Right, to you and me, this is where the lines are drawn. But I am talking about the kinds of people that you in Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" segment. The kinds of people who can not be bothered with any in-depth analysis of the topic because they have too much other stuff to deal with. Specifically, is there an issue with "first impressions" setting the tenor of a person's stance?
Let me put it a little bit differently. Is there a general lack of controversy around adult stem cells because of the name? Note, I am referring only to public opinion, which is composed mostly those who are not knowledgeable on the subject and have not thought more than five seconds about the subject. It is a completely different story when we talk about those who actively debate, ponder upon, and inform themselves with information on the topic. Semantic differences are relatively unimportant to them (regardless of their opinion on the matter).
While, I welcome any and all advances in the field of stem cells, I often wonder if the controversy around embryonic stem cells is mostly a product of language. As I understand it, the names "embryonic" and "adult" refers to where in the life-cycle of the stem cell it is in. It does not describe the source of the cells. Notice that even babies can have adult stem cells.
In cloud physics, there is a concept of a embryonic cloud drop. It is merely a label for a cloud droplet at the beginning of its life cycle, before it grows or evaporates.
So, are many people having problems with embryonic stem cells because they believe that it comes from an embryo instead of a zygote? Would public opinion be different if people understood this distinction? Would they care?
Why not use ImageMagick for your converter? They support all sorts of formats and have a powerful command-line arguments that allows you to specify all sorts of conversion options. I am sure they will quickly pick up WebP.
ah, but we all know that python doesn't exist in the land of slashdot. No, they have been replaced by perl scripts. And nobody can figure out how to make it stop!
This is one reason I like Github. So long as people *fork* a repository, Github can then track and network together the individual forks. Github can show you in a graph which repo is getting which patches (and from who) and see how the forks compare with each other in terms of maintenance.
Is it only for certain video cards? I would be curious to see the nouveau drivers support this soon. I have a card that nVidia does not support for CUDA, and I don't know enough about hardware to know if there is an inherent limitation that prevents me from using it for CUDA/OpenCL.
I think you might be mis characterizing a bit. With DRM, a hacker only needs to make a single binary patch and post it onto the web for others to apply. Plus, the DRM doesn't get updated frequently, so the binary patch can probably remain valid for quite a while. Lastly, there is usually some sort of very well-defined goal to achieve for a proper hack of DRM (e.g., flip a bit, apply key, etc.).
For graphics cards, the bugs are more vague and without the proper source code, the root causes are more difficult to find. The problems and goals aren't nearly as well-defined as they are for DRM. In addition, there are plenty of hardware hackers who have found the exact cause of bugs and reported them to the respective companies, only to have them ignored. Maybe the debate between closed vs. open wouldn't be as much of an issue if the companies had a better workflow procedure for external trouble reports?
No, it is AI to me. The reason for calling it intelligence is that the algorithms exhibit a "learning"-like behavior. It is artificial intelligence because it is 1) artificial (I made it), 2) intelligent-like (in the sense that the process exhibits learning).
The unfortunate thing I was referring to is that people seem to misconstrue the "intelligence" in AI to mean that it is supposed to exhibit an intelligence like a life-form, which is not true.
Good point, I hadn't thought of rule-based spam filters as an expert system, but it would fit the bill. I speak mostly from my own experience and research within meteorology. Expert systems became huge when computational resources were becoming more common, but still scarce. One couldn't run a weather model on their research machine, or code one up themselves, but a basic expert system was relatively easier.
I have not to see much in expert systems in meteorology (at least, nothing new) since I entered the field. However, AI systems (as I defined them elsewhere) are a significant field of study in meteorology.
Interesting. So given that this is artificial intelligence, real intelligence is an error minimization problem to maximize chances of success?
How the heck should I know? We have yet to find any real intelligence.
But seriously, I have always thought that AI was an unfortunate name for the field of study because it caused many people to misperceive what it can and can not do. I personally use AI to create useful data models in weather forecasting. I make no pretense that it has anything to do with "real" intelligence and cognitive systems of any life-form.
Russel and Norvig, 2003. Paraphrasing (because I don't have the book with me), AI systems perceives its environment and works to maximize its chances of success. As a matter of technical implementation, this is traditionally framed as an error minimization problem.
Ah, so you didn't head over to the Walker Building on the 5th floor and check out the Meteorology Department's computer lab? Mix of Macs and Linux PCs with Windows available in a VM?
Expert Systems and AI really shouldn't be in the same category. AI is, essentially, smart/clever ways to generically find a minimum/maximum of a function (which can, mathematically, be used for a lot of things). Expert systems were an attempt to mimic some human decision processes by hard-coding "expert knowledge" with a few parameters. In the field of meteorology, expert systems have been largely discarded, while AI systems are still researched and studied.
And, as you train some more, you will find that this is only necessary at the computer level, not the logical level. You can disable root for users and spread out responsibilities across users using a sudoers and ACLs (yes, linux has ACLs like Windows) and such. RedHat is also working on a number of very fine-grained control systems that, while fundamentally still uses the original unix security model, it logically acts a lot more distributed.
plus, it would have been hard to prove the media's contribution to the matter. The student did have other issues in his life that a defense could point to (but what teen-aged boy doesn't?).
I did go back a looked up a couple of extra pieces of information (I won't mention names and such because that would reveal too much of my own personal information). It turns out it did go to trial (but not a jury trial). The student was found not guilty by the judge.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, to you and me, this is where the lines are drawn. But I am talking about the kinds of people that you in Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" segment. The kinds of people who can not be bothered with any in-depth analysis of the topic because they have too much other stuff to deal with. Specifically, is there an issue with "first impressions" setting the tenor of a person's stance?
Let me put it a little bit differently. Is there a general lack of controversy around adult stem cells because of the name? Note, I am referring only to public opinion, which is composed mostly those who are not knowledgeable on the subject and have not thought more than five seconds about the subject. It is a completely different story when we talk about those who actively debate, ponder upon, and inform themselves with information on the topic. Semantic differences are relatively unimportant to them (regardless of their opinion on the matter).
While, I welcome any and all advances in the field of stem cells, I often wonder if the controversy around embryonic stem cells is mostly a product of language. As I understand it, the names "embryonic" and "adult" refers to where in the life-cycle of the stem cell it is in. It does not describe the source of the cells. Notice that even babies can have adult stem cells.
In cloud physics, there is a concept of a embryonic cloud drop. It is merely a label for a cloud droplet at the beginning of its life cycle, before it grows or evaporates.
So, are many people having problems with embryonic stem cells because they believe that it comes from an embryo instead of a zygote? Would public opinion be different if people understood this distinction? Would they care?
Why not use ImageMagick for your converter? They support all sorts of formats and have a powerful command-line arguments that allows you to specify all sorts of conversion options. I am sure they will quickly pick up WebP.
Neelix, is that you?
He said "wonderful" things with vegetables... so, not Neelix.
Normally, I would agree with that sentiment, but then there is LibreOffice coming from OpenOffice.org... so, who knows?
ah, but we all know that python doesn't exist in the land of slashdot. No, they have been replaced by perl scripts. And nobody can figure out how to make it stop!
Dammit, where is the 'hurts brain' moderation?
Well, if you put water on it, I am sure it would short out and drown...
Dude, have you ever had double-decadent chocolate cake? It's so good, but so wrong...
Ula dance again!
Ahhh, much better...
I believe Fedora 13 now has that.
This is one reason I like Github. So long as people *fork* a repository, Github can then track and network together the individual forks. Github can show you in a graph which repo is getting which patches (and from who) and see how the forks compare with each other in terms of maintenance.
Is it only for certain video cards? I would be curious to see the nouveau drivers support this soon. I have a card that nVidia does not support for CUDA, and I don't know enough about hardware to know if there is an inherent limitation that prevents me from using it for CUDA/OpenCL.
I think you might be mis characterizing a bit. With DRM, a hacker only needs to make a single binary patch and post it onto the web for others to apply. Plus, the DRM doesn't get updated frequently, so the binary patch can probably remain valid for quite a while. Lastly, there is usually some sort of very well-defined goal to achieve for a proper hack of DRM (e.g., flip a bit, apply key, etc.).
For graphics cards, the bugs are more vague and without the proper source code, the root causes are more difficult to find. The problems and goals aren't nearly as well-defined as they are for DRM. In addition, there are plenty of hardware hackers who have found the exact cause of bugs and reported them to the respective companies, only to have them ignored. Maybe the debate between closed vs. open wouldn't be as much of an issue if the companies had a better workflow procedure for external trouble reports?
I bow to you, good sir...
No, it is AI to me. The reason for calling it intelligence is that the algorithms exhibit a "learning"-like behavior. It is artificial intelligence because it is 1) artificial (I made it), 2) intelligent-like (in the sense that the process exhibits learning).
The unfortunate thing I was referring to is that people seem to misconstrue the "intelligence" in AI to mean that it is supposed to exhibit an intelligence like a life-form, which is not true.
Good point, I hadn't thought of rule-based spam filters as an expert system, but it would fit the bill. I speak mostly from my own experience and research within meteorology. Expert systems became huge when computational resources were becoming more common, but still scarce. One couldn't run a weather model on their research machine, or code one up themselves, but a basic expert system was relatively easier.
I have not to see much in expert systems in meteorology (at least, nothing new) since I entered the field. However, AI systems (as I defined them elsewhere) are a significant field of study in meteorology.
Interesting. So given that this is artificial intelligence, real intelligence is an error minimization problem to maximize chances of success?
How the heck should I know? We have yet to find any real intelligence.
But seriously, I have always thought that AI was an unfortunate name for the field of study because it caused many people to misperceive what it can and can not do. I personally use AI to create useful data models in weather forecasting. I make no pretense that it has anything to do with "real" intelligence and cognitive systems of any life-form.
Take your trolling elsewhere.
Russel and Norvig, 2003. Paraphrasing (because I don't have the book with me), AI systems perceives its environment and works to maximize its chances of success. As a matter of technical implementation, this is traditionally framed as an error minimization problem.
Sorry, 6th floor...
Ah, so you didn't head over to the Walker Building on the 5th floor and check out the Meteorology Department's computer lab? Mix of Macs and Linux PCs with Windows available in a VM?
Expert Systems and AI really shouldn't be in the same category. AI is, essentially, smart/clever ways to generically find a minimum/maximum of a function (which can, mathematically, be used for a lot of things). Expert systems were an attempt to mimic some human decision processes by hard-coding "expert knowledge" with a few parameters. In the field of meteorology, expert systems have been largely discarded, while AI systems are still researched and studied.
And, as you train some more, you will find that this is only necessary at the computer level, not the logical level. You can disable root for users and spread out responsibilities across users using a sudoers and ACLs (yes, linux has ACLs like Windows) and such. RedHat is also working on a number of very fine-grained control systems that, while fundamentally still uses the original unix security model, it logically acts a lot more distributed.
I did go back a looked up a couple of extra pieces of information (I won't mention names and such because that would reveal too much of my own personal information). It turns out it did go to trial (but not a jury trial). The student was found not guilty by the judge.