Don't forget that the whole humans as a powerplant need not be true if the Zion (reality) part of the matrix is just another part of the matrix. This raises the question, why are the humans trapped inside the matrix? Do humans exist at all?
Yes this is all assuming that there isn't a meta-matrix in which the matrix is run. It seems pretty obvious to me that that is what the last scene was trying to portray in a subtle way.
Subtle way?? That was about as subtle as getting hit in the head by a ton of bricks!
A tuner is a nice idea. I was thinking that one of those $30 radio shack sound mixers would also be nice. You can run all the audio through it and adjust levels depending upon what you choose to concentrate on.
I agree with this method. Devise some fair plan and stick too it. If somebody doesn't agree with the way funds are distributed, then they can start there own project and not contribute to this one.
I agree with wdr1. Random walk down wall street is an excellent introduction to the market works.
Other books depend upon what level you want to learn about finance. If, for example, you are just looking for some personal finance tip books than many other people here have made good recommendations.
If you are looking to get your hands wet by opening a brokerage account and buying some stocks/options, then I recommend that you start with Random Walk Down Wall Street. If you are inclined to try some simple computer models to see what will happen to your portfolio on a particularly volatile day, or what happens if interest rates move, then I would recommend the following two books:
Hull's Options, Futures, & Other Derivatives (this one is THE classic) Willmot's Willmot on Quantitative Finance
Both of these books lay out the basic framework for the savy investor. They both include examples for valuing the risk in your portfolio, determining optimal prices of derivative options, modelling outcomes. Many of hte included models are shown in spreadsheet form and can be instantly typed into excel. Both books would be understandable by anybody who's taken college calculus (and they only briefly mention calculus). Both books provide basic strategies for keeping your portfolio hedged against various things. Both books give insight into Risk neutrality which is a KEY thing to understand as an active investor.
Another book if you interested in investing for fun would be one that teaches how to do a basic 10k analysis of companies. I've been happy with one called Essentials of Invesments (Bodie Kaine Marcus) but it's the only one I've read, so I can't say it's good.
Finally, the best way to find out how recreational investing works is to open up a online account (currently scottrade is the cheapest) and start investing. Face it, you're never going to learn or care about how a Margin account works until your deep in the margin and Scottrade makes you pay money... or when euro options expire until you've bought some and forgot to sell them in time.
Finally, I use the term "recreational investing" because it is. If you want to maximize your long term $$$$$, then you should be contributing $12k to your 401(k) each year and maxing our IRA's before you start investing in other areas. It's hard to max those out for somebody right out of college, so starting to invest in other areas won't be the optimal choice. However, it's very educational and fun.
I sent a snailmail letter anyways. It's to Caroline Maloney's district office in Manhattan. The cool thing is that this office is close to my work, so I'm going to walk over there during lunch one day and hopefully talk to somebody about this issue.
The sad thing is that prior to the DMCA passing, I read slashdot and wanted to snailmail or call my representative. I procrastinated and never really did anything because I assumed that such restrictive legislation would never get passed. I feel rather guilty, now. Today I wrote my representative in support of BALANCE as soon as I read Slashdot (after carefully reading Zoe's website). I plan to fully voice my concern this time around.
This is true. I recently sold a 450MHz G4 (128MB RAM) for $600. That was with NO monitor and NO software. I offered to include OS X 10.2, but the buyer wasn't interested.
Try to sell the equivalent P3 for that amount. It won't happen.
"If you knowingly buy Windows, you are telling the market "I like Windows!" Whether or not you actually like the OS is irrelevant - you are voting with your money."
Although I agree that you are voting with your money, your assumption, ATMAvatar, isn't exactly correct. You are telling the market, "either I like Windows, or, I like the hardware and care about hardware more than software." The difference between my statement and your statment is the reason that Microsoft spends so much to insure 100% OEM compliance.
"When you can no longer buy computers without Windows, you have lost the most basic right of a consumer - the ability to choose what product you spend your money on."
I would argue differently: When you can no longer buy computers without Windows, the market for computers without Windows is too small/unprofitable for a company to take advantage of. I love it when people say, "Microshit is junk/sucks/etc." I always respond that Microsoft must be doing something right, because 90%+ of desktop computers around the world run Windows. There's a obviously a *market* for Windows software and with 90%+ of market penetration, I'd say that Windows is excellent (there's not many products and industries with marketshare like that).
In a "Democratic" society, the citizens should be making the laws. I get scared when the RIAA, BSA, MPAA has so much lobbying power, because by changing the laws, these companies can make our markets innefficient. However, I'm happy with our capitalist society as it is right now. Even though Microsoft commands a vulgar profit margin on each copy of WindowsXP that it sells (a sign of an inefficient market), I understand that software is a commodity and in the long run (10 years? 5 years?), Microsoft is royally screwed with respect to operating system software. The same holds true for office/productivity software. I kind of feel sorry for them, since the best they can come up with is "XBox".
Re:FSMs , Graphs, Numerical Analysis
on
What Math do You Use?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm not sure that I agree with you Muonzoo. I've worked in two very different industries since graduating, and with the exception of general numerical analysis, I haven't used anything that you mention.
I worked at a large defense contractor and we developed OCR and hand writing recognition software. We used many ideas from controls systems, including FFTs and many image processing algorithms. Finally we placed our own customized (and patented) neural network over the top to categorize the images based on the results of the other algorithms. 99% of the math that I used for this job was either AI related (Neural networks, Support Vector Machines, Simulated annealing) or image/controls related (scale reduction, FFT, filtering, etc).
Currently, I work in quantitative finance and I study quantitative finance at NYU. Although the program is *very* mathematical, my computer programming has been limited to solving partial differential equations using Finite Differences and Monte Carlo simulations. Although neither of these seems like a very sophisticated numerical method (compared with FEA and Galerkin methods), there is much math involved in tuning the finer points of both methods.
Finally, I consider Numerical methods something different from understanding the mathematics of computer science. The numerical methods are something that should not be taught in a Mathematics of CS course. The mathematics would be to understand the underlying PDEs that need to be solved or understanding exactly what each image processing algorithm is telling us.
I believe that finite state macines and graph theory are useful in computer science from the professor's viewpoint, but when it comes to a practitioner, modeling/PDEs are most widely used.
On Apple's X11 list [apple.com], it has been stated that X11.app's QuartzWM is going to remain closed-source and proprietary. That's all their code and they're going to keep it to themselves, as is their right. On the other hand, the extensions made to the xfree86 codebase have been offered back to the community under the same licensing terms as the rest of that project.
There's nothing wrong with this. Apple extended X11 under the terms of the X11 license and as a result is giving the code back to the community. Apple created a propiretary window manager (QuartzWM) and doesn't look like it is going to release this code to the community.
It is within Apple's right to do both things. Please don't get mad at them for not releasing QuartzWM source to the public. Why should they release QuartzWM to the public?
Poeple applaud apple for choosing Khtml and X11 to extend for their own uses. Apple obliges with the licenses, but then people get mad when they don't release source with their browser or WM.
Please be happy that apple has chosen open source software and extended it. The GPL and many other licenses protect the right for businesses to extend the software and still use proprietary extensions in the same way that it protects your right to download the source. It is a good thing that the software allows Apple to do what it does, otherwise Apple would have never used the source code to begin with.
Rather than being happy or sad with Apple for helping/hurting free software, why don't we all be happy with free software for allowing Apple to use it in commercial applications? I don't think that Babbage (the author) disagrees with me, I just wanted to clarify this point with other readers.
I am from nigeria and I have a huge fortune in source code (100,000,000 lines of source) locked up in the South African government. A friend at the embassy has made me aware of your trustworthiness... and should you help export this sourcecode from my dictator government, then I will give you 25% of the sourcecode. I will keep 60% of the source code and the other 15% will go towards the fees of transfering it out of my country and into an american repository.
I need to move fast, since I have only days to export this sourcecode out of my contry before the dictator finds out.
The author of the article doesn't refer to XML as a programming language here. He only mentions that the new programming language will be based around XML. Actually, later in the article, he speculates that the language will be *lisp-ish* so who knows if MS will do a functional programming language or not. Although the author relates XML to a programming language later in the article, each time, he doesn't explicitly state that XML is a programming language. Just because XML has a strong affinity towards functional programming languages doesn't mean that he's stating that XML is a programming language.
Last Fall, I came to a realization that I love my bed. We each should spend about 30% of our lives laying in our beds, and up until December, I was neglecting that crucial area of my apartment. Since I work 10+ hours each day *and* go to school part time, I spend too little time in my bed. This makes me wish I spent more time there, and as a result I love my bed even more.
So what did I do? I went out and got a down mattress pad, down comforter, a bunch of down pillos, and some kick-ass bed sheets. Now, when I sleep in my bed, I'm surround everywhere by warm fluf. On top of my extra firm matress, it feels like heaven.
We spend most of our lives either at work or laying in bed, so why not put a littl effort into having a nice bed?
I just love it when people who have no business concepts come up with crackpot reasons for why corporations do what they do. A lot of times these people make me laugh with their logic.
First of all, Jobs doesn't want competition. He's the CEO of a multibillion dollar company. Do you honestly think he believes in a competitive, efficient market? Sure, he'll say and do whatever he can as long as MS is where it's at, but only as long as he's in second place.
Remember, the Macintosh computer is a franchise market (read: Harley Davidson) with Apple at the helm. Companies with a monopoly over a franchise market (which Apple has) have little that will erode their marketshare. The Harley Davidson example is the textbook case. Basically, Harley Davidson has 0 competition from Honda, Yamaha, whoever in their main market. Harley's main market happens to be "Harley Davidson Motorcycles". Similarly, Apple has 0 competition from other computer makers in the Macintosh market. Everytime somebody tries to release something that emulates a Mac, they get crushed by Apple's litigation thugs. Send an email to themes.org if you disagree.
Now if we can rule out betterment of society from CEO Jobs' goals, we should be able to assume that profit is his ultimate goal. All of his plans revolve around those little 3 step underpants gnomes plans. in this particular case, we have: 1. Use KHTML 2. ???? 3. Profit!!
Now we just have to find the elusive step 2. from the 3 step plan. You, GiMP suggest that he wants a competitive browser market to create a better browser that will drive people to the Macintosh platform, thus, creating profit. Hmmm. I don't think that having the best browser will generate any profit. How much profit has MS made from IE (if we haphazardly assume it's the best browser)? None. Has dominance with IE led to profit with IIS? IIS has yet to generate profits for MS, so again, No.
Here's my idea of why Apple chose KHTML, and although it may be just as crackpot as yours, at least it's business based crack (the expensive stuff that Wall St Tycoons snort) as opposed to opensource hippie crack. I think that Apple sees a switch campaign as a good way to increase revenues so he needs to get more people to "switch". One main reason that people don't feel comfortable with OS X is because all of the browsers suck. I use OS X and I'm justified in saying that ALL CURRENT OS X Browsers suck. I currently use a collection IE, Navigator (chimera?), Mozilla, and OmniWeb. Every one of them sucks differently and together, there's usually one that's right for each job, but I can't use one for everything. Steve Jobs knows this and says, "Holy shit! How can convince people that OS X is the best platform when people can't even browse the fscking web?" CEO Steve is smart though. He realizes that the slow web browsers in OS X (IE and Mozilla) don't suck as much as the fast web browsers (Navigator and Omniweb). He decides that Apple's going to do it's typical amazing thing and surprise everybody with a fast webbrowser for OS X that doesn't suck! Has Steve succeeded? From other comments on this page I'd say not yet, but it's a beta version and CEO Steve put a serious team of hackers behind his browser.
Why did he choose KHTML? Probably because it was the easiest *fast* html renderer to modify and create a new web browser with. CEO Steve knows that reinventing the wheel costs too much in today's economy.
PS. I'm very happy that Apple chose an open source browser and is giving back to the community the way that they are. I'm happy for the KDE people (all of them) for creating a browser and desktop environment that was capable for a company like Apple to use the code base.
jbolden pretty much sums up the differences in the parent comment.
I used mathematica extensively in college, and I've used Matlab + neural network toolbox extensively in my profession.
Another majore difference between the two is programming languages. Mathematica is best utilized as a functional, lisp-ish programming language, while Matlab is best for C-ish programming that is optimmized for vectors. If the whitepapers that you read for your research do a lot of AI programming in Lisp, then go with Mathematica. If the AI whitepapers use a lot of neural networks or general C/Fortran algorithms, then go with Matlab.
If you are using the math package for prototyping, and then converting the code a run-time system, then I would definitely stick with Matlab->C and Mathematica->Lisp.
Ninnux, if you are serious about this, then email me at b_pretender(at)yahoo(dot)com and I can tell you a little more about what I've used and what I've thought about it. We developed our own baysian filters and also used the Matlab image processing toolbox extensively. Most of my comments will be Matlab biased, but that is because I've used it and I've liked it.
I'm going to ebay a powermac G4, 450MHz, AGP. If anybody is interested in making an offer, than I won't even put it on ebay. You can email me at b_pretender@yahoo.com with an offer. I live in the manhattan area, so we could arrange free pickup/delivery if you are in the manhattan area, otherwise include delivery in your offer.
Since this discussion is abuot eBay and Macintoshes, I don't consider this post off-topic.
I see a lot of resistance to keyword based filesystems.
What about if you created a heirarchical filesystem that placed files into directories, but it didn't matter which order you typed directories. For example: ls/home/biff/mp3s/NIN/broken.mp3 listed the same file as was listed by:
ls mp3s/NIN/biff/broken.mp3
(I left a few directories out, because they are likely redundant). This is still a heirarchical filesystem, yet many of your anti-keyword filesystem people will agree that the order shouldn't matter. Well, this is a keyword based system.
This is a good idea for commandline driven keyword based system.
I don't think that it would be hard to add keywords to legacy data. Keywords could be stripped from the name of each nested directory that the file is in. Next, keywords could automatically be created based upon the application that created the file (or filetype), the content of the file, date, user, etc.
Actually, the directory names as keywords would be enough, because basically, that's what you currently have.
Slashdot Mirror
...that's exactly how I spent my last year of college (late night gaming & snoozing during classes).
Linguistic errors??? That's not what we call them in English, buddy. They're grammar errors and you guilty of a few!!
Don't forget that the whole humans as a powerplant need not be true if the Zion (reality) part of the matrix is just another part of the matrix. This raises the question, why are the humans trapped inside the matrix? Do humans exist at all?
Subtle way?? That was about as subtle as getting hit in the head by a ton of bricks!
A tuner is a nice idea. I was thinking that one of those $30 radio shack sound mixers would also be nice. You can run all the audio through it and adjust levels depending upon what you choose to concentrate on.
that sucks that light cycles won't be multi-player... but I'd rather have no multi-player light cycles than shitty laggy multi-player light cycles.
I hope the towering flying things make the same cool sound as they did in the movie.
C ,rgne dak. yr aip.. ,afw ydco cob-y a yprnn abe cu frg mre ydco ao YPRNN yd.b cy co x.jago. frg ap. bry n337!!!
Bf yd.
I agree with this method. Devise some fair plan and stick too it. If somebody doesn't agree with the way funds are distributed, then they can start there own project and not contribute to this one.
Other books depend upon what level you want to learn about finance. If, for example, you are just looking for some personal finance tip books than many other people here have made good recommendations.
If you are looking to get your hands wet by opening a brokerage account and buying some stocks/options, then I recommend that you start with Random Walk Down Wall Street. If you are inclined to try some simple computer models to see what will happen to your portfolio on a particularly volatile day, or what happens if interest rates move, then I would recommend the following two books:
Hull's Options, Futures, & Other Derivatives (this one is THE classic)
Willmot's Willmot on Quantitative Finance
Both of these books lay out the basic framework for the savy investor. They both include examples for valuing the risk in your portfolio, determining optimal prices of derivative options, modelling outcomes. Many of hte included models are shown in spreadsheet form and can be instantly typed into excel. Both books would be understandable by anybody who's taken college calculus (and they only briefly mention calculus). Both books provide basic strategies for keeping your portfolio hedged against various things. Both books give insight into Risk neutrality which is a KEY thing to understand as an active investor.
Another book if you interested in investing for fun would be one that teaches how to do a basic 10k analysis of companies. I've been happy with one called Essentials of Invesments (Bodie Kaine Marcus) but it's the only one I've read, so I can't say it's good.
Finally, the best way to find out how recreational investing works is to open up a online account (currently scottrade is the cheapest) and start investing. Face it, you're never going to learn or care about how a Margin account works until your deep in the margin and Scottrade makes you pay money... or when euro options expire until you've bought some and forgot to sell them in time.
Finally, I use the term "recreational investing" because it is. If you want to maximize your long term $$$$$, then you should be contributing $12k to your 401(k) each year and maxing our IRA's before you start investing in other areas. It's hard to max those out for somebody right out of college, so starting to invest in other areas won't be the optimal choice. However, it's very educational and fun.
Amen
Can anybody help me out? Direct me to a website that explains how to do it?
The sad thing is that prior to the DMCA passing, I read slashdot and wanted to snailmail or call my representative. I procrastinated and never really did anything because I assumed that such restrictive legislation would never get passed. I feel rather guilty, now. Today I wrote my representative in support of BALANCE as soon as I read Slashdot (after carefully reading Zoe's website). I plan to fully voice my concern this time around.
Try to sell the equivalent P3 for that amount. It won't happen.
Although I agree that you are voting with your money, your assumption, ATMAvatar, isn't exactly correct. You are telling the market, "either I like Windows, or, I like the hardware and care about hardware more than software." The difference between my statement and your statment is the reason that Microsoft spends so much to insure 100% OEM compliance.
"When you can no longer buy computers without Windows, you have lost the most basic right of a consumer - the ability to choose what product you spend your money on."
I would argue differently: When you can no longer buy computers without Windows, the market for computers without Windows is too small/unprofitable for a company to take advantage of. I love it when people say, "Microshit is junk/sucks/etc." I always respond that Microsoft must be doing something right, because 90%+ of desktop computers around the world run Windows. There's a obviously a *market* for Windows software and with 90%+ of market penetration, I'd say that Windows is excellent (there's not many products and industries with marketshare like that).
In a "Democratic" society, the citizens should be making the laws. I get scared when the RIAA, BSA, MPAA has so much lobbying power, because by changing the laws, these companies can make our markets innefficient. However, I'm happy with our capitalist society as it is right now. Even though Microsoft commands a vulgar profit margin on each copy of WindowsXP that it sells (a sign of an inefficient market), I understand that software is a commodity and in the long run (10 years? 5 years?), Microsoft is royally screwed with respect to operating system software. The same holds true for office/productivity software. I kind of feel sorry for them, since the best they can come up with is "XBox".
I worked at a large defense contractor and we developed OCR and hand writing recognition software. We used many ideas from controls systems, including FFTs and many image processing algorithms. Finally we placed our own customized (and patented) neural network over the top to categorize the images based on the results of the other algorithms. 99% of the math that I used for this job was either AI related (Neural networks, Support Vector Machines, Simulated annealing) or image/controls related (scale reduction, FFT, filtering, etc).
Currently, I work in quantitative finance and I study quantitative finance at NYU. Although the program is *very* mathematical, my computer programming has been limited to solving partial differential equations using Finite Differences and Monte Carlo simulations. Although neither of these seems like a very sophisticated numerical method (compared with FEA and Galerkin methods), there is much math involved in tuning the finer points of both methods.
Finally, I consider Numerical methods something different from understanding the mathematics of computer science. The numerical methods are something that should not be taught in a Mathematics of CS course. The mathematics would be to understand the underlying PDEs that need to be solved or understanding exactly what each image processing algorithm is telling us.
I believe that finite state macines and graph theory are useful in computer science from the professor's viewpoint, but when it comes to a practitioner, modeling/PDEs are most widely used.
There's nothing wrong with this. Apple extended X11 under the terms of the X11 license and as a result is giving the code back to the community. Apple created a propiretary window manager (QuartzWM) and doesn't look like it is going to release this code to the community.
It is within Apple's right to do both things. Please don't get mad at them for not releasing QuartzWM source to the public. Why should they release QuartzWM to the public?
Poeple applaud apple for choosing Khtml and X11 to extend for their own uses. Apple obliges with the licenses, but then people get mad when they don't release source with their browser or WM.
Please be happy that apple has chosen open source software and extended it. The GPL and many other licenses protect the right for businesses to extend the software and still use proprietary extensions in the same way that it protects your right to download the source. It is a good thing that the software allows Apple to do what it does, otherwise Apple would have never used the source code to begin with.
Rather than being happy or sad with Apple for helping/hurting free software, why don't we all be happy with free software for allowing Apple to use it in commercial applications? I don't think that Babbage (the author) disagrees with me, I just wanted to clarify this point with other readers.
The grammar nazi is appalled!!
I am from nigeria and I have a huge fortune in source code (100,000,000 lines of source) locked up in the South African government. A friend at the embassy has made me aware of your trustworthiness... and should you help export this sourcecode from my dictator government, then I will give you 25% of the sourcecode. I will keep 60% of the source code and the other 15% will go towards the fees of transfering it out of my country and into an american repository.
I need to move fast, since I have only days to export this sourcecode out of my contry before the dictator finds out.
[snip] considering a new XML programming language
The author of the article doesn't refer to XML as a programming language here. He only mentions that the new programming language will be based around XML. Actually, later in the article, he speculates that the language will be *lisp-ish* so who knows if MS will do a functional programming language or not. Although the author relates XML to a programming language later in the article, each time, he doesn't explicitly state that XML is a programming language. Just because XML has a strong affinity towards functional programming languages doesn't mean that he's stating that XML is a programming language.
So what did I do? I went out and got a down mattress pad, down comforter, a bunch of down pillos, and some kick-ass bed sheets. Now, when I sleep in my bed, I'm surround everywhere by warm fluf. On top of my extra firm matress, it feels like heaven.
We spend most of our lives either at work or laying in bed, so why not put a littl effort into having a nice bed?
Please don't take offense to the following:
I just love it when people who have no business concepts come up with crackpot reasons for why corporations do what they do. A lot of times these people make me laugh with their logic.
First of all, Jobs doesn't want competition. He's the CEO of a multibillion dollar company. Do you honestly think he believes in a competitive, efficient market? Sure, he'll say and do whatever he can as long as MS is where it's at, but only as long as he's in second place.
Remember, the Macintosh computer is a franchise market (read: Harley Davidson) with Apple at the helm. Companies with a monopoly over a franchise market (which Apple has) have little that will erode their marketshare. The Harley Davidson example is the textbook case. Basically, Harley Davidson has 0 competition from Honda, Yamaha, whoever in their main market. Harley's main market happens to be "Harley Davidson Motorcycles". Similarly, Apple has 0 competition from other computer makers in the Macintosh market. Everytime somebody tries to release something that emulates a Mac, they get crushed by Apple's litigation thugs. Send an email to themes.org if you disagree.
Now if we can rule out betterment of society from CEO Jobs' goals, we should be able to assume that profit is his ultimate goal. All of his plans revolve around those little 3 step underpants gnomes plans. in this particular case, we have:
1. Use KHTML
2. ????
3. Profit!!
Now we just have to find the elusive step 2. from the 3 step plan. You, GiMP suggest that he wants a competitive browser market to create a better browser that will drive people to the Macintosh platform, thus, creating profit. Hmmm. I don't think that having the best browser will generate any profit. How much profit has MS made from IE (if we haphazardly assume it's the best browser)? None. Has dominance with IE led to profit with IIS? IIS has yet to generate profits for MS, so again, No.
Here's my idea of why Apple chose KHTML, and although it may be just as crackpot as yours, at least it's business based crack (the expensive stuff that Wall St Tycoons snort) as opposed to opensource hippie crack. I think that Apple sees a switch campaign as a good way to increase revenues so he needs to get more people to "switch". One main reason that people don't feel comfortable with OS X is because all of the browsers suck. I use OS X and I'm justified in saying that ALL CURRENT OS X Browsers suck. I currently use a collection IE, Navigator (chimera?), Mozilla, and OmniWeb. Every one of them sucks differently and together, there's usually one that's right for each job, but I can't use one for everything. Steve Jobs knows this and says, "Holy shit! How can convince people that OS X is the best platform when people can't even browse the fscking web?" CEO Steve is smart though. He realizes that the slow web browsers in OS X (IE and Mozilla) don't suck as much as the fast web browsers (Navigator and Omniweb). He decides that Apple's going to do it's typical amazing thing and surprise everybody with a fast webbrowser for OS X that doesn't suck! Has Steve succeeded? From other comments on this page I'd say not yet, but it's a beta version and CEO Steve put a serious team of hackers behind his browser.
Why did he choose KHTML? Probably because it was the easiest *fast* html renderer to modify and create a new web browser with. CEO Steve knows that reinventing the wheel costs too much in today's economy.
PS. I'm very happy that Apple chose an open source browser and is giving back to the community the way that they are. I'm happy for the KDE people (all of them) for creating a browser and desktop environment that was capable for a company like Apple to use the code base.
I used mathematica extensively in college, and I've used Matlab + neural network toolbox extensively in my profession.
Another majore difference between the two is programming languages. Mathematica is best utilized as a functional, lisp-ish programming language, while Matlab is best for C-ish programming that is optimmized for vectors. If the whitepapers that you read for your research do a lot of AI programming in Lisp, then go with Mathematica. If the AI whitepapers use a lot of neural networks or general C/Fortran algorithms, then go with Matlab.
If you are using the math package for prototyping, and then converting the code a run-time system, then I would definitely stick with Matlab->C and Mathematica->Lisp.
Ninnux, if you are serious about this, then email me at b_pretender(at)yahoo(dot)com and I can tell you a little more about what I've used and what I've thought about it. We developed our own baysian filters and also used the Matlab image processing toolbox extensively. Most of my comments will be Matlab biased, but that is because I've used it and I've liked it.
Since this discussion is abuot eBay and Macintoshes, I don't consider this post off-topic.
What about if you created a heirarchical filesystem that placed files into directories, but it didn't matter which order you typed directories. /home/biff/mp3s/NIN/broken.mp3
For example:
ls
listed the same file as was listed by:
ls mp3s/NIN/biff/broken.mp3
(I left a few directories out, because they are likely redundant). This is still a heirarchical filesystem, yet many of your anti-keyword filesystem people will agree that the order shouldn't matter. Well, this is a keyword based system.
This is a good idea for commandline driven keyword based system.
Actually, the directory names as keywords would be enough, because basically, that's what you currently have.