my note in a previous CLEF conference. Here is the DBLP entry for it:
\n\n\nJean-Francois Puget:
\n
\n STFT Transformers for Bird Song Recognition. CLEF (Working Notes) 2021: 1609-1616
This work was done in a competition that awarded points and medals on Kaggle: Birdclef. I would not have done it if it was not the case.
\nIt so happen that till 2005 I was actively publishing scientific papers in top AI venues like IJCAI, AAAI, etc. I decided to stop because of the bias in peer reviews. I find Kaggle to be much more reliable and rewarding because it evaluates contributions without human intervention.
\nBut that's me, and only me. I am sure you can find other people who are so motivated by scientific contribution that they accept to do it for free without any valuable recognition. Maybe they are paid to make scientific discoveries. Kagglers are not paid to compete.
", "rawMarkdown": "I find your post condescending to be honest. I'll answer still given you do not seem to have understood my first response to you. The short answer to your question these questions: \n- Why would people spend time and money on your competition? \n- What do you give them in return for their hard work?\n\n> Why do people care about points and medals?\n\nIndeed. Why are there Olympic games? Why are there scientific prizes like Turing award, Nobel prize, etc? Because some people like honors and recognition.\n\nBack to us here, Kaggle medals are hard to get, and collecting them is a recognized way to prove your value as a data scientist or machine learning practitioner. I personally got my current job because I was a top Kaggler (7th at the time of hiring). In that way Kaggle points and medals are very valuable. Working hard to get some kaggle medal makes sense. \n\n> we seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published.\n\nIf you think that one can get a top result in a Kaggle competition that way then you should reconsider. Just think about the flaw in you assumption: given anyone can do it, how would one emerge that way. To emerge in front you need to do something no one else has shared. You need to improve over state of the art.\n\n> we would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.\n\nI suggest you read top solutions in any featured competition of your choice and you will see that it advances the state of the art.\n\nLet me conclude with this: I got a prize for my note in a previous CLEF conference. Here is the DBLP entry for it:\n>Jean-Francois Puget:\n> STFT Transformers for Bird Song Recognition. CLEF (Working Notes) 2021: 1609-1616\n\nThis work was done in a competition that awarded points and medals on Kaggle: Birdclef. I would not have done it if it was not the case.\n\nIt so happen that till 2005 I was actively publishing scientific papers in top AI venues like IJCAI, AAAI, etc. I decided to stop because of the bias in peer reviews. I find Kaggle to be much more reliable and rewarding because it evaluates contributions without human intervention.\n\nBut that's me, and only me. I am sure you can find other people who are so motivated by scientific contribution that they accept to do it for free without any valuable recognition. Maybe they are paid to make scientific discoveries. Kagglers are not paid to compete.", "votes": null }, { "id": "2760131", "postDate": "04/19/2024 06:01:32", "content": "A large portion of grandmasters have academic background and a PhD. Now why is that? Because you need the scientific focus to do well in kaggle competitions (at least in those with thousands of participants, i.e. with medals and points). Everybody can copy-paste a notebook, or even copy paste ideas from papers and related githubs. So in order to do well in a competition, and to beat hundreds of others, you need to improve upon the existing. And grandmasters are a subgroup of kaggle users who have proven multiple times to be capable of exactly that.
\n\n\nDoes Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?
\n
Thats why they are grandmasters, because they produced a better solution than the rest on several occasions.
", "rawMarkdown": "A large portion of grandmasters have academic background and a PhD. Now why is that? Because you need the scientific focus to do well in kaggle competitions (at least in those with thousands of participants, i.e. with medals and points). Everybody can copy-paste a notebook, or even copy paste ideas from papers and related githubs. So in order to do well in a competition, and to beat hundreds of others, you need to improve upon the existing. And grandmasters are a subgroup of kaggle users who have proven multiple times to be capable of exactly that. \n\n>Does Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?\n\nThats why they are grandmasters, because they produced a better solution than the rest on several occasions.", "votes": null }, { "id": "2760784", "postDate": "04/19/2024 13:43:37", "content": "Hi there,
\nFirst and foremost, I want to sincerely apologize if my previous post came across as condescending. It was never my intention to offend or hurt anyone. I was simply in a hurry and didn't consider the potential impact of my words. I hope you can understand that it was not a personal attack, and I'm truly sorry if it was taken that way.
\nAnyway, thank you for your perspective. It definitely helped me understand how Kagglers perceive competitions. We cannot do much about the medals/points as Kaggle makes the decision. As an experienced Kaggler, you might know what Featured competition means you must pay. Even though there are \"grants,\" they are not easy to get, and there is not a guarantee you will have \"medals\". For example, the GeolifeCLEF 2022 received a grant to be \"featured,\" but no medals/points were given. To be honest, it would be great to have all the competitions featured. But it is not easy to get sponsors; maybe NVIDIA could sponsor some of our competitions? :)
\nIt's crucial to recognize and appreciate the fact that many competition organizers host competitions in their free time purely out of a desire to provide the community with interesting problems to solve. This voluntary effort is a testament to the community spirit that drives Kaggle, and we should all be grateful for it.
\nIf I understood that correctly, you are getting paid solely to participate in competitions. What would you say to someone who argues that Grand Masters (paid for participating in competitions) are not interested in research competitions as they do not get medals, even though they do not have such a big need for it? They already have their status. Maybe participating in non-research competitions may be valuable for building one's reputation or credibility in the field beyond getting the Kaggle medals. Perhaps we can consider it an equivalent of \"pro bono\" work, where the value lies in the contribution to the community rather than the direct personal rewards?
\nPS: Have a great weekend. Once again, thank you for your comments.
\nBest,
\nLukas
Your last paragraph is still casting us as greedy unethical people.
\nLet me just say that you should lobby to get points and medals for research competition rather than trying to cast a flawed moral judgement on Kaggle GMs. I tried to help you and you make me regret having done it.
", "rawMarkdown": "Your last paragraph is still casting us as greedy unethical people.\n\nLet me just say that you should lobby to get points and medals for research competition rather than trying to cast a flawed moral judgement on Kaggle GMs. I tried to help you and you make me regret having done it.", "votes": null }, { "id": "2763480", "postDate": "04/20/2024 15:07:55", "content": "I spent the past 11 years having zero income. Reason: Not being told what to do is the only way to do meaningful research in ML. My passion is doing ML research, and I intend to do it in the direction I think is worthwhile. I allow nothing to spoil that intention, even if it means not getting a \"normal\" job or not getting paid.
\nFor any ML endeavor, it'll eventually come to a time when you'd need to apply it somewhere.
\nI unapologetically prioritize that \"somewhere\" to be where I can get monetary reward so I can pay my bills, so I can continue doing research in the direction I think is worthwhile without being told what to do.
\nI'm OK with eating instant noodle everyday, but even that has to be bought with money.
", "rawMarkdown": "I spent the past 11 years having zero income. Reason: Not being told what to do is the only way to do meaningful research in ML. My passion is doing ML research, and I intend to do it in the direction I think is worthwhile. I allow nothing to spoil that intention, even if it means not getting a \"normal\" job or not getting paid.\n\nFor any ML endeavor, it'll eventually come to a time when you'd need to apply it somewhere.\n\nI unapologetically prioritize that \"somewhere\" to be where I can get monetary reward so I can pay my bills, so I can continue doing research in the direction I think is worthwhile without being told what to do.\n\nI'm OK with eating instant noodle everyday, but even that has to be bought with money.", "votes": null } ], "comments": [ { "id": 2758381, "author_name": "jattidevapaul", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/18/2024 06:25:58", "content": "Thank you for such good competitions
", "votes": null, "replies": [] }, { "id": 2758735, "author_name": "cpmpml", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/18/2024 10:16:46", "content": "These look great but they do not award points nor medals. Given the amount of work top kagglers invest when competing they focus where there is some rewards, i.e. medals (and prizes for happy few ones). It is why you don't see Kaggle grandmasters on these other competitions.
\nThe competition topic and its data are not at stake. It really is why would people invest time there rather than on featured competitions.
\nAs a host I would see if it was possible to award points and medals, even if there was no prize money.
", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 2759459, "author_name": "picekl", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/18/2024 17:15:24", "content": "Hi @cpmpml ,
\nThank you for your comment. I'm very glad you shared it with us. I see it a little bit differently. Therefore I have a few questions for you.
\nWhy do people care about points and medals? Isn't scientific contribution much more than some virtual medals? Does the higher number of participants mean you will get a better solution? Does Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?
\nIn CLEF competitions, we seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published. Therefore, we would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.
\nBest,
\nLukas
I think people care about points and medals because that is a measurable means by which we contribute.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] }, { "id": 2759854, "author_name": "cpmpml", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/19/2024 00:08:39", "content": "I find your post condescending to be honest. I'll answer still given you do not seem to have understood my first response to you. The short answer to your question these questions:
\n\n\nWhy do people care about points and medals?
\n
Indeed. Why are there Olympic games? Why are there scientific prizes like Turing award, Nobel prize, etc? Because some people like honors and recognition.
\nBack to us here, Kaggle medals are hard to get, and collecting them is a recognized way to prove your value as a data scientist or machine learning practitioner. I personally got my current job because I was a top Kaggler (7th at the time of hiring). In that way Kaggle points and medals are very valuable. Working hard to get some kaggle medal makes sense.
\n\n\nwe seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published.
\n
If you think that one can get a top result in a Kaggle competition that way then you should reconsider. Just think about the flaw in you assumption: given anyone can do it, how would one emerge that way. To emerge in front you need to do something no one else has shared. You need to improve over state of the art.
\n\n\nwe would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.
\n
I suggest you read top solutions in any featured competition of your choice and you will see that it advances the state of the art.
\nLet me conclude with this: I got a prize for my note in a previous CLEF conference. Here is the DBLP entry for it:
\n\n\nJean-Francois Puget:
\n
\n STFT Transformers for Bird Song Recognition. CLEF (Working Notes) 2021: 1609-1616
This work was done in a competition that awarded points and medals on Kaggle: Birdclef. I would not have done it if it was not the case.
\nIt so happen that till 2005 I was actively publishing scientific papers in top AI venues like IJCAI, AAAI, etc. I decided to stop because of the bias in peer reviews. I find Kaggle to be much more reliable and rewarding because it evaluates contributions without human intervention.
\nBut that's me, and only me. I am sure you can find other people who are so motivated by scientific contribution that they accept to do it for free without any valuable recognition. Maybe they are paid to make scientific discoveries. Kagglers are not paid to compete.
", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 2760784, "author_name": "picekl", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/19/2024 13:43:37", "content": "Hi there,
\nFirst and foremost, I want to sincerely apologize if my previous post came across as condescending. It was never my intention to offend or hurt anyone. I was simply in a hurry and didn't consider the potential impact of my words. I hope you can understand that it was not a personal attack, and I'm truly sorry if it was taken that way.
\nAnyway, thank you for your perspective. It definitely helped me understand how Kagglers perceive competitions. We cannot do much about the medals/points as Kaggle makes the decision. As an experienced Kaggler, you might know what Featured competition means you must pay. Even though there are \"grants,\" they are not easy to get, and there is not a guarantee you will have \"medals\". For example, the GeolifeCLEF 2022 received a grant to be \"featured,\" but no medals/points were given. To be honest, it would be great to have all the competitions featured. But it is not easy to get sponsors; maybe NVIDIA could sponsor some of our competitions? :)
\nIt's crucial to recognize and appreciate the fact that many competition organizers host competitions in their free time purely out of a desire to provide the community with interesting problems to solve. This voluntary effort is a testament to the community spirit that drives Kaggle, and we should all be grateful for it.
\nIf I understood that correctly, you are getting paid solely to participate in competitions. What would you say to someone who argues that Grand Masters (paid for participating in competitions) are not interested in research competitions as they do not get medals, even though they do not have such a big need for it? They already have their status. Maybe participating in non-research competitions may be valuable for building one's reputation or credibility in the field beyond getting the Kaggle medals. Perhaps we can consider it an equivalent of \"pro bono\" work, where the value lies in the contribution to the community rather than the direct personal rewards?
\nPS: Have a great weekend. Once again, thank you for your comments.
\nBest,
\nLukas
Your last paragraph is still casting us as greedy unethical people.
\nLet me just say that you should lobby to get points and medals for research competition rather than trying to cast a flawed moral judgement on Kaggle GMs. I tried to help you and you make me regret having done it.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] }, { "id": 2763480, "author_name": "revealer", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/20/2024 15:07:55", "content": "I spent the past 11 years having zero income. Reason: Not being told what to do is the only way to do meaningful research in ML. My passion is doing ML research, and I intend to do it in the direction I think is worthwhile. I allow nothing to spoil that intention, even if it means not getting a \"normal\" job or not getting paid.
\nFor any ML endeavor, it'll eventually come to a time when you'd need to apply it somewhere.
\nI unapologetically prioritize that \"somewhere\" to be where I can get monetary reward so I can pay my bills, so I can continue doing research in the direction I think is worthwhile without being told what to do.
\nI'm OK with eating instant noodle everyday, but even that has to be bought with money.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ] } ] }, { "id": 2760131, "author_name": "christofhenkel", "author_url": "", "post_date": "04/19/2024 06:01:32", "content": "A large portion of grandmasters have academic background and a PhD. Now why is that? Because you need the scientific focus to do well in kaggle competitions (at least in those with thousands of participants, i.e. with medals and points). Everybody can copy-paste a notebook, or even copy paste ideas from papers and related githubs. So in order to do well in a competition, and to beat hundreds of others, you need to improve upon the existing. And grandmasters are a subgroup of kaggle users who have proven multiple times to be capable of exactly that.
\n\n\nDoes Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?
\n
Thats why they are grandmasters, because they produced a better solution than the rest on several occasions.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ] } ] } ], "raw_markdown_by_id": { "2757227": "Hi everyone,\n\nWe would like to inform you that the BirdCLEF2024 competition is part of an exciting set of competitions affiliated with the LifeCLEF and the 11th Workshop on Fine-Grained Visual Categorization [CVPR 2024]. The majority of these other competitions are also hosted on Kaggle. Many of them have similar data formats to make it as easy as possible for interested competitors to try their hand at multiple different competitions!\n\nYou can find the full list of competitions here:\n- [LifeCLEF](https://www.imageclef.org/LifeCLEF2024)\n- [FGVC11](https://sites.google.com/view/fgvc11/competitions)\n\nHave fun!\n\nOn behalf of the LifeCLEF and FGVC organization committees.\nLukas", "2758381": "Thank you for such good competitions", "2758735": "These look great but they do not award points nor medals. Given the amount of work top kagglers invest when competing they focus where there is some rewards, i.e. medals (and prizes for happy few ones). It is why you don't see Kaggle grandmasters on these other competitions.\n\nThe competition topic and its data are not at stake. It really is why would people invest time there rather than on featured competitions. \n\nAs a host I would see if it was possible to award points and medals, even if there was no prize money.", "2759459": "Hi @cpmpml , \n\nThank you for your comment. I'm very glad you shared it with us. I see it a little bit differently. Therefore I have a few questions for you.\n\nWhy do people care about points and medals? Isn't scientific contribution much more than some virtual medals? Does the higher number of participants mean you will get a better solution? Does Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?\n\nIn CLEF competitions, we seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published. Therefore, we would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.\n\nBest,\nLukas", "2759542": "I think people care about points and medals because that is a measurable means by which we contribute.", "2759854": "I find your post condescending to be honest. I'll answer still given you do not seem to have understood my first response to you. The short answer to your question these questions: \n- Why would people spend time and money on your competition? \n- What do you give them in return for their hard work?\n\n> Why do people care about points and medals?\n\nIndeed. Why are there Olympic games? Why are there scientific prizes like Turing award, Nobel prize, etc? Because some people like honors and recognition.\n\nBack to us here, Kaggle medals are hard to get, and collecting them is a recognized way to prove your value as a data scientist or machine learning practitioner. I personally got my current job because I was a top Kaggler (7th at the time of hiring). In that way Kaggle points and medals are very valuable. Working hard to get some kaggle medal makes sense. \n\n> we seek teams that submit a technical report / paper rather than people that submit a copy-pasted notebook that someone else published.\n\nIf you think that one can get a top result in a Kaggle competition that way then you should reconsider. Just think about the flaw in you assumption: given anyone can do it, how would one emerge that way. To emerge in front you need to do something no one else has shared. You need to improve over state of the art.\n\n> we would rather have fewer participants with a more-less scientific focus and evaluating novel ideas.\n\nI suggest you read top solutions in any featured competition of your choice and you will see that it advances the state of the art.\n\nLet me conclude with this: I got a prize for my note in a previous CLEF conference. Here is the DBLP entry for it:\n>Jean-Francois Puget:\n> STFT Transformers for Bird Song Recognition. CLEF (Working Notes) 2021: 1609-1616\n\nThis work was done in a competition that awarded points and medals on Kaggle: Birdclef. I would not have done it if it was not the case.\n\nIt so happen that till 2005 I was actively publishing scientific papers in top AI venues like IJCAI, AAAI, etc. I decided to stop because of the bias in peer reviews. I find Kaggle to be much more reliable and rewarding because it evaluates contributions without human intervention.\n\nBut that's me, and only me. I am sure you can find other people who are so motivated by scientific contribution that they accept to do it for free without any valuable recognition. Maybe they are paid to make scientific discoveries. Kagglers are not paid to compete.", "2760131": "A large portion of grandmasters have academic background and a PhD. Now why is that? Because you need the scientific focus to do well in kaggle competitions (at least in those with thousands of participants, i.e. with medals and points). Everybody can copy-paste a notebook, or even copy paste ideas from papers and related githubs. So in order to do well in a competition, and to beat hundreds of others, you need to improve upon the existing. And grandmasters are a subgroup of kaggle users who have proven multiple times to be capable of exactly that. \n\n>Does Kaggle Grandmaster participation mean you will get a better solution?\n\nThats why they are grandmasters, because they produced a better solution than the rest on several occasions.", "2760784": "Hi there, \n\nFirst and foremost, I want to sincerely apologize if my previous post came across as condescending. It was never my intention to offend or hurt anyone. I was simply in a hurry and didn't consider the potential impact of my words. I hope you can understand that it was not a personal attack, and I'm truly sorry if it was taken that way. \n\nAnyway, thank you for your perspective. It definitely helped me understand how Kagglers perceive competitions. We cannot do much about the medals/points as Kaggle makes the decision. As an experienced Kaggler, you might know what Featured competition means you must pay. Even though there are \"grants,\" they are not easy to get, and there is not a guarantee you will have \"medals\". For example, the [GeolifeCLEF 2022](https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/geolifeclef-2022-lifeclef-2022-fgvc9) received a grant to be \"featured,\" but no medals/points were given. To be honest, it would be great to have all the competitions featured. But it is not easy to get sponsors; maybe NVIDIA could sponsor some of our competitions? :)\n\nIt's crucial to recognize and appreciate the fact that many competition organizers host competitions in their free time purely out of a desire to provide the community with interesting problems to solve. This voluntary effort is a testament to the community spirit that drives Kaggle, and we should all be grateful for it. \n\nIf I understood that correctly, you are getting paid solely to participate in competitions. What would you say to someone who argues that Grand Masters (paid for participating in competitions) are not interested in research competitions as they do not get medals, even though they do not have such a big need for it? They already have their status. Maybe participating in non-research competitions may be valuable for building one's reputation or credibility in the field beyond getting the Kaggle medals. Perhaps we can consider it an equivalent of \"pro bono\" work, where the value lies in the contribution to the community rather than the direct personal rewards?\n\nPS: Have a great weekend. Once again, thank you for your comments. \n\nBest,\nLukas", "2760878": "Your last paragraph is still casting us as greedy unethical people.\n\nLet me just say that you should lobby to get points and medals for research competition rather than trying to cast a flawed moral judgement on Kaggle GMs. I tried to help you and you make me regret having done it.", "2763480": "I spent the past 11 years having zero income. Reason: Not being told what to do is the only way to do meaningful research in ML. My passion is doing ML research, and I intend to do it in the direction I think is worthwhile. I allow nothing to spoil that intention, even if it means not getting a \"normal\" job or not getting paid.\n\nFor any ML endeavor, it'll eventually come to a time when you'd need to apply it somewhere.\n\nI unapologetically prioritize that \"somewhere\" to be where I can get monetary reward so I can pay my bills, so I can continue doing research in the direction I think is worthwhile without being told what to do.\n\nI'm OK with eating instant noodle everyday, but even that has to be bought with money." }, "source": "meta" }