Assuming that this really is a GPL violation, then I'm surprised they've already got some big names to fall for the con. On their own website, they make mention that VX30 was used by HFPA. I was incredulous of course and decided to do some fact checking. Well, turns out, it's true! The video gallery over at the Golden Globe awards has an icon for VX30 which links back to MXS.
Here's what I think would be the most hilarious thing of all:
the code turns out to be a GPL violation.
HFPA gets mad, makes a ruckus - especially to the movie industry
movie industry sues MXS
???
Slashdotters celebrate and rejoice over the movie industry suing someone
CMU generally refers to Carnegie Mellon as cmu.edu points to while Claremont McKenna is usually just called by its fullname (or possibly Claremont but that can cause confusion with respect to all the Claremont schools)
CMU is in Pittsburgh unless you mean their west coast extension, in which case, there are just a bunch of unattractive Ph.D. students hanging out there. Caltech has even fewer women than MIT and they are also less attractive (yes, this sounds impossible, but it's true). In summary, while many Californians are attractive, they are not at Caltech or CMU.
I think you have it quite backwards and this is due to the current folklore surrounding colleges such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT, etc. The common folklore is pretty much what you stated: professors don't teach classes, TAs do, and that it's all about 'the name' of attending the school.
I attend one of these 'highly ranked' institutions and it has been a great experience. I've never had a class taught by a TA. In fact, all of my classes are taught by the professor. The big name professors are even willing to teach small seminars. For example, at Stanford, Osheroff (physics Nobel) teaches a small seminar that's related to optics and photography (one of his hobbies). Outside of lecture, one may deal with the TAs more, but most of the questions one would ask are adequately answered by the TAs. If one requires the professor's assistance, it might take some effort to setup a meeting time, but I've always seen them try hard to make time for students.
Here's how I view the difference between a 'top' institution and your typical state school: one will get the same education at both schools. There's a huge caveat to this, that being at a state school, one will probably have to expend a good amount of effort to ensure that he receives the same education. For example, at Caltech, the math core that all students must take is far beyond any typical math requirement at a state school, and if one attended a state school, he would have to spend more effort to find the correct difficult courses to take.
So, why pay the exorbitant amount of money to attend a so-called prestigious university? One word: opportunity. The opportunities afforded at a top university are exponentially greater than other schools. The top professors within the field have lots of knowledge to share; there is a great chance to network with both the faculty and one's peers. Definitely, as you mentioned, atmosphere is key, because everyone at these schools went there as "overachievers" (not that they are all overachievers, but they all share some type of 'drive' - if you get my gist) and being in such an environment, simple conversations can lead to interesting studies. I feel that the big difference in the opportunities available at a big-name school is research at the frontier with lots of available resources. At a small state school, if one wishes to do research in any field, the odds of finding a professor with a similar interest who is at the cutting edge and has resources to share is significantly smaller than at a top university where there are more research dollars coming in and cutting edge work happening every day. In addition, having the most current research being conducted at one's school allows more opportunities to see the frontier and learn about it in class. Finally, there is a great opportunity to listen and learn from others that one could not do at a state school. Big-name schools can draw people like Howard Dean or Bill Clinton or [insert visionary/scientist/social mover/etc. here] to speak at the school. While it's possible for a small state university to do so, I doubt you'll see Fresno State or whoever pull in more than one or two of such speakers a year whereas at Harvard, such people would be coming in year-round.
Being able to do cutting edge work while learning in an atmosphere geared toward higher education and having the interaction with great professors and people is the difference. Whether or not one thinks it's worth it to pay big bucks to get that difference is an individual choice.
Dead on. As others have mentioned, there are tons of uses for math in CS (AI, robotics, graphics, etc.). I just wanted to add that to your point about being a "hacker" means that more math is probably not necessary. But really, if someone is going to just be a hacker and nothing more, he shouldn't be in computer science in the first place.
If you look at the results, the voting percentages were very similar in each poll. And this is no mistake. Most people will not invest in more than one MMORPG and few will play two at any given time. Even fewer will choose to play three simultaneously and once someone starts one, they are unlikely to switch to another. Thus, it seems like a lot of the voting was simply based on what people were familiar with via word-of-mouth, their experience with their game of choice, etc. With limited knowledge, it obviously makes it hard to vote properly on the various categories and people will be apt to simply vote for their own game as they haven't seen many of the others in action. The results probably reflect the MMORPG split-up of RPGdot's voting base and nothing more.
I wanted to point out the article in Wired as well. It really seems like Dvorak read the parody memo and decided that he'd try to sound intelligent by writing a serious article with its content stolen from someone else.
While the idea is neat and clearly it is possible to put their idea into practice as shown by the demo, this project really does not have all that much to do with the semantic web. Unless the article is very misleading, it seems like the project uses RDF as a basis for finding and creating these slices. But partitioning data isn't what will make the semantic web powerful. We need computers themselves to understand the relationships between different sources of information on the semantic web. This will enable us to query/use different services in conjunction with one another whereas this project seems to gather said data and slice it up into ways for different people to interact with it. The former allows for greater expressivity and power while the latter (this project) seems to be more of a database project for building views with tagged data that is collected. Information integration is a solved problem in computer science and I hope that people don't see that as what the semantic web is about.
I'm curious to the answer to this question as well, as I admit, I don't know too much about their IIS system. Also, could you explain the ASP.NET vs. PHP thing? I've developed in PHP and dabbled in ASP (pre-.NET) and PHP has always been quite nice.
I wish I had mod points. I donate my karma to the parent post. He hits the nail on the head. While it was great to have an interview with Martin, Roblimo totally borked it by imparting his own biases.
I really don't see how you and those supposedly closer to the subject are still misinterpreting his words. It's quite obvious to me at least, that his poorly written argument was along the lines of:
1. all things being equal, based upon economic theory of leisure/work tradeoff, etc. we can infer that black people are less likely to want to work as hard (meaning much/time) than a white person
2. the tradeoff is different for them b/c of existing practices that cause them to have lower wages
3. were they not to receive lower wages then, the theoretical disincentive would no longer exist
Now, based upon the way I see it then, he's never saying, "black people are lazy bums." Sure, you can take the words and twist them to mean that, but the overall gist of the entire entry seems to be that which I have just outlined.
I will concede that perhaps backdating the entry is questionable. But, at the same time, you do have to admit, that it may simply be a product of this storm that may have pressured him into something he didn't really want to do.
Actually, looking at the source material you provide, I think this quote summarizes best: "Mr. Nelson's attempt to justify the perception that black people are lazy is evidence of his own ignorance to what the modern problems of racisim are." He's attempting to justify the perception, not actually claim that the perception is correct. There's a huge difference. The latter is racist; the former is not. He may be ignorant about the modern problems of racism, but that certainly does not make him a racist.
I read your journal and these recent comments by you. I don't understand your personal vendetta against Russ Nelson. Most of the problems with the article have been addressed by people like Marxist Hacker 42 and he does a pretty good job of explaining what is going on. The article is not racist.
You seem to be unable to come to grips with the fact that you have gone overboard. The whole thing started as racist, and then you begin to saunter over to 'lack of facts' and 'backdating' the post as reasons to continue.
I see no reason to continue this pointless attack against Nelson. It is quite obvious that he had no intention of being a racist/bigot/discriminatory, but merely addressing somethinofteng observed in society. Retracting the article and backdating it is obviously one way for him to avoid all this unnecessary attention drawn to him by the likes of you, for NO GOOD REASON.
Clearly, it was poorly written without regard to citing sources, facts, etc. Nonetheless, it is quite clear from the text that he had no intent to be racist. Your entire argument/campaign against him, then, is built upon something that does not exist. It is people like you and your overly-political correct friends who are so quick to pounce on others for anything related to race/sex/religion that many studies that would be beneficial to society crawl to a halt.
You clearly have a hard time accepting the fact that your original notion was incorrect. You should take this opportunity to start learning how to lose gracefully.
In the United States, the GRE still is and will be computer based. If you RTFA, it is not only out-dated, but the paper and pencil only applies to certain test-takers overseas.
Re:"Apples == expensive" not a stereotype
on
Top 10 Apple Flops
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Averatec 3200 series. http://www.averatec.com/notebooks/3200series.htm My dad got one for $999 with DVD burner, 80gb HD, etc.
Not only is this laptop sub-1000$, it specs closely to the Mac and is a much better deal than the 12" iBook. In fact, I bought one myself when I was shopping for a laptop and even w/ the Apple education discount, the Averatec was a better deal.
...they want to take Lisp and replace all the parenthesis with < and > symbols?
The article itself clearly states: "Yes, this could all have been done 20 years ago using s-expressions."
C'mon, LISP has already done this stuff and then some. This "new" idea deserved a publication on ACM AND front page Slashdot? If everyone flocks to this because of s#(#<#, etc. it will be a sad day in programming language history.
Slashdot Mirror
amaroK is definitely the way to go. I've been using it for the past few months and it's simply amazing. Think iTunes but better (a LOT better).
Assuming that this really is a GPL violation, then I'm surprised they've already got some big names to fall for the con. On their own website, they make mention that VX30 was used by HFPA. I was incredulous of course and decided to do some fact checking. Well, turns out, it's true! The video gallery over at the Golden Globe awards has an icon for VX30 which links back to MXS.
Here's what I think would be the most hilarious thing of all:
- the code turns out to be a GPL violation.
- HFPA gets mad, makes a ruckus - especially to the movie industry
- movie industry sues MXS
- ???
- Slashdotters celebrate and rejoice over the movie industry suing someone
Wouldn't that be something?He's getting destroyed by readers on his very own forum.. Also, from his website, are a bunch of his other writings on the SCO case.
"him name is hopkin green frog
ps. i'll find my frog"
Well, I think we have a pretty good clue now.
CMU generally refers to Carnegie Mellon as cmu.edu points to while Claremont McKenna is usually just called by its fullname (or possibly Claremont but that can cause confusion with respect to all the Claremont schools)
CMU is in Pittsburgh unless you mean their west coast extension, in which case, there are just a bunch of unattractive Ph.D. students hanging out there. Caltech has even fewer women than MIT and they are also less attractive (yes, this sounds impossible, but it's true). In summary, while many Californians are attractive, they are not at Caltech or CMU.
I think you have it quite backwards and this is due to the current folklore surrounding colleges such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT, etc. The common folklore is pretty much what you stated: professors don't teach classes, TAs do, and that it's all about 'the name' of attending the school.
I attend one of these 'highly ranked' institutions and it has been a great experience. I've never had a class taught by a TA. In fact, all of my classes are taught by the professor. The big name professors are even willing to teach small seminars. For example, at Stanford, Osheroff (physics Nobel) teaches a small seminar that's related to optics and photography (one of his hobbies). Outside of lecture, one may deal with the TAs more, but most of the questions one would ask are adequately answered by the TAs. If one requires the professor's assistance, it might take some effort to setup a meeting time, but I've always seen them try hard to make time for students.
Here's how I view the difference between a 'top' institution and your typical state school: one will get the same education at both schools. There's a huge caveat to this, that being at a state school, one will probably have to expend a good amount of effort to ensure that he receives the same education. For example, at Caltech, the math core that all students must take is far beyond any typical math requirement at a state school, and if one attended a state school, he would have to spend more effort to find the correct difficult courses to take.
So, why pay the exorbitant amount of money to attend a so-called prestigious university? One word: opportunity. The opportunities afforded at a top university are exponentially greater than other schools. The top professors within the field have lots of knowledge to share; there is a great chance to network with both the faculty and one's peers. Definitely, as you mentioned, atmosphere is key, because everyone at these schools went there as "overachievers" (not that they are all overachievers, but they all share some type of 'drive' - if you get my gist) and being in such an environment, simple conversations can lead to interesting studies. I feel that the big difference in the opportunities available at a big-name school is research at the frontier with lots of available resources. At a small state school, if one wishes to do research in any field, the odds of finding a professor with a similar interest who is at the cutting edge and has resources to share is significantly smaller than at a top university where there are more research dollars coming in and cutting edge work happening every day. In addition, having the most current research being conducted at one's school allows more opportunities to see the frontier and learn about it in class. Finally, there is a great opportunity to listen and learn from others that one could not do at a state school. Big-name schools can draw people like Howard Dean or Bill Clinton or [insert visionary/scientist/social mover/etc. here] to speak at the school. While it's possible for a small state university to do so, I doubt you'll see Fresno State or whoever pull in more than one or two of such speakers a year whereas at Harvard, such people would be coming in year-round.
Being able to do cutting edge work while learning in an atmosphere geared toward higher education and having the interaction with great professors and people is the difference. Whether or not one thinks it's worth it to pay big bucks to get that difference is an individual choice.
Dead on. As others have mentioned, there are tons of uses for math in CS (AI, robotics, graphics, etc.). I just wanted to add that to your point about being a "hacker" means that more math is probably not necessary. But really, if someone is going to just be a hacker and nothing more, he shouldn't be in computer science in the first place.
If you want to try it without registering on this copyright infringer's website, here's the direct link: http://movies.mxsinc.com/CherryOS_Software.zip
If you look at the results, the voting percentages were very similar in each poll. And this is no mistake. Most people will not invest in more than one MMORPG and few will play two at any given time. Even fewer will choose to play three simultaneously and once someone starts one, they are unlikely to switch to another. Thus, it seems like a lot of the voting was simply based on what people were familiar with via word-of-mouth, their experience with their game of choice, etc. With limited knowledge, it obviously makes it hard to vote properly on the various categories and people will be apt to simply vote for their own game as they haven't seen many of the others in action. The results probably reflect the MMORPG split-up of RPGdot's voting base and nothing more.
I wanted to point out the article in Wired as well. It really seems like Dvorak read the parody memo and decided that he'd try to sound intelligent by writing a serious article with its content stolen from someone else.
How about this: since the editorial is in French, I think it's only fitting to post the Google translation of the editorial
While the idea is neat and clearly it is possible to put their idea into practice as shown by the demo, this project really does not have all that much to do with the semantic web. Unless the article is very misleading, it seems like the project uses RDF as a basis for finding and creating these slices. But partitioning data isn't what will make the semantic web powerful. We need computers themselves to understand the relationships between different sources of information on the semantic web. This will enable us to query/use different services in conjunction with one another whereas this project seems to gather said data and slice it up into ways for different people to interact with it. The former allows for greater expressivity and power while the latter (this project) seems to be more of a database project for building views with tagged data that is collected. Information integration is a solved problem in computer science and I hope that people don't see that as what the semantic web is about.
I'm curious to the answer to this question as well, as I admit, I don't know too much about their IIS system. Also, could you explain the ASP.NET vs. PHP thing? I've developed in PHP and dabbled in ASP (pre-.NET) and PHP has always been quite nice.
I wish I had mod points. I donate my karma to the parent post. He hits the nail on the head. While it was great to have an interview with Martin, Roblimo totally borked it by imparting his own biases.
I really don't see how you and those supposedly closer to the subject are still misinterpreting his words. It's quite obvious to me at least, that his poorly written argument was along the lines of:
1. all things being equal, based upon economic theory of leisure/work tradeoff, etc. we can infer that black people are less likely to want to work as hard (meaning much/time) than a white person
2. the tradeoff is different for them b/c of existing practices that cause them to have lower wages
3. were they not to receive lower wages then, the theoretical disincentive would no longer exist
Now, based upon the way I see it then, he's never saying, "black people are lazy bums." Sure, you can take the words and twist them to mean that, but the overall gist of the entire entry seems to be that which I have just outlined.
I will concede that perhaps backdating the entry is questionable. But, at the same time, you do have to admit, that it may simply be a product of this storm that may have pressured him into something he didn't really want to do.
Actually, looking at the source material you provide, I think this quote summarizes best:
"Mr. Nelson's attempt to justify the perception that black people are lazy is evidence of his own ignorance to what the modern problems of racisim are." He's attempting to justify the perception, not actually claim that the perception is correct. There's a huge difference. The latter is racist; the former is not. He may be ignorant about the modern problems of racism, but that certainly does not make him a racist.
I read your journal and these recent comments by you. I don't understand your personal vendetta against Russ Nelson. Most of the problems with the article have been addressed by people like Marxist Hacker 42 and he does a pretty good job of explaining what is going on. The article is not racist.
You seem to be unable to come to grips with the fact that you have gone overboard. The whole thing started as racist, and then you begin to saunter over to 'lack of facts' and 'backdating' the post as reasons to continue.
I see no reason to continue this pointless attack against Nelson. It is quite obvious that he had no intention of being a racist/bigot/discriminatory, but merely addressing somethinofteng observed in society. Retracting the article and backdating it is obviously one way for him to avoid all this unnecessary attention drawn to him by the likes of you, for NO GOOD REASON.
Clearly, it was poorly written without regard to citing sources, facts, etc. Nonetheless, it is quite clear from the text that he had no intent to be racist. Your entire argument/campaign against him, then, is built upon something that does not exist. It is people like you and your overly-political correct friends who are so quick to pounce on others for anything related to race/sex/religion that many studies that would be beneficial to society crawl to a halt.
You clearly have a hard time accepting the fact that your original notion was incorrect. You should take this opportunity to start learning how to lose gracefully.
In the United States, the GRE still is and will be computer based. If you RTFA, it is not only out-dated, but the paper and pencil only applies to certain test-takers overseas.
Averatec 3200 series. http://www.averatec.com/notebooks/3200series.htm
My dad got one for $999 with DVD burner, 80gb HD, etc.
Not only is this laptop sub-1000$, it specs closely to the Mac and is a much better deal than the 12" iBook. In fact, I bought one myself when I was shopping for a laptop and even w/ the Apple education discount, the Averatec was a better deal.
Will this release take a version jump from 1.4 to 5.0?
The article itself clearly states: "Yes, this could all have been done 20 years ago using s-expressions."
C'mon, LISP has already done this stuff and then some. This "new" idea deserved a publication on ACM AND front page Slashdot? If everyone flocks to this because of s#(#<#, etc. it will be a sad day in programming language history.
Unfortunately, you weren't. I read it as biotch too and thought, 'woah, Patents and Open Source BEE-YATCH!'
badger badger badger badger badger badger... mushroom! mushroom! (it _had_ to be said, karma be damned!)
And of course that should read "Rumsfeld"
No, no, you have it all wrong. It's not that they didn't proofread it, it's that Rumself was the proofreader and editor.