<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Is AmI (Attacks Meet Interpretability) Robust to Adversarial Examples? · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.02322/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.02322/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Is AmI (Attacks Meet Interpretability) Robust to Adversarial Examples? — mentioned by Imnimo</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25321000</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1902.02322:25321000</guid><pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2020 04:19:22 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;If you enjoy reading Carlini tear into papers, also check out the following: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.08347.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.02322.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.03286.pdf He definitely doesn&amp;#x27;t mince words, but it&amp;#x27;s hard to be mad when he always makes very valid points. And I say that as a secondary author on one the criticized methods (not InstaHide).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.02322/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
