I agree. While I give them my emotional support ("Go, go, go!"), I can't be too excited until the mod is finished and released. Showing a trailer is nice and all, but if I can't play it, then the trailer is just a tease.
I'll second Duda and Hart, though I guess it's Duda, Hart, and Stork now.
It's probably the most widely used pattern classification book that I've seen, and covers most of the techniques that you'll find. The coverage of neural networks is limited to Backprop though, so you'll need to look elsewhere for more in-depth on those.
If you want something cool with multidimensional data, do something with GGobi [http://www.ggobi.org/]
Re:Halfway through the book, and ...
on
Anathem
·
· Score: 1
De gustibus non est disputandum.
I loved Cryptonomicon, since I didn't know that stuff, and it made a (to me) dry subject interesting.
What's interesting to me is that in Stephenson's books there's lots of story lines, and you just don't know until the end which ones are going to be tied up (in some weird / interesting way) and which ones will leave you going 'wtf'?
...including the Slingshot water purifer that Stephen Colbert made famous but that no one has actually bought yet
Unfortunately philanthropy won't ever take off unless it's profitable. Just an inherit part of human greed.
So, how do you make his things profitable? The water purification process seems pretty good, but there's a serious problem getting it to market.
Seems like the best way to do it is to make it profitable for the little stores, which means that they need to be able to get the device and power and maintain it for less than they can make selling the water. Maybe through microloans or something like that.
The real difficult part here is the maintenance and energy costs. If he really wanted to get it everywhere, the thing to do is to design it such that it could be built and maintained in a poor place, then give the plans away, so that small entrepreneurs could make them to sell to the small stores. And then he'd do the same with a cheap, efficient Stirling engine to power it.
Or not. There is a wide diversity of people on this planet. Some of them can legitimately and sanely say that they are willing to take very high risk (i.e. likely death), high reward (known for all time as first person on mars) opportunities. They exist in the military (esp. special ops) and emergency response teams already. Can't say that their personal lives are all that great, but they love what they are doing.
Recently, there was a biography of Roald Dahl (author of James and the Giant Peach). When he was younger he was in an RAF in a squadron that suffered massive casualties. He and his comrades kept going up even though they knew there was a very good chance of them dying on each mission. Was he insane? No, he just made a decision that risking his life was worth it. People in the military do that sort of thing.
No, I wouldn't do it. But some people would and they get the opportunity to become famous (or dead trying), and accept the chance happily.
Hm....the drop could evaporate, then leave the atmosphere, so it doesn't need to eventually 'get there' where 'there' is the ocean. The molecules could chemically react with something else, become solid, and never become part of the ocean.
Yes, I'm being pedantic. But the underlying point is that you don't know what's going to happen in a system as complex as the planet.
Further, when it comes to the universe we have no idea what the underlying rules for its creation are, so we would have no idea what the paths for possible outcomes are.
Why the hell do people always choose the most extreme examples? Couldn't you just have gone with smoking weed in Amsterdam or something? Anyways, in germany ALL laws 'carry' like this but the actual reason is that your government thinks it *owns* your ass. There is NO reason why a country should consider their laws worth squad outside their borders...
We use extreme examples because they clarify the principles involved and separate out the emotional attachment to a particular outcome.
Look, if a principle means that a rapist goes to jail, then emotionally you will like that principle. It if means that a known rapist walks, then you will emotionally oppose it. It is only when you can agree to the principle when it does something that you don't like that you really believe in it.
Its adherence to the principles that make us a nation of laws, not of men. To take a non-random example, I like the idea of spying on the 'bad guys', but you can't have warrant-less wiretapping. Even if it means that some of the bad guys get away. because the principle underlying illegal search and seizure takes precedence.
Why on earth (or whatever planet you live on) would this be good for creationists? It's good science, and indicates significant progress in astronomy. Of course, they don't count any data as against them but I can't imagine how that would help them.
As a father of a 6 year old, that should not be a big concern.
First, you can't do that much damage to the house with a soldering iron. Yes, you can burn your name into a piece of wood / wall / table / etc, but if you have a work room then it's not a big deal.
Second, the parent should be working with the kid when learning and the child can wear gloves to reduce burns. Burning himself is something that he will quickly learn not to do. Yes, there will likely be some slight injury, but nothing that bad. Really, parents need to let the kids try stuff out in a relatively (but not completely) safe environment.
It's like learning to skateboard or ride a bike. They are going to fall down and hurt themselves. So, get them some protective gear to prevent major injury, kiss the boo-boos, and get over it.
Damn, and me with no mod points. Someone please mod this up. It is a good example of the neat sort of thing that you can do with emacs.
Since I use Eclipse a lot, I don't use emacs nearly as much as I used to, but there are somethings that emacs just makes easier. One of them is performing a complicated command many times over. I copy from Eclipse, paste in emacs, do a C-x (, do what I need it to do, C-x ), and then C-u 10000 C-x e. Then, copy and paste it back into Eclipse. Saves lots and lots of time.
Here's something I have in my.emacs:
;;-- ;; This will count the number of words in a highlighted region ;;--
I would like to think I could expect honesty. I could expect that the candidates get up in front of the nation in their debates and on their websites and say "Hey, things are looking dire. I'm not going to bullshit you, you're going to go through some rough times if things are going to be rectified..."
Is that too much to ask? Instead we've been offered hope and Joe Sixpack bought it up. Even if Obama does relatively well he's going to have a hard time holding office in 4 years because, frankly, he lied to the American people. Last night was the first time I've heard the man talk sacrifice. Sacrifice should have been his catch word all along. This is going to be used against him in his next run and even if the Republican, that will be likely to be elected, has our best intentions in mind it's going to slow progress as all transitions of that nature do.
No. We've been lead astray by both of the big party candidates. We should have been looked in the eye and told that even in the best case scenario there was going to be hell to pay. Instead we have a nation of people expecting the skies to open up and manna to rain from the heavens on January 21st 2009. They're in for some tough times...
Both of the candidates have said, on multiple occasions, that things are going to be difficult, while trying to maintain a positive attitude. From the victory speech last night:
"For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us. There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wonder how theyll make the mortgage, or pay their doctors bills, or save enough for college. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair.
The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who wont agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government cant solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way its been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."
Yes, we are in rough times, they are going to be bad for a while, but at least we've decided to stop digging ourselves deeper.
The best I can hope for is that Obama does what he did while running the law review - get the best people to do the job and not just those who agree with his ideology.
This is my hope as well.
If his campaign is any indication, then things will, at least, go smoothly. There wasn't any back stabbing, 'rogue' behavior, or massively underhanded tactics by the campaign. It is, I'm really hoping, a return to meritocracy, a return to competence. There seems to be (IMHO) way too much emphasis by the Republicans on brain-dead "loyalty" over a simple ability to get the day-to-day work done. Combined with a sheer anti-intellectualism by much of the right-wing base, it's just scary.
It seemed to me that on the campaign trail Obama was level-headed, thoughtful, and restrained. Here's hoping that his presidency is the same.
for an organization the size of the air force, and with the mandate it has, there is nothing laughable or overly ambitious about say, creating and implementing your own supersecure protocol, and supporting it within its subnet
and, if successful, watch it leave its military surroundings, be adapted by universities, then corporations, then the general public
The general public will never adopt a protocol which removes the freedom of the internet from the internet at the behest of government and corporate fatcats.
Which general public? The Chinese general public have already done so, and didn't have much choice about it. A number of Muslim countries have restrictions on what parts of the internet can be viewed (i.e. they insult Islam) so that general public has lost the freedom of the internet. In Germany and other parts of Europe, you can't buy certain items on the internet because they have certain symbols on them. It really looks like Australia and the U.K. are instituting limits that take away parts of the internet.
Sites block people from certain addresses, and countries block things like the Pirate Bay.
The general public has already lost much of the freedom of the internet. Further, 99% of the general public has no idea what a protocol is, and won't notice when it changes. Face it, we've already lost.
Living outside of D.C., I assure you that people complain about the crimes about the administration all the time. (And they screw up traffic). Want to complain? Try (random Google search):
or any of the other of hundreds of protests for everything under the sun. And counter-protests for the protesters, and counter-counter-protesters. Ad nauseum.
Yes, you have to organize and it has to be peaceful, but they happen all the stinking time. There's not many people listening, to be honest we people who live here are protested-out, but the media will be there to cover you. If you try to stop people from going about their business, yes, you will be arrested, as your protest does not give you the right to prevent other people from ignoring you. But, go right ahead and protest.
Here, let's test it: The Bush Administration Sucks! [waits.... waits... nope, nobody coming to take me away]. You are simply wrong.
In what way was the access illegal? Honestly, I'm wondering because it seems to Fair Use to me and nobody says why it isn't.
Providing the entire work would be illegal. Quoting a small part would be legal. Providing some of the work could be either legal or illegal. Which was it, and why?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. While I give them my emotional support ("Go, go, go!"), I can't be too excited until the mod is finished and released. Showing a trailer is nice and all, but if I can't play it, then the trailer is just a tease.
I'll second Duda and Hart, though I guess it's Duda, Hart, and Stork now.
It's probably the most widely used pattern classification book that I've seen, and covers most of the techniques that you'll find. The coverage of neural networks is limited to Backprop though, so you'll need to look elsewhere for more in-depth on those.
If you want something cool with multidimensional data, do something with GGobi [http://www.ggobi.org/]
De gustibus non est disputandum.
I loved Cryptonomicon, since I didn't know that stuff, and it made a (to me) dry subject interesting.
What's interesting to me is that in Stephenson's books there's lots of story lines, and you just don't know until the end which ones are going to be tied up (in some weird / interesting way) and which ones will leave you going 'wtf'?
...including the Slingshot water purifer that Stephen Colbert made famous but that no one has actually bought yet
Unfortunately philanthropy won't ever take off unless it's profitable. Just an inherit part of human greed.
So, how do you make his things profitable? The water purification process seems pretty good, but there's a serious problem getting it to market.
Seems like the best way to do it is to make it profitable for the little stores, which means that they need to be able to get the device and power and maintain it for less than they can make selling the water. Maybe through microloans or something like that.
The real difficult part here is the maintenance and energy costs. If he really wanted to get it everywhere, the thing to do is to design it such that it could be built and maintained in a poor place, then give the plans away, so that small entrepreneurs could make them to sell to the small stores. And then he'd do the same with a cheap, efficient Stirling engine to power it.
Or not. There is a wide diversity of people on this planet. Some of them can legitimately and sanely say that they are willing to take very high risk (i.e. likely death), high reward (known for all time as first person on mars) opportunities. They exist in the military (esp. special ops) and emergency response teams already. Can't say that their personal lives are all that great, but they love what they are doing.
Recently, there was a biography of Roald Dahl (author of James and the Giant Peach). When he was younger he was in an RAF in a squadron that suffered massive casualties. He and his comrades kept going up even though they knew there was a very good chance of them dying on each mission. Was he insane? No, he just made a decision that risking his life was worth it. People in the military do that sort of thing.
No, I wouldn't do it. But some people would and they get the opportunity to become famous (or dead trying), and accept the chance happily.
Hm....the drop could evaporate, then leave the atmosphere, so it doesn't need to eventually 'get there' where 'there' is the ocean. The molecules could chemically react with something else, become solid, and never become part of the ocean.
Yes, I'm being pedantic. But the underlying point is that you don't know what's going to happen in a system as complex as the planet.
Further, when it comes to the universe we have no idea what the underlying rules for its creation are, so we would have no idea what the paths for possible outcomes are.
Why the hell do people always choose the most extreme examples? Couldn't you just have gone with smoking weed in Amsterdam or something? Anyways, in germany ALL laws 'carry' like this but the actual reason is that your government thinks it *owns* your ass. There is NO reason why a country should consider their laws worth squad outside their borders ...
We use extreme examples because they clarify the principles involved and separate out the emotional attachment to a particular outcome.
Look, if a principle means that a rapist goes to jail, then emotionally you will like that principle. It if means that a known rapist walks, then you will emotionally oppose it. It is only when you can agree to the principle when it does something that you don't like that you really believe in it.
Its adherence to the principles that make us a nation of laws, not of men. To take a non-random example, I like the idea of spying on the 'bad guys', but you can't have warrant-less wiretapping. Even if it means that some of the bad guys get away. because the principle underlying illegal search and seizure takes precedence.
Dude, we don't have that for all the planets in our own Solar System.
Why on earth (or whatever planet you live on) would this be good for creationists? It's good science, and indicates significant progress in astronomy. Of course, they don't count any data as against them but I can't imagine how that would help them.
As a father of a 6 year old, that should not be a big concern.
First, you can't do that much damage to the house with a soldering iron. Yes, you can burn your name into a piece of wood / wall / table / etc, but if you have a work room then it's not a big deal.
Second, the parent should be working with the kid when learning and the child can wear gloves to reduce burns. Burning himself is something that he will quickly learn not to do. Yes, there will likely be some slight injury, but nothing that bad. Really, parents need to let the kids try stuff out in a relatively (but not completely) safe environment.
It's like learning to skateboard or ride a bike. They are going to fall down and hurt themselves. So, get them some protective gear to prevent major injury, kiss the boo-boos, and get over it.
What? Is prostitution really legal in RI? Do you have a reference for that? What's the tax rate? How is health maintained? Do you have to be licensed?
In Nevada, there's lots of rules. What are the rules for RI?
How do you see the keyboard recording?
Damn, and me with no mod points. Someone please mod this up. It is a good example of the neat sort of thing that you can do with emacs.
Since I use Eclipse a lot, I don't use emacs nearly as much as I used to, but there are somethings that emacs just makes easier. One of them is performing a complicated command many times over. I copy from Eclipse, paste in emacs, do a C-x (, do what I need it to do, C-x ), and then C-u 10000 C-x e. Then, copy and paste it back into Eclipse. Saves lots and lots of time.
Here's something I have in my .emacs:
(global-set-key "\C-x5c" 'word-count )
(defun word-count (start end)
(interactive "r")
(let ((words 0) (lines 0) (chars 0))
(save-excursion
(goto-char start)
(while ( (point) end) (forward-word 1) (setq words (1+ words))))
(setq lines (count-lines start end) chars (- end start))
(message "Region has %d lines; %d words; %d characters."
lines words chars)))
So does 'sdiff'
Wait until 2011. You will get more sketches about Palin. Far more than you probably want.
I would like to think I could expect honesty. I could expect that the candidates get up in front of the nation in their debates and on their websites and say "Hey, things are looking dire. I'm not going to bullshit you, you're going to go through some rough times if things are going to be rectified..."
Is that too much to ask? Instead we've been offered hope and Joe Sixpack bought it up. Even if Obama does relatively well he's going to have a hard time holding office in 4 years because, frankly, he lied to the American people. Last night was the first time I've heard the man talk sacrifice. Sacrifice should have been his catch word all along. This is going to be used against him in his next run and even if the Republican, that will be likely to be elected, has our best intentions in mind it's going to slow progress as all transitions of that nature do.
No. We've been lead astray by both of the big party candidates. We should have been looked in the eye and told that even in the best case scenario there was going to be hell to pay. Instead we have a nation of people expecting the skies to open up and manna to rain from the heavens on January 21st 2009. They're in for some tough times...
Both of the candidates have said, on multiple occasions, that things are going to be difficult, while trying to maintain a positive attitude. From the victory speech last night:
"For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us. There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wonder how theyll make the mortgage, or pay their doctors bills, or save enough for college. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair.
The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who wont agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government cant solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way its been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."
Yes, we are in rough times, they are going to be bad for a while, but at least we've decided to stop digging ourselves deeper.
My wife asked me what I thought that MLK would say to Obama if King was still alive. I said "Duck!". She hit me.
The best I can hope for is that Obama does what he did while running the law review - get the best people to do the job and not just those who agree with his ideology.
This is my hope as well.
If his campaign is any indication, then things will, at least, go smoothly. There wasn't any back stabbing, 'rogue' behavior, or massively underhanded tactics by the campaign. It is, I'm really hoping, a return to meritocracy, a return to competence. There seems to be (IMHO) way too much emphasis by the Republicans on brain-dead "loyalty" over a simple ability to get the day-to-day work done. Combined with a sheer anti-intellectualism by much of the right-wing base, it's just scary.
It seemed to me that on the campaign trail Obama was level-headed, thoughtful, and restrained. Here's hoping that his presidency is the same.
All hail simple competence!
for an organization the size of the air force, and with the mandate it has, there is nothing laughable or overly ambitious about say, creating and implementing your own supersecure protocol, and supporting it within its subnet
and, if successful, watch it leave its military surroundings, be adapted by universities, then corporations, then the general public
The general public will never adopt a protocol which removes the freedom of the internet from the internet at the behest of government and corporate fatcats.
Which general public? The Chinese general public have already done so, and didn't have much choice about it. A number of Muslim countries have restrictions on what parts of the internet can be viewed (i.e. they insult Islam) so that general public has lost the freedom of the internet. In Germany and other parts of Europe, you can't buy certain items on the internet because they have certain symbols on them. It really looks like Australia and the U.K. are instituting limits that take away parts of the internet.
Sites block people from certain addresses, and countries block things like the Pirate Bay.
The general public has already lost much of the freedom of the internet. Further, 99% of the general public has no idea what a protocol is, and won't notice when it changes. Face it, we've already lost.
Some of the strands of spaghetti are in knots?
Perhaps that's heresy.
Ewwww.....
Well, no, that's bullshit.
Living outside of D.C., I assure you that people complain about the crimes about the administration all the time. (And they screw up traffic). Want to complain? Try (random Google search):
http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ANS_homepage
or
http://media.www.dailyorange.com/media/storage/paper522/news/2007/01/29/News/Iraq-War.Peace.Rallies.Washington.D.c.Syracuse.Joins.Celebrities.To.Protest.Bu-2682704.shtml
or any of the other of hundreds of protests for everything under the sun. And counter-protests for the protesters, and counter-counter-protesters. Ad nauseum.
Yes, you have to organize and it has to be peaceful, but they happen all the stinking time. There's not many people listening, to be honest we people who live here are protested-out, but the media will be there to cover you. If you try to stop people from going about their business, yes, you will be arrested, as your protest does not give you the right to prevent other people from ignoring you. But, go right ahead and protest.
Here, let's test it: The Bush Administration Sucks! [waits .... waits ... nope, nobody coming to take me away]. You are simply wrong.
National Security Letters
In what way was the access illegal? Honestly, I'm wondering because it seems to Fair Use to me and nobody says why it isn't.
Providing the entire work would be illegal. Quoting a small part would be legal. Providing some of the work could be either legal or illegal. Which was it, and why?