...so to be denied tenure at 35, after having spent 19 years working for it, means you started gradschool at, um, 16 years old?
Hmmm. Maybe math skills would be useful at Slashdot too.
Looks like NebuAd isn't just eavesdropping on user behavior, but actively creating fake traffic:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/23/topolski_takes_on_nebuad/
As if the Post Office were not only to read your mail, but to rewrite it for you on the sly. That's beyond Orwellian.
I worked in visual brain research for years, and can vouch there are lots of skeletons in the closet, or elephants in the drawing room: there is no accepted model of the statistics of real images (corners, occlusion, shading), nor of the algorithms necessary to infer them from inputs, nor of the learning process to infer those algorithms. Yes the brain is parallel, and yes it involves robust, fuzzy processing and analog values, but we not only don't know how the brain does it, we don't even know what problem it's trying to solve.
The good news is that if this student does indeed have a business model and a real-world problem people will pay to solve, then the ratchet of engineering evolution could give us some real traction into understanding and solving this mystery. Good luck!
I read a couple years back that True.com is pushing state legislatures to adopt such bills as a boost to their own business model (and a hindrance to their competitors). Anyone know if this is the case here?
Slashdot Mirror
...so to be denied tenure at 35, after having spent 19 years working for it, means you started gradschool at, um, 16 years old? Hmmm. Maybe math skills would be useful at Slashdot too.
Looks like NebuAd isn't just eavesdropping on user behavior, but actively creating fake traffic: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/23/topolski_takes_on_nebuad/ As if the Post Office were not only to read your mail, but to rewrite it for you on the sly. That's beyond Orwellian.
I worked in visual brain research for years, and can vouch there are lots of skeletons in the closet, or elephants in the drawing room: there is no accepted model of the statistics of real images (corners, occlusion, shading), nor of the algorithms necessary to infer them from inputs, nor of the learning process to infer those algorithms. Yes the brain is parallel, and yes it involves robust, fuzzy processing and analog values, but we not only don't know how the brain does it, we don't even know what problem it's trying to solve. The good news is that if this student does indeed have a business model and a real-world problem people will pay to solve, then the ratchet of engineering evolution could give us some real traction into understanding and solving this mystery. Good luck!
I read a couple years back that True.com is pushing state legislatures to adopt such bills as a boost to their own business model (and a hindrance to their competitors). Anyone know if this is the case here?