I have had no English courses in college, but the best class I ever had the pleasure of taking was my High School AP English class.
It was taught towards the AP exam. Twice a week, we would come into class, receive a poem or short story and we had the remainder of the period to write an essay on it. Each essay was graded and handed back to us.
I am sure that it was a lot of work for my teacher, but nothing has benefitted me more than that intensive class.
I suppose the short answer is that teaching style and grammar is good, but the only way to really reinforce skills that will stick with students is to have them write. Having a limited amount of time forces students to write, rather than stress about word choice or grammar. They will learn their own weaknesses, not those of spell-check or the thesaurus, and they will improve.
Cheers
I've done this before.
In a city it works great.
It's a very basic localization problem that comes up in robotics. Basically, with a dense enough population of wireless routers (most uniquely named) you can run algorithms which "localize" your position.
It can actually work extremely well in a city where there are many devices. Even if some of them change, the beauty of the system is that it can easily prune/add new nodes while functioning normally.
As if CPU benchmark tests weren't vague and subjective enough, we get a bunch of random graphs without LABELS. Jesus. I mean, you can figure out what most of them probably are but I'd rather just READ it.
I mean I hate reading those things enough when they don't mention how they do means or what they normalize to, but just meaningless numbers? Yeah, no thanks boss.
Not necessarily. It's the same concept as a Beowulf supercomputer.
With the possiblity of parallelism, we can use cheaper cards in tandem and get the same power as a high end graphics card (or one that doesn't exist) for far less money.
It also helps things like failure--if one node fails you can simply replace it without the entire system (your $1000 graphics card) going down.
Redundant systems and parallel computing are the wave of the future wooooooo!
Nice! I plan on war driving my local city once we get RFID chips put in the IDs. I'm gonna set up a website that will illustrate the traffic flow of hot girls throughout the day.
You ignore the other major rule of cryptography--Don't trust a system if you don't know how it works.
I don't know these guys working on the Freenet project. Why should I trust them more than anyone else? If everyone can examine the algorithms they use it will be a FAR more trustworthy system because it can be established whether it is cryptographically sound.
Until the cutting edge in encryption is surpassed by the cutting edge in encryption breaking your point is simply, uneducatedly wrong. Obscurity of algorithm gives you a slight advantage over the lay user, but a SERIOUS disadvantage over the determined, capable user as well as a drastic hit to your trustworthiness.
I see where you're coming from. You're saying that the system will be more secure from the developer's perspective if the algorithm is kept secret. This is true. But how do we know whether Bob Developer is keeping it secret for added security, or because he is using obscurity as a crutch because his knowledge of cryptography is inadequate?
I know NASA has had some difficulties, but science fiction has clearly influenced our expectations for the feasible.
For an example of what I mean, check out the DARPA Grand Challenge. That's here on EARTH and they don't get far.
Robotics is an extremely interesting field--one which I've had the pleasure of working in at UTexas, Austin but it is still quite in its infancy.
You say "Oh just give it extra legs like a spider". You have no idea of the shear logistics that go into something like that. Giving it a system like that would be another expensive project by itself involving years of work on control mechanisms, sensor mechanisms, PID controllers for feedback to every joint, swivle, whatnot. If one TINY thing is mis-anticipated; if the sand has a little bit more friction or a little less; if the wind blows it into the joints of your spider; if the system has to rely on hydraulics (lord have mercy on you) the entire thing can grind to a hault.
At least they stopped selling the full Pentium 4 laptops.
I have one of those things and after about 10 minutes of having it on your lap you have to stand up and walk it off.
Probably had to replace too many melted keyboards.
I am a CS major at UT Austin and have been involved in robotics here. It was mentioned briefly, but I'd like to paste the text from the UT site which corrects this article. Sources. Check them.
"11 May 2005 The team is just getting back from the 2005 US Open where we placed third. While we lost our semifinal match 1-0 to Penn, we played an exhibition match against the eventual first place team, CMU, and won 2-1. In official play, we outscored our opponents 24-1. With a little bit of luck we could have wound up in 2nd or even 1st. We're coming home with a lot of ideas for improvement though, so we're looking forward to Robocup 2005 in Osaka! Contrary to what was posted on Slashdot, we did not play the Germans. That was CMDash from CMU."
Since this appears to be a sandbox tool, what's the problem?
The only real problem I can see, and that people bring up (since everything else is deterministic in a closed environment) would be random or psuedo random number generation.
Could it not (or does it) simply save the results of system clock queries? Since the system clock is used to seed most random number generators, saving the return values and feeding them back could eliminate the problem. Clearly in encryption intensive programs this would act like some kind of memory bomb, but it would solve probably 99.9% of applications. As a safeguard, it could simply be alloted a certain area of memory that, once filled, would return to a 'closest fit' senario.
I hope nobody here has a compaq... but if you know someone who does you've seen a failure of this same premise. Compaq thought it would be the best thing since sliced bread to put buttons on your keyboard that would launcha a browser, play music, feed your dog, etc. Long story short -
Nobody uses them (And compaq is horrible).
Cell phones will NEVER replace cameras. Why? Because a camera of equivilant size will always be better at taking pictures than a device that has to incorporate a small PC into it.
Slashdot Mirror
I have had no English courses in college, but the best class I ever had the pleasure of taking was my High School AP English class. It was taught towards the AP exam. Twice a week, we would come into class, receive a poem or short story and we had the remainder of the period to write an essay on it. Each essay was graded and handed back to us. I am sure that it was a lot of work for my teacher, but nothing has benefitted me more than that intensive class. I suppose the short answer is that teaching style and grammar is good, but the only way to really reinforce skills that will stick with students is to have them write. Having a limited amount of time forces students to write, rather than stress about word choice or grammar. They will learn their own weaknesses, not those of spell-check or the thesaurus, and they will improve. Cheers
http://maddox.xmission.com/
~150million hits?
Proof by counter-example?
I've done this before. In a city it works great. It's a very basic localization problem that comes up in robotics. Basically, with a dense enough population of wireless routers (most uniquely named) you can run algorithms which "localize" your position. It can actually work extremely well in a city where there are many devices. Even if some of them change, the beauty of the system is that it can easily prune/add new nodes while functioning normally.
As if CPU benchmark tests weren't vague and subjective enough, we get a bunch of random graphs without LABELS. Jesus. I mean, you can figure out what most of them probably are but I'd rather just READ it. I mean I hate reading those things enough when they don't mention how they do means or what they normalize to, but just meaningless numbers? Yeah, no thanks boss.
Not necessarily.
It's the same concept as a Beowulf supercomputer.
With the possiblity of parallelism, we can use cheaper cards in tandem and get the same power as a high end graphics card (or one that doesn't exist) for far less money.
It also helps things like failure--if one node fails you can simply replace it without the entire system (your $1000 graphics card) going down.
Redundant systems and parallel computing are the wave of the future wooooooo!
Nice! I plan on war driving my local city once we get RFID chips put in the IDs. I'm gonna set up a website that will illustrate the traffic flow of hot girls throughout the day.
Now we can go international baby! gtfo.
Welcome to geekdom--where all things are measured against that singular barometer of joy which is Star Wars.
gtfo
You ignore the other major rule of cryptography--Don't trust a system if you don't know how it works.
I don't know these guys working on the Freenet project. Why should I trust them more than anyone else? If everyone can examine the algorithms they use it will be a FAR more trustworthy system because it can be established whether it is cryptographically sound.
Until the cutting edge in encryption is surpassed by the cutting edge in encryption breaking your point is simply, uneducatedly wrong. Obscurity of algorithm gives you a slight advantage over the lay user, but a SERIOUS disadvantage over the determined, capable user as well as a drastic hit to your trustworthiness.
I see where you're coming from. You're saying that the system will be more secure from the developer's perspective if the algorithm is kept secret. This is true. But how do we know whether Bob Developer is keeping it secret for added security, or because he is using obscurity as a crutch because his knowledge of cryptography is inadequate?
I know NASA has had some difficulties, but science fiction has clearly influenced our expectations for the feasible.
For an example of what I mean, check out the DARPA Grand Challenge. That's here on EARTH and they don't get far.
Robotics is an extremely interesting field--one which I've had the pleasure of working in at UTexas, Austin but it is still quite in its infancy.
You say "Oh just give it extra legs like a spider". You have no idea of the shear logistics that go into something like that. Giving it a system like that would be another expensive project by itself involving years of work on control mechanisms, sensor mechanisms, PID controllers for feedback to every joint, swivle, whatnot. If one TINY thing is mis-anticipated; if the sand has a little bit more friction or a little less; if the wind blows it into the joints of your spider; if the system has to rely on hydraulics (lord have mercy on you) the entire thing can grind to a hault.
At least they stopped selling the full Pentium 4 laptops. I have one of those things and after about 10 minutes of having it on your lap you have to stand up and walk it off. Probably had to replace too many melted keyboards.
are you saynig Texas did not play Dortmund at all?
Yes, I am.
Articles...Read Them.
Associated Press is great, but their salaries are on the low end for reporters (quite so in major cities). Draw your own conclusions.
I am a CS major at UT Austin and have been involved in robotics here. It was mentioned briefly, but I'd like to paste the text from the UT site which corrects this article. Sources. Check them.
"11 May 2005
The team is just getting back from the 2005 US Open where we placed third. While we lost our semifinal match 1-0 to Penn, we played an exhibition match against the eventual first place team, CMU, and won 2-1. In official play, we outscored our opponents 24-1. With a little bit of luck we could have wound up in 2nd or even 1st. We're coming home with a lot of ideas for improvement though, so we're looking forward to Robocup 2005 in Osaka! Contrary to what was posted on Slashdot, we did not play the Germans. That was CMDash from CMU."
Since this appears to be a sandbox tool, what's the problem? The only real problem I can see, and that people bring up (since everything else is deterministic in a closed environment) would be random or psuedo random number generation. Could it not (or does it) simply save the results of system clock queries? Since the system clock is used to seed most random number generators, saving the return values and feeding them back could eliminate the problem. Clearly in encryption intensive programs this would act like some kind of memory bomb, but it would solve probably 99.9% of applications. As a safeguard, it could simply be alloted a certain area of memory that, once filled, would return to a 'closest fit' senario.
I hope nobody here has a compaq... but if you know someone who does you've seen a failure of this same premise. Compaq thought it would be the best thing since sliced bread to put buttons on your keyboard that would launcha a browser, play music, feed your dog, etc. Long story short - Nobody uses them (And compaq is horrible). Cell phones will NEVER replace cameras. Why? Because a camera of equivilant size will always be better at taking pictures than a device that has to incorporate a small PC into it.