That is not a "Judeo-Christian principle." The most you could say is that it's a principle grounded in the Protestant work-ethic. But the idea of equating labor to wages is relatively modern.
Geocaching isn't really a scavenger hunt, it's more of a treasure hunt. In any event, it's not like other people in other countries are prevented from having their own scavenger hunts -- certainly not in the same way that, say, a Japanese baseball team is prevented from playing in the MLB.
You're just looking for something to complain about. Big ol' whiner.
It is common, but since it isn't represented orthographically many people don't even realize it's a sound they make. Interjections like "uh-oh" and "uh-uh" have glottal stops, and in many dialects words like "can't" are realized as [kaen?] in regular speech.
Er, not quite. "Jumping the shark" denotes a moment when people notice a show (or series, franchise, etc.) is of noticeably worse quality than it used to be. Fonz jumping the shark wasn't the high point of Happy Days, it was the point at which people realized the show had totally gone off the rails and wasn't worth watching any longer.
libgaim has been "in development" for years, now. It's not coming any time soon and doesn't appear to be a high priority for the Gaim developers at this moment. That does not mean it's entirely unusable. Third-party projects (e.g., Adium) sometimes excise libgaim from the gaim trunk and use that to support their application. But I wouldn't hold my breath for a libgaim supported by the Gaim developers themselves.
When I saw the headline, and even after reading the first few sentences of the intro, I thought this was about the sort of "boss" that employs you, not the video game variety. And I had to wonder, why isn't my boss cool enough to have laser blast?
Huh? Natural selection doesn't care why you're incapable of reproduction, only that you are. People who are willing to forge suicide pacts are less likely to reproduce and therefore nature will select against those traits. This says nothing about other traits which don't cause one to commit suicide but which nature still selects against.
The problem is that saying it is "81% successful" is meaningless. Typically one would use a two-fold measure of success for these sorts of application: precision and recall. In the case of spam, the precision of your algorithm would be the number of correctly marked emails over the total number of emails marked, and the recall would be the number of correctly marked emails over the number of emails that are actually spam.
In terms of search this is perhaps more clear, so consider Google. You issue Google a search query and it returns a bunch of results. Precision measures how many of the results returned are actually relevant, and recall measures how many of the relevant results were actually returned. One could get 100% precision by returning just one result which could be verified as relevant (or, in the above case, verified as spam), and one could get 100% recall by simply returning everything. Oftentimes one takes the harmonic mean of the two, called the F-score in this case, as an overall measure of the success of the algorithm. In other instances one might want to favor precision over recall or vice versa.
I think they probably mean "81% precision," but a low recall means that you'll have many spam emails which are not marked. Of course, if they mean the opposite, then low precision could mean many marked emails which are not spam!
Maybe you just went to a mediocre school? I have a BS in mathematics, but had to take courses in every major division and wrote probably two or three dozen papers in my time there. I was also required to demonstrate competency in a foreign, non-native language.
There are still schools out there that can give you a great education, but when most people are demanding "job skills" from their education, most schools will provide just that. It's not some nefarious plot to stupify our youths, just simple economics.
Well, LSA came around in the late 80s/early 90s, so it wasn't really "many years ago." In any event, I wasn't saying that these techniques were new or that I had some special insight into them. Am I "this guy?" If you meant the article, the point was to show in what ways businesses are using mathematics. LSA and other NLP techniques are certainly a good example (e.g., Google).
The technique in this article is actually used, too, and can be used on different levels. That is, the BW article says this company uses it to measure the distance between two articles, but you can use it to compare the distance between two words. Here's how.
Let's say you have some corpus with N distinct words in it. For each word w you create a "context vector" vw of length 2N. In the first N positions there are counts for the number of time each word in the corpus appears immediately to the left of the word w, and for the second N positions there are counts of the same for the right context. The angle between any two vectors in this 2N-dimensional vector space produces a measure of the distance between the two words. If you use some kind of dimensionality reduction technique to get a 2-dimensional representation, you can see that although this technique is pretty crude linguistically speaking it does pretty well. Each language has a distinct "shape" in this regard, with similar words grouped together, i.e., in English there might be a cluster of points consisting of "singular nouns," or specific parts of speech, like prepositions. It can sometimes even group words by semantic domain, depending on your corpus.
Most European languages have the distinction between a formal and informal second person singular, and perhaps plural, e.g., the German 'du' and 'Sie' or Spanish 'tu and 'usted.' English has this, too, with 'thou' and 'you.' Although most people think 'thou' is somehow more formal than 'you,' the opposite is actually true: historically 'thou' was the informal second person.
In any case, if Dutch if your native language that is probably why you find these "ambiguities" confusing in English. They're really not ambiguous at all -- they're simply not expressed grammatically. People coming from English find things like grammatical gender very confusing. What's more, there are languages, like Japanese, where all sorts of things which are left for context, word usage, tone, and so forth in Western language are embedded right in the grammar. You alter nouns and verb-endings depending on whom you are speaking to and their relationship with you.
English might confuse you sometimes, but it's hardly English's fault.
If a college student today had the skills necessary to do the Summer of Code he probably has the skills necessary to find a much better paying job, even if just over the summer. If he also has good grades it wouldn't be impossible for him to find a paid internship or paid research opportunity, either.
Like I said, if someone has exhausted these opportunities, then yes, Summer of Code is compelling. If not, well, he'd be stupid not to look elsewhere first.
There are plenty of unpaid internships to go around, still. What I did over the summer wasn't an internship per se, it was a program funded by the NSF which allowed the university at which I was studying to give me a stipend. There are many summer opportunities like this, though of course they tend to be more competitive.
Well, any smart student will apply for summer research or internship opportunities in a subject they enjoy. I also got to research what I wanted during the summer, plus I had direction from people who were at the top of the fields in which I was interested.
To me that sounds a lot more compelling than, say, being mentored by a Gaim developer writing code to implement ICQ file transfer.
He's right. There were two big problems for me with Google's summer of code. The first was that they announced it well after most major summer internship deadlines. Even if I had wanted to do it I was already committed to doing an REU. The second was the pay. $4500 for the entire summer? Give me a break. Most REUs pay better than that per-hour and include room and board.
Personally, I did an REU for the first 8 weeks of summer, which paid two thirds the amount Google was paying. The remainder of the summer I work full time and by the end I'll have made significantly more than Google's $4500, plus I'll have learned a lot of research-level mathematics. Most of the Summer of Code projects seemed to be plain BORING. Never mind that $4500 for someone in rural Iowa will go a lot farther than $4500 for someone living in San Francisco -- cost of living doesn't figure into Summer of Code anywhere, while it does for typical summer research or internship opportunities.
I'm glad Google did this because it will help out a lot of projects, but the only way Summer of Code is compelling to a college student is if they've already exhausted other avenues.
Slightly OOT, but I noticed a few months ago that László Lovász works at Microsoft R&D. His name comes up frequently in the study of graph theory and discrete math in general. For example, he proved the (Weak) Perfect Graph Theorem in 1972: a graph is perfect iff its graph complement is perfect.
Either we're to trust them because they're a commercial business, in which case their code should already be tested and work without hassle, or they're "no better" than OSS in this regard.
I agree. Even for schools that are still in session (e.g., mine, the University of Chicago), most people make summer plans well before school ends. Metcalf scholarship deadlines, for example, already passed us by about a month ago. The same goes for things like REUs and other research fellowships.
I would have seriously considered this, but have already committed to a mathematics REU. The application deadline for that was in early April, which is late for most REUs, and I had to make the decision about whether or not I would attend in early March!
Slashdot Mirror
Hah, yeah.
The bots would never figure it out.
That is not a "Judeo-Christian principle." The most you could say is that it's a principle grounded in the Protestant work-ethic. But the idea of equating labor to wages is relatively modern.
Geocaching isn't really a scavenger hunt, it's more of a treasure hunt. In any event, it's not like other people in other countries are prevented from having their own scavenger hunts -- certainly not in the same way that, say, a Japanese baseball team is prevented from playing in the MLB.
You're just looking for something to complain about. Big ol' whiner.
It is common, but since it isn't represented orthographically many people don't even realize it's a sound they make. Interjections like "uh-oh" and "uh-uh" have glottal stops, and in many dialects words like "can't" are realized as [kaen?] in regular speech.
Er, not quite. "Jumping the shark" denotes a moment when people notice a show (or series, franchise, etc.) is of noticeably worse quality than it used to be. Fonz jumping the shark wasn't the high point of Happy Days, it was the point at which people realized the show had totally gone off the rails and wasn't worth watching any longer.
libgaim has been "in development" for years, now. It's not coming any time soon and doesn't appear to be a high priority for the Gaim developers at this moment. That does not mean it's entirely unusable. Third-party projects (e.g., Adium) sometimes excise libgaim from the gaim trunk and use that to support their application. But I wouldn't hold my breath for a libgaim supported by the Gaim developers themselves.
When I saw the headline, and even after reading the first few sentences of the intro, I thought this was about the sort of "boss" that employs you, not the video game variety. And I had to wonder, why isn't my boss cool enough to have laser blast?
Huh? Natural selection doesn't care why you're incapable of reproduction, only that you are. People who are willing to forge suicide pacts are less likely to reproduce and therefore nature will select against those traits. This says nothing about other traits which don't cause one to commit suicide but which nature still selects against.
The problem is that saying it is "81% successful" is meaningless. Typically one would use a two-fold measure of success for these sorts of application: precision and recall. In the case of spam, the precision of your algorithm would be the number of correctly marked emails over the total number of emails marked, and the recall would be the number of correctly marked emails over the number of emails that are actually spam.
In terms of search this is perhaps more clear, so consider Google. You issue Google a search query and it returns a bunch of results. Precision measures how many of the results returned are actually relevant, and recall measures how many of the relevant results were actually returned. One could get 100% precision by returning just one result which could be verified as relevant (or, in the above case, verified as spam), and one could get 100% recall by simply returning everything. Oftentimes one takes the harmonic mean of the two, called the F-score in this case, as an overall measure of the success of the algorithm. In other instances one might want to favor precision over recall or vice versa.
I think they probably mean "81% precision," but a low recall means that you'll have many spam emails which are not marked. Of course, if they mean the opposite, then low precision could mean many marked emails which are not spam!
Maybe you just went to a mediocre school? I have a BS in mathematics, but had to take courses in every major division and wrote probably two or three dozen papers in my time there. I was also required to demonstrate competency in a foreign, non-native language.
There are still schools out there that can give you a great education, but when most people are demanding "job skills" from their education, most schools will provide just that. It's not some nefarious plot to stupify our youths, just simple economics.
Maybe he was really an 80-year old man and was talking about WWII.
Pedantry, the last resort of the boring.
But yes, "size" is a more accurate word, although what I said was still perfectly clear. The "rank" of a vector is nonsensical, though.
Well, LSA came around in the late 80s/early 90s, so it wasn't really "many years ago." In any event, I wasn't saying that these techniques were new or that I had some special insight into them. Am I "this guy?" If you meant the article, the point was to show in what ways businesses are using mathematics. LSA and other NLP techniques are certainly a good example (e.g., Google).
The technique in this article is actually used, too, and can be used on different levels. That is, the BW article says this company uses it to measure the distance between two articles, but you can use it to compare the distance between two words. Here's how.
Let's say you have some corpus with N distinct words in it. For each word w you create a "context vector" vw of length 2N. In the first N positions there are counts for the number of time each word in the corpus appears immediately to the left of the word w, and for the second N positions there are counts of the same for the right context. The angle between any two vectors in this 2N-dimensional vector space produces a measure of the distance between the two words. If you use some kind of dimensionality reduction technique to get a 2-dimensional representation, you can see that although this technique is pretty crude linguistically speaking it does pretty well. Each language has a distinct "shape" in this regard, with similar words grouped together, i.e., in English there might be a cluster of points consisting of "singular nouns," or specific parts of speech, like prepositions. It can sometimes even group words by semantic domain, depending on your corpus.
Remember kids, computational linguistics is fun!
Most European languages have the distinction between a formal and informal second person singular, and perhaps plural, e.g., the German 'du' and 'Sie' or Spanish 'tu and 'usted.' English has this, too, with 'thou' and 'you.' Although most people think 'thou' is somehow more formal than 'you,' the opposite is actually true: historically 'thou' was the informal second person.
In any case, if Dutch if your native language that is probably why you find these "ambiguities" confusing in English. They're really not ambiguous at all -- they're simply not expressed grammatically. People coming from English find things like grammatical gender very confusing. What's more, there are languages, like Japanese, where all sorts of things which are left for context, word usage, tone, and so forth in Western language are embedded right in the grammar. You alter nouns and verb-endings depending on whom you are speaking to and their relationship with you.
English might confuse you sometimes, but it's hardly English's fault.
Huh? The picture is upside down, but on each chip it clearly says "Toshiba XD9936."
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
If a college student today had the skills necessary to do the Summer of Code he probably has the skills necessary to find a much better paying job, even if just over the summer. If he also has good grades it wouldn't be impossible for him to find a paid internship or paid research opportunity, either.
Like I said, if someone has exhausted these opportunities, then yes, Summer of Code is compelling. If not, well, he'd be stupid not to look elsewhere first.
There are plenty of unpaid internships to go around, still. What I did over the summer wasn't an internship per se, it was a program funded by the NSF which allowed the university at which I was studying to give me a stipend. There are many summer opportunities like this, though of course they tend to be more competitive.
Well, any smart student will apply for summer research or internship opportunities in a subject they enjoy. I also got to research what I wanted during the summer, plus I had direction from people who were at the top of the fields in which I was interested.
To me that sounds a lot more compelling than, say, being mentored by a Gaim developer writing code to implement ICQ file transfer.
He's right. There were two big problems for me with Google's summer of code. The first was that they announced it well after most major summer internship deadlines. Even if I had wanted to do it I was already committed to doing an REU. The second was the pay. $4500 for the entire summer? Give me a break. Most REUs pay better than that per-hour and include room and board.
Personally, I did an REU for the first 8 weeks of summer, which paid two thirds the amount Google was paying. The remainder of the summer I work full time and by the end I'll have made significantly more than Google's $4500, plus I'll have learned a lot of research-level mathematics. Most of the Summer of Code projects seemed to be plain BORING. Never mind that $4500 for someone in rural Iowa will go a lot farther than $4500 for someone living in San Francisco -- cost of living doesn't figure into Summer of Code anywhere, while it does for typical summer research or internship opportunities.
I'm glad Google did this because it will help out a lot of projects, but the only way Summer of Code is compelling to a college student is if they've already exhausted other avenues.
Slightly OOT, but I noticed a few months ago that László Lovász works at Microsoft R&D. His name comes up frequently in the study of graph theory and discrete math in general. For example, he proved the (Weak) Perfect Graph Theorem in 1972: a graph is perfect iff its graph complement is perfect.
Microsoft can't have it both ways.
Either we're to trust them because they're a commercial business, in which case their code should already be tested and work without hassle, or they're "no better" than OSS in this regard.
I agree. Even for schools that are still in session (e.g., mine, the University of Chicago), most people make summer plans well before school ends. Metcalf scholarship deadlines, for example, already passed us by about a month ago. The same goes for things like REUs and other research fellowships.
I would have seriously considered this, but have already committed to a mathematics REU. The application deadline for that was in early April, which is late for most REUs, and I had to make the decision about whether or not I would attend in early March!
That's pretty much what happened, minus the "firing" and "expelling" part.