Agreed... the publicity for it was low key until the results were out.
Maybe next year. The good news is that the interface between the game engine and the controller is very easy to work with.
Start with the random move example and work up.
mikej
Re:am i the only one who misread it as al-Pacman?
on
AI Takes On Pac-Man
·
· Score: 2
Look I'm the one who submitted it and I read it as AL - as in the Paul Simon song.
So to me it reads - someone called AL is taking on Pac-man..... who is a she anyway,,,, there is no hope....
... The US and the UK are particularly good at draining other countries of already well-educated people, but this doesn't mean that the US or the UK have performed the academic preparation necessary to produce excellent researchers.
Ah but it doesn't alter the location of the centers that are doing well. If you are interested in identifying places that are doing the best/most work then you don't caer if the people doing the work have come from somewhere else!
Yes you are correct that the situation is complicated and yes all browsers are troubled in the same way by not supporting standards but....
WebGL is slightly different as it provides 3D and web developers wanting to take things in a new direction need it to create games and other similar stuff.
All of the major browsers are at least attempting to support WebGL except Microsoft (basically because it would undermine DirectX).
This isn't a failure of implementation its a decision not to implement for competing commercial reasons and it really does mirror the situation with SVG ten years ago.
If Microsoft had got on the SVG bandwagon then, and not wait until 2010, the web would be a very different place today.
Not supporting WebGL is a real problem...
The same think happen back when SVG was introduced and IE not supporting it held back the use of 2D graphics in web pages for 10 years.
Now MS is with SVG in IE9 i.e. 2D graphics but it is repeating history with WebGL and setting back 3D web page graphics in exactly the way it did with 2D!
See the link in the post threat to web development
This isn't a good thing and it might even be a bad thing.
There already is a semi official SDK from PrimeSense the people who made the Kinect hardware for MS - it just needs a tweek to work with the Kinect (an XML file).
They also supply "middleware" to do jobs like body tracking and we have to wait to see what the MS SDK includes.
FInally there is the interesting distinction between the non-comercial and commercial SDK - does this mean that anything I create using the
non-commercial SDK can't be used commerciall and are they going to charge for the commercial SDK and take a cut from any apps that result?
The point is that the semi-official SDK is open source so why bother with the Microsoft SDK with strings attached?
I wrote all this up about a week ago but it was ignored by Slashdoters - shame on you:-)
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/91-hardware/2030-official-kinect-sdk-who-needs-it.html
But it is clear that this is an attempt by MS to take over the Kinect party.
The attachement of these offprints to Turing is far less than any of the artworks to their artists that are being quoted.
This is very different.... these are offprints and Turing simply recieved them in the post and handed them out to people he wanted to read them.
I don' think this is correct. Turing handed them over to Max yes and then Max read them and made notes. This was what happened to offprints.
I don't think that this justifies the cost in any way.
I think Simon Greenish got pushed on the bandwaggon to buy them. It was very difficult and still is to get anyone to actually listen and take a look at what has just been bought.
But to be clear you think some pieces of paper that Turing touched are worth hundreds of thousands of pounds?
If so this is getting close to a religious act...
Keeping in mind that you can view the content of said papers are online and even buy the same offprints on the internet for a few tens of pounds (probably gone up since I first looked due to the crazy prices paid).
No it isn't - they have just bought copies. What is an original of a printed article there are thousands of copies.
Back in the days before the web academics got offprints to send to people who were intereted - they were just extra prints of the journal article.
There is very little original about them.
This is crazy - so much money for papers that are available on the web for free and are simply offprints of journal articles - none of which have gone missing from the usual sources. You can even buy original copies from the web for tens of pounds.
It seems this is a knee jerk reaction and a missunderstanding of the term "papers" - these are not litterary papers or personal papers but scientific papers with a few scribble that are in the main not even Turings!
see:
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/82-heritage/2043-purchase-of-turing-papers-secured-for-bletchley-park-.html
People have been over hyping AI for as long as it has been around.
In this case all the researchers have managed to do is create a 2D cellular automata like structure
using a chemical bi-layer. A nice piece of work but they have no idea how
to use a 2D cellular automata to create intelligence either! What you use to implement
it isn't the issue. Using words like self organising, healing and showing scans of the brain
against scans of the chemical layer is simply misleading.
AI needs this sort of work - but it can do without this sort of hype
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/820-brain-like-computing.html
Slashdot Mirror
I cant understand how I missed it I did a search for "passcode" and a few other things in the body text. Ah well.... try harder next time. mikej
Dam it - I did do a search to make sure it hadn't appeared before. Sorry if it is a repeat.
Agreed... the publicity for it was low key until the results were out. Maybe next year. The good news is that the interface between the game engine and the controller is very easy to work with. Start with the random move example and work up. mikej
Look I'm the one who submitted it and I read it as AL - as in the Paul Simon song. So to me it reads - someone called AL is taking on Pac-man..... who is a she anyway,,,, there is no hope....
Sorry :-(
And Windows 7 does a defrag automatically! See : http://www.i-programmer.info/news/149-security/2352-hiding-data-in-disk-fragmentation.html for some of the problems.
It's not just the reduction in the price you also get special offers and the inital offers include $10 off a gift card and $10 ebook credit and so on... http://www.i-programmer.info/news/152-epub/2279-kindle-with-ads-is-that-a-good-bargain.html Its more like Kindle with coupons!
Since when has chemistry been a science? :-)
... The US and the UK are particularly good at draining other countries of already well-educated people, but this doesn't mean that the US or the UK have performed the academic preparation necessary to produce excellent researchers.
Ah but it doesn't alter the location of the centers that are doing well. If you are interested in identifying places that are doing the best/most work then you don't caer if the people doing the work have come from somewhere else!
Yes you are correct that the situation is complicated and yes all browsers are troubled in the same way by not supporting standards but.... WebGL is slightly different as it provides 3D and web developers wanting to take things in a new direction need it to create games and other similar stuff. All of the major browsers are at least attempting to support WebGL except Microsoft (basically because it would undermine DirectX). This isn't a failure of implementation its a decision not to implement for competing commercial reasons and it really does mirror the situation with SVG ten years ago. If Microsoft had got on the SVG bandwagon then, and not wait until 2010, the web would be a very different place today.
Not supporting WebGL is a real problem ...
The same think happen back when SVG was introduced and IE not supporting it held back the use of 2D graphics in web pages for 10 years.
Now MS is with SVG in IE9 i.e. 2D graphics but it is repeating history with WebGL and setting back 3D web page graphics in exactly the way it did with 2D!
See the link in the post threat to web development
This isn't a good thing and it might even be a bad thing. There already is a semi official SDK from PrimeSense the people who made the Kinect hardware for MS - it just needs a tweek to work with the Kinect (an XML file). They also supply "middleware" to do jobs like body tracking and we have to wait to see what the MS SDK includes. FInally there is the interesting distinction between the non-comercial and commercial SDK - does this mean that anything I create using the non-commercial SDK can't be used commerciall and are they going to charge for the commercial SDK and take a cut from any apps that result? The point is that the semi-official SDK is open source so why bother with the Microsoft SDK with strings attached? I wrote all this up about a week ago but it was ignored by Slashdoters - shame on you :-)
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/91-hardware/2030-official-kinect-sdk-who-needs-it.html
But it is clear that this is an attempt by MS to take over the Kinect party.
Yes I agree - perhaps we should start keeping old offprints just in case. see: http://www.i-programmer.info/news/82-heritage/1616-christies-sells-apple-i-but-not-the-turing-papers.html
The BBC story simply repeated the other stories - no one went and looked at what was in the bundle to be sold
The attachement of these offprints to Turing is far less than any of the artworks to their artists that are being quoted. This is very different.... these are offprints and Turing simply recieved them in the post and handed them out to people he wanted to read them.
I don' think this is correct. Turing handed them over to Max yes and then Max read them and made notes. This was what happened to offprints. I don't think that this justifies the cost in any way. I think Simon Greenish got pushed on the bandwaggon to buy them. It was very difficult and still is to get anyone to actually listen and take a look at what has just been bought. But to be clear you think some pieces of paper that Turing touched are worth hundreds of thousands of pounds? If so this is getting close to a religious act... Keeping in mind that you can view the content of said papers are online and even buy the same offprints on the internet for a few tens of pounds (probably gone up since I first looked due to the crazy prices paid).
No it isn't - they have just bought copies. What is an original of a printed article there are thousands of copies. Back in the days before the web academics got offprints to send to people who were intereted - they were just extra prints of the journal article. There is very little original about them.
This is crazy - so much money for papers that are available on the web for free and are simply offprints of journal articles - none of which have gone missing from the usual sources. You can even buy original copies from the web for tens of pounds. It seems this is a knee jerk reaction and a missunderstanding of the term "papers" - these are not litterary papers or personal papers but scientific papers with a few scribble that are in the main not even Turings! see: http://www.i-programmer.info/news/82-heritage/2043-purchase-of-turing-papers-secured-for-bletchley-park-.html
Sorry about the typo - I screwed up and hit save before I could correct it. I also forgot to put the link in - not a good day for me.
People have been over hyping AI for as long as it has been around. In this case all the researchers have managed to do is create a 2D cellular automata like structure using a chemical bi-layer. A nice piece of work but they have no idea how to use a 2D cellular automata to create intelligence either! What you use to implement it isn't the issue. Using words like self organising, healing and showing scans of the brain against scans of the chemical layer is simply misleading. AI needs this sort of work - but it can do without this sort of hype http://www.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/820-brain-like-computing.html