I read the whole article and found it entirely not terribly original or interesting. Sure, maybe you can make a code from it. I can generate tons of weird combinatorial/geometric widgets that do the same thing.
People have been doing this since the 90s. Here is a paper where they say they use a 30 fps camera. I am sure you can find an older one. I saw one in 1996.
http://www.manuelstuflesser.net/stuflesser_paper.pdf
Also, if you ask CV people they don't think they are part of AI. Some of them use AI, but there are many tools used.
That's so true. Like if you have a terrorist who knows the location of a biological weapon but won't tell unless he gets immunity, then you can patch him right through to the president and attorney general.
I think you point is a good one. Basically, as key lengths get longer for most cryptosystems, the brute force time required grows exponetially (? - or really fast). So I think that this kind of issue, which comes up a lot in tech news lately, can be squashed by making a key length which is not unreasonably long. RSA for example is just not going to be beaten this way. If you find a parallel resource to factor 150 digits numbers, it probably isn't going to be able to handle 200 digit numbers. (Or maybe even 155 digits numbers...)
Not sure about true, but not great science or engineering. It's a pity that the media can't distinguish between work like this as opposed to work by great people in robotics such as Michael Raibert or Andy Ruina. Compare this with big dog. That's real engineering.
I guess the real problem, which I think you are getting at, is that the children didn't act independently on the project, and that this could mislead them into thinking they had done real science?
For programming projects, the software gives a number indicating how similar two projects are. This is a flag. Then the instructor considers the projects on a case by case basis. For one thing, if there is code in the book they are allowed to use or code given in class, and two students use it, then the two projects get flagged. Then, I, the instructor looks at it and checks to see what was going on.
You can't really test students with projects/papers. They cheat. Even if they don't use a professional service. I spent years teaching CS students and it was always a problem. It helps to use detection software, like the system Berkeley provides. But the humanities just have to suck it up and admit that they need to give only in class exams.
Slashdot Mirror
One thing you can be sure of - if you see a flying object, and it's unidentified, then it is a UFO.
Charles Widmore can do that by going to the island and turning the wheel.
It is now. But it wasn't a state until 1959 or something. And was John McCain born in Panama or something?
And you know what? That kid in elementary school that was the first to try smoking? He works in a Walmart now.
I read the whole article and found it entirely not terribly original or interesting. Sure, maybe you can make a code from it. I can generate tons of weird combinatorial/geometric widgets that do the same thing.
People have been doing this since the 90s. Here is a paper where they say they use a 30 fps camera. I am sure you can find an older one. I saw one in 1996. http://www.manuelstuflesser.net/stuflesser_paper.pdf Also, if you ask CV people they don't think they are part of AI. Some of them use AI, but there are many tools used.
This is has nothing to do with AI. It's hardware. Balancing the pencil is basic control theory. You can do it with a regular video camera.
That's so true. Like if you have a terrorist who knows the location of a biological weapon but won't tell unless he gets immunity, then you can patch him right through to the president and attorney general.
I think you point is a good one. Basically, as key lengths get longer for most cryptosystems, the brute force time required grows exponetially (? - or really fast). So I think that this kind of issue, which comes up a lot in tech news lately, can be squashed by making a key length which is not unreasonably long. RSA for example is just not going to be beaten this way. If you find a parallel resource to factor 150 digits numbers, it probably isn't going to be able to handle 200 digit numbers. (Or maybe even 155 digits numbers...)
Anti-matter is probably created all the time in the room you are sitting in. Just hard to detect.
Exactly. Just as to be an organ recipient, you should be listed as an organ donor.
Not sure about true, but not great science or engineering. It's a pity that the media can't distinguish between work like this as opposed to work by great people in robotics such as Michael Raibert or Andy Ruina. Compare this with big dog. That's real engineering.
I bet in the future there may be a way to make Linux work with drivers my scanner. Just a prediction. I know it's way out there.
I guess the real problem, which I think you are getting at, is that the children didn't act independently on the project, and that this could mislead them into thinking they had done real science?
Or it would have been considered illegal.
Welcome to 1994, and Peter Shor's discovery of how to factor with quantum computers.
Newsflash - after the internet came into vogue, hacking has meant to commit "computer" crimes.
I don't really think one day is really enough time to process these documents.
He was a funny guy. Bye dude!
For programming projects, the software gives a number indicating how similar two projects are. This is a flag. Then the instructor considers the projects on a case by case basis. For one thing, if there is code in the book they are allowed to use or code given in class, and two students use it, then the two projects get flagged. Then, I, the instructor looks at it and checks to see what was going on.
You can't really test students with projects/papers. They cheat. Even if they don't use a professional service. I spent years teaching CS students and it was always a problem. It helps to use detection software, like the system Berkeley provides. But the humanities just have to suck it up and admit that they need to give only in class exams.
But your units don't check. It is 900,000,000 * .004.
Ack! I totally agree. I meant to reply to the original statement that stated the opposite.
Nice troll! You managed to choose a topic that is probably as complex and volatile as Kirk vs. Picard, but yet is not as familiar.
Hahaha! Exactly why that movie is so funny.