Artificial Neural Networks (ANN's) can be trained so intensively that they lose their ability to generalize. For example, if you train a network to recognize a photograph of a telephone pole, it should be able to recognize it during differing light conditions, different orientations, etc. An overtrained network will not generalize, but will only recognize a single instance of a telephone pole and ignore all the others.
One way to improve the generalization of neural networks is to feed them a bit of random data every once in a while.
During sleep it appears that random signals are being emitted into the rest of the brain by the brain stem. Sometimes you might be aware of the random signals, and put them into an imaginative framework called a dream. Anway, what do you suppose those random inputs periodically injected into a brain could be doing????
It's all speculation, but still fun to think about.
I've read some things where researchers speculate that most of the degradation isn't due to the loss of brain cells, but due to plaques that form between neurons in the brain.
They think this because many people can function at higher levels than Alzheimer's patients, but with a similar number of neurons. Apparently there's other ways to lose large numbers of neurons. Anyway, since Alzheimer's patients did so much worse with the same number of neurons the researchers were speculating that perhaps deposits that show up as whitish streaks on the NMRI scans were interfering with transmission of signals between neurons.
So, you're right. We're still learning about the disease and even the cause of the disease and the mechanism through which it destroys the brain isn't understood.
I'm gonna flame Concentric Network right here because they USED to control their spam, but no more. I used to be their customer, but I got two spams from another one of their customers (www.traderspain.com) and complained about both of them. The first time they said the problem was solved. The second time they ignored me.
So, that brings me to the main point. When you find that your ISP cannot control their spam, it's time to leave. I'm no longer a customer of Concentric network, and I tell EVERYONE that I know to stay away, far away, from Concentric.
The same should go for PSI too! If they started losing customers they would clean up their act. VOTE WITH YOUR FEET. It's the only language that companies understand.
I can't stand it when some luddite comes out and denounces cloning or whatever because it will take away interest from preserving existing species.
WHAT IS THE GOAL HERE?????
Is the goal to perpetuate the existing process, no matter how broken it is, or is the goal to figure out the best way to help save animals from extinction?
It seems that the guy who says that cloning will take away from preserving existing species is really afraid that his paycheck will be taken away and he might have to switch jobs.
Cloning is just one technical solution to saving species that might become or are already extince. We should develop the technology and use it.
The mitochondria are small sort of independant cell-like structures contained within our cells. The thinking is that simple cells evolved into complex cells by subsuming other simple cells around them. It's a borg-like thing I guess. Anyway, these cells which started to live together took over different jobs within the cells, and the mitochondria got the job of converting molecules into energy for the rest of the cell.
So, on a strictly cellular level, the mitochondria are the mitigators of the "force."
Moderation is a job that I take seriously when I get the chance. Even micro-moderation would be something that I take seriously.
When I read slashdot and have to moderate, it becomes a *job*. Mind you, it's a job that I gladly do, but most of the time I just want to read without being judgemental in the extreme.
I think that ultimately what will happen with micro-moderation is that the moderators will be self-selected, rather than elected to a community duty.
It would be nice to have several different form factors for a single model. I've got a Thinkpad i1450 now, but the thing is big and heavy. I rather like the teeny size of the Psion machine and I think that I would choose a machine of that size over a larger unit. But not everyone is the same as me. Offering a Psion 7 in a small, medium, and large size would be a great idea. The basic difference should be only the size of the screen which is the biggest dictator of the overall unit size.
On the other hand, I have a Newton 130 as well and though it's a great machine, it doesn't have a keyboard which I think is essential, and it doesn't run Linux either. The 130 is a little too small for my tastes too, so the Palm Pilot would only be worse in that regard since it's about 1/3 the size of the Newton. The Psion unit is about as small as you can get and still have a keyboard.
It's been two years since I wrote code to sign certificates, but IIRC, the NSA is at the root of the tree.
There's 5 levels or something like that, and the NSA has the key at the very top of the tree. People like Verisign have a key at level 3 or 4, and we end users might have a personal key at level 5.
This means NOTHING, except that you can prove who you say you are! It doesn't require that you need to trust the NSA for anything, and it won't give them any access.
So, am I on target, or am I talking about something completely different than the subject of the article? It's hard to tell because the article is so vague.
Anyway, I'm not too worried about security holes in my Linux box. Even if someone broke in they would only be able to steal what they could buy for $1.99 from www.cheapbytes.com! heh heh
The ideas are indeed dishonest. They are not truthful. I never said that he was lying, but I did say that he was repeating ideas that are dishonest. I'm sure he believes them, and that's a good reason why the educational system needs to be overhauled. When intelligent people believe things that are wrong, there's a problem.
I agree with your statements about scientific studies of god. There's no evidence to show that god exists, so why fabricate him?
And finally, I wasn't calling his Christian ideas dangerous, but his complete mis-understanding of science and scientific inquiry dangerous. Come on people! We're living in 1999 and science is all around us! It's inexcusable not to have an inkling of how science works.
Well thanks for stepping up and admitting that you marked it down.
Where did I call anyone who disagreed with me an idiot? What I called them is irrational. That's not an insulting word, but it is in fact the *most accurate* word that exists for those who believe in creationism.
Irrational is belief without proof. That's almost the same definition that the word 'faith' has. If you have some other definition that you are going by, then you should be aware that your internal dictionary is non-standard!
So, I take it back. It's not that you couldn't handle my opinion, it's just that you didn't UNDERSTAND my opinion.
Genesis 1:1 heavens and Earth 1:3 light 1:4 darkness 1:8 Heaven again! 1:9 Earth again! 1:12 plants on the land 1:14 light again! darkness again too! 1:16 god calls the moon a light - heh heh! 1:20 finally sea animals, and birds 1:24 beasts of the earth 1:27 man finally
Besides the obviously silly notion that god made light and darkness before he made the sun, and that the moon is called a light, there is still the error that birds were created before land animals, and that plants were created only on the land.
Things are a great deal simpler if you just forget about Biblical creation stories because then you don't need to make the rationalization that days means hundreds of millions of years. Besides, the Cambrian explosion would be even harder to fit into that sort of contrivance.
Why is it that Christians love to ramble on and on?
I'll address your points concisely:
1) Re: Newtonian mechanics not applying at the quantum level: Duh! But that does not invalidate Newtonian mechanics. The proof is that spacecraft arrive within microseconds of their predicted positions, after years of travel even out to Saturn and beyond. Even a unified theory which is Physics holy grail will not nullify Newtonian mechanics. Such a theory will only further explain what we already know to be a true description of the universe. Bzzt! Try again.
2) Re: Dinosaurs, truth being rationalized, not knowing 100% for sure: Once again, Duh! That's the way that science works. It is not 100% sure. But, compare that to every other system of investigation, including religious dogma. The *results* are what count. Success after success after success in an extremely wide variety of inquiries have increased our understanding. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that we're on to something here with the scientific method. It works better than anything else we've tried. If you can get any closer to 100% knowlege I'd certainly like to hear about it. If your methods are worse than the scientific method then keep them to yourself.
3) Re: you're thankful that I was honest to put a 'tentative' in front of my statement: Have I lied to you? If so, then where. Why are you thankful for one instance of truthfulness when my entire posting was truthful?
4) Re: I want to control people's minds: Where did I say that? Read the alt.atheism FAQ and look up non-sequitur please. Your ideas are dangerous for the reason that they are not truthful, and are irrational. Before you whine about the word "irrational" get out your dictionary. Irrational and faith have nearly the same definition: belief without proof.
I just noticed that you seem to think there is something called a scientific law. There is not. Please see my other post for an explanation.
Read "About Science" by Chalmers for a detailed explanation. The read (in order) Popper, and then Kuhn. Once you do that you will understand just how different the colloquial notion of theory is from the scientific notion of theory.
Read "About Science" by Chalmers. You will realize that you are wrong.
Science has nothing to say about considering all alternatives. One alternative is that you and everything else are all figments of my imagination, and I am the only thing in the universe.
One should simply reject that theory out of hand without even considering it, because it is so obviously stupid and wrong.
Furthermore, if god created the universe and made it look like man evolved from apes, then that god is very dishonest indeed. Or do you worship Pan? In that case it would make sense.
OK, I'm going to stomp your dishonest ideas once and for all.:-)
You say: -->"A scientist should alway have an open mind that even their most beloved and trusted theories may one day be proven false"
Evolution is a scientific theory. The definition of theory is much stronger in science than it is in conventional use. Newton's theory is used to guide spacecraft to Saturn. The theory works, and is accepted and proven to be a truthful description of how the universe works. There is no way that Newton's theory will ever be falsified. Not even Einstein's theory did that!
Likewise, evolution is a scientific theory, but it has been shown and observed to be a true representation of how life evolved on this planet.
Here's a quote and a reference for you. I expect you to look it up. It says nothing less than evolution has been observed in the laboratory to cause speciation. Evolution is a confirmed theory.
4.11: No one has ever seen one species arise from another. In 1964, Dr. D.J. Reish removed 5 or 6 polychaetes (Nereis acuminata) from Los Angeles/Long Beach harbor, and grew his sample to a size of thousands. In 1986, four pairs from this group were brought to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; the population at Woods Hole thus had gone through two bottlenecks, which are supposed to help drive evolution through genetic drift. In 1977-1978, two new cultures of N. acuminata were gathered from nearby Long Beach and Newport Beach, and grown under the same conditions as the Woods Hole sample. The three populations were later crossed, and it was found that the only crosses that would not produce viable offspring were the crosses involving Woods Hole and the two new cultures. This signifies nothing less than speciation, and all in the laboratory - all observed directly (Weinberg et al., 1992).
-->"there is no evidence. (is there any evidence at all that there is definately NO god?). "
There's a great deal of evidence that the Christian god is fabricated out of whole cloth. Similar evidence exists for every other god described in any human culture. By induction, I can extend that evidence to a tentative statement "There is no god."
-->"If you can't disprove His existence, then shut the hell up and leave those of who DO believe alone."
I will not and cannot shut up. Your ideas are dangerous because anyone who believes your notions of what science is and what a scientific theory consists of is trodding down the path of ignorance. That costs actual human lives!
Ahhhhh! This is more of the problem with education in this country. Returning schools to the community will only ensure that poor communities have poor education and rich communities will have variable education. Are you rich? Well you can afford to move to a school district that will at least have a lot of money for education. Whether the school is any good is a whole separate issue. If you're not rich, then you will have to blame your own tough luck and quit whining. Are you well educated? Well, if you want your children to have a shot at also being well educated, you need to do two things: get rich, and move to a school district that provides good education, with enough funding. Out of all the school districts in this country, probably only about 10% will fall into the "good" category. The rest fall into the categories of "well-funded" or "crappy." The federal government must set proper standards that are followed by all schools, regardless of where those schools are located. Schools that do not meet the standards must be improved and adequate funding must be provided.
To cap my point off, I am confident that if I start a school where students will learn that the Earth is in the midst of a battle between warring alien races, then I will have many many students. But, it should be illegal for me to even start such a school.
I find it interesting that though my previous comment was on topic, and accurate, it has been labelled as flamebait.
I spoke my mind without concern for how others would react. That means that I did not post my opinion to start a flame war. If some people cannot handle the truth and consider my comments flame bait, then so be it. It's yet another example of how an initiative to improve education is desperately needed.
I read the web site and I saw written nowhere that creationists and other irrational people are a huge threat to education. I agree with them that science education in this country is a mess. The fact that most adults believe that the universe was created by a god is proof of that. One of the critical things that we must do is defend schools against such things as public prayer, religion, and especially creationism. When dogma is taught as science all truth is in jeopardy.
The difference between the TI-99/4A is that it was a crappy computer! I know because that was my first machine.
The basic language that came with the machine was alright, but it lacked any sort of peek or poke command. There was no way to program to the hardware without getting some expensive assembler cartridge. It was also dog slow compared to the competition. The an empty for-next loop iterated about 180 times per second.
And if you breathed on the cartridge when it was in the slot the machine would crash.
The "curse" of the TI was simply a bunch of pissed off users yelling "FUCK" because they just lost a lot of work in a crash.
Slashdot Mirror
Artificial Neural Networks (ANN's) can be trained so intensively that they lose their ability to generalize. For example, if you train a network to recognize a photograph of a telephone pole, it should be able to recognize it during differing light conditions, different orientations, etc. An overtrained network will not generalize, but will only recognize a single instance of a telephone pole and ignore all the others.
One way to improve the generalization of neural networks is to feed them a bit of random data every once in a while.
During sleep it appears that random signals are being emitted into the rest of the brain by the brain stem. Sometimes you might be aware of the random signals, and put them into an imaginative framework called a dream. Anway, what do you suppose those random inputs periodically injected into a brain could be doing????
It's all speculation, but still fun to think about.
I've read some things where researchers speculate that most of the degradation isn't due to the loss of brain cells, but due to plaques that form between neurons in the brain.
They think this because many people can function at higher levels than Alzheimer's patients, but with a similar number of neurons. Apparently there's other ways to lose large numbers of neurons. Anyway, since Alzheimer's patients did so much worse with the same number of neurons the researchers were speculating that perhaps deposits that show up as whitish streaks on the NMRI scans were interfering with transmission of signals between neurons.
So, you're right. We're still learning about the disease and even the cause of the disease and the mechanism through which it destroys the brain isn't understood.
Hey how fast does that transister respond? :-)
It's probably fast enough, but ya never know, right?
I'm gonna flame Concentric Network right here because they USED to control their spam, but no more. I used to be their customer, but I got two spams from another one of their customers (www.traderspain.com) and complained about both of them. The first time they said the problem was solved. The second time they ignored me.
So, that brings me to the main point. When you find that your ISP cannot control their spam, it's time to leave. I'm no longer a customer of Concentric network, and I tell EVERYONE that I know to stay away, far away, from Concentric.
The same should go for PSI too! If they started losing customers they would clean up their act. VOTE WITH YOUR FEET. It's the only language that companies understand.
End of rant.
Were any of these geeks who were rocking back and forth wearing pants?
AHA! I found the flaw in the study.
I can't stand it when some luddite comes out and denounces cloning or whatever because it will take away interest from preserving existing species.
WHAT IS THE GOAL HERE?????
Is the goal to perpetuate the existing process, no matter how broken it is, or is the goal to figure out the best way to help save animals from extinction?
It seems that the guy who says that cloning will take away from preserving existing species is really afraid that his paycheck will be taken away and he might have to switch jobs.
Cloning is just one technical solution to saving species that might become or are already extince. We should develop the technology and use it.
Hmmmm. There's an analogy I think....
The mitochondria are small sort of independant cell-like structures contained within our cells. The thinking is that simple cells evolved into complex cells by subsuming other simple cells around them. It's a borg-like thing I guess. Anyway, these cells which started to live together took over different jobs within the cells, and the mitochondria got the job of converting molecules into energy for the rest of the cell.
So, on a strictly cellular level, the mitochondria are the mitigators of the "force."
Moderation is a job that I take seriously when I get the chance. Even micro-moderation would be something that I take seriously.
When I read slashdot and have to moderate, it becomes a *job*. Mind you, it's a job that I gladly do, but most of the time I just want to read without being judgemental in the extreme.
I think that ultimately what will happen with micro-moderation is that the moderators will be self-selected, rather than elected to a community duty.
It would be nice to have several different form factors for a single model. I've got a Thinkpad i1450 now, but the thing is big and heavy. I rather like the teeny size of the Psion machine and I think that I would choose a machine of that size over a larger unit. But not everyone is the same as me. Offering a Psion 7 in a small, medium, and large size would be a great idea. The basic difference should be only the size of the screen which is the biggest dictator of the overall unit size.
On the other hand, I have a Newton 130 as well and though it's a great machine, it doesn't have a keyboard which I think is essential, and it doesn't run Linux either. The 130 is a little too small for my tastes too, so the Palm Pilot would only be worse in that regard since it's about 1/3 the size of the Newton. The Psion unit is about as small as you can get and still have a keyboard.
Railroad is a great game!
But my heart cries out for
Jane's Israeli Air Force and ESPECIALLY Jane's Fighter's Anthology.
Is that like computer porn?
It's been two years since I wrote code to sign certificates, but IIRC, the NSA is at the root of the tree.
There's 5 levels or something like that, and the NSA has the key at the very top of the tree. People like Verisign have a key at level 3 or 4, and we end users might have a personal key at level 5.
This means NOTHING, except that you can prove who you say you are! It doesn't require that you need to trust the NSA for anything, and it won't give them any access.
So, am I on target, or am I talking about something completely different than the subject of the article? It's hard to tell because the article is so vague.
Anyway, I'm not too worried about security holes in my Linux box. Even if someone broke in they would only be able to steal what they could buy for $1.99 from www.cheapbytes.com! heh heh
The ideas are indeed dishonest. They are not truthful. I never said that he was lying, but I did say that he was repeating ideas that are dishonest. I'm sure he believes them, and that's a good reason why the educational system needs to be overhauled. When intelligent people believe things that are wrong, there's a problem.
I agree with your statements about scientific studies of god. There's no evidence to show that god exists, so why fabricate him?
And finally, I wasn't calling his Christian ideas dangerous, but his complete mis-understanding of science and scientific inquiry dangerous. Come on people! We're living in 1999 and science is all around us! It's inexcusable not to have an inkling of how science works.
Well thanks for stepping up and admitting that you marked it down.
Where did I call anyone who disagreed with me an idiot? What I called them is irrational. That's not an insulting word, but it is in fact the *most accurate* word that exists for those who believe in creationism.
Irrational is belief without proof. That's almost the same definition that the word 'faith' has. If you have some other definition that you are going by, then you should be aware that your internal dictionary is non-standard!
So, I take it back. It's not that you couldn't handle my opinion, it's just that you didn't UNDERSTAND my opinion.
You need to read your Bible more closely:
Genesis 1:1 heavens and Earth
1:3 light
1:4 darkness
1:8 Heaven again!
1:9 Earth again!
1:12 plants on the land
1:14 light again! darkness again too!
1:16 god calls the moon a light - heh heh!
1:20 finally sea animals, and birds
1:24 beasts of the earth
1:27 man finally
Besides the obviously silly notion that god made light and darkness before he made the sun, and that the moon is called a light, there is still the error that birds were created before land animals, and that plants were created only on the land.
Things are a great deal simpler if you just forget about Biblical creation stories because then you don't need to make the rationalization that days means hundreds of millions of years. Besides, the Cambrian explosion would be even harder to fit into that sort of contrivance.
Why is it that Christians love to ramble on and on?
I'll address your points concisely:
1) Re: Newtonian mechanics not applying at the quantum level: Duh! But that does not invalidate Newtonian mechanics. The proof is that spacecraft arrive within microseconds of their predicted positions, after years of travel even out to Saturn and beyond. Even a unified theory which is Physics holy grail will not nullify Newtonian mechanics. Such a theory will only further explain what we already know to be a true description of the universe. Bzzt! Try again.
2) Re: Dinosaurs, truth being rationalized, not knowing 100% for sure: Once again, Duh! That's the way that science works. It is not 100% sure. But, compare that to every other system of investigation, including religious dogma. The *results* are what count. Success after success after success in an extremely wide variety of inquiries have increased our understanding. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that we're on to something here with the scientific method. It works better than anything else we've tried. If you can get any closer to 100% knowlege I'd certainly like to hear about it. If your methods are worse than the scientific method then keep them to yourself.
3) Re: you're thankful that I was honest to put a 'tentative' in front of my statement: Have I lied to you? If so, then where. Why are you thankful for one instance of truthfulness when my entire posting was truthful?
4) Re: I want to control people's minds: Where did I say that? Read the alt.atheism FAQ and look up non-sequitur please. Your ideas are dangerous for the reason that they are not truthful, and are irrational. Before you whine about the word "irrational" get out your dictionary. Irrational and faith have nearly the same definition: belief without proof.
I just noticed that you seem to think there is something called a scientific law. There is not. Please see my other post for an explanation.
Read "About Science" by Chalmers for a detailed explanation. The read (in order) Popper, and then Kuhn. Once you do that you will understand just how different the colloquial notion of theory is from the scientific notion of theory.
Nope, I'm not joking. Public school prayer is illegal and unconstitutional. One nation under god is what Iran believes. I am happy that we do not.
Furthermore, you put up a red herring by claiming that private school prayer is illegal. It is not.
And yes, I am a liberal. I believe that freedom of the individual is paramount.
Any other interpretation of what I said is a contrivance of an irrational mind.
Read "About Science" by Chalmers. You will realize that you are wrong.
Science has nothing to say about considering all alternatives. One alternative is that you and everything else are all figments of my imagination, and I am the only thing in the universe.
One should simply reject that theory out of hand without even considering it, because it is so obviously stupid and wrong.
Furthermore, if god created the universe and made it look like man evolved from apes, then that god is very dishonest indeed. Or do you worship Pan? In that case it would make sense.
OK, I'm going to stomp your dishonest ideas once and for all. :-)
You say:
-->"A scientist should alway have an open mind that even their most beloved and trusted theories may one day be proven false"
Evolution is a scientific theory. The definition of theory is much stronger in science than it is in conventional use. Newton's theory is used to guide spacecraft to Saturn. The theory works, and is accepted and proven to be a truthful description of how the universe works. There is no way that Newton's theory will ever be falsified. Not even Einstein's theory did that!
Likewise, evolution is a scientific theory, but it has been shown and observed to be a true representation of how life evolved on this planet.
Here's a quote and a reference for you. I expect you to look it up. It says nothing less than evolution has been observed in the laboratory to cause speciation. Evolution is a confirmed theory.
4.11: No one has ever seen one species arise from another. In 1964, Dr. D.J. Reish removed 5 or 6 polychaetes (Nereis acuminata) from Los Angeles/Long Beach harbor, and grew his sample to a size of thousands. In 1986, four pairs from this group were brought to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; the population at Woods Hole thus had gone through two bottlenecks, which are supposed to help drive evolution through genetic drift. In 1977-1978, two new cultures of N. acuminata were gathered from nearby Long Beach and Newport Beach, and grown under the same conditions as the Woods Hole sample. The three populations were later crossed, and it was found that the only crosses that would not produce viable offspring were the crosses involving Woods Hole and the two new cultures. This signifies nothing less than speciation, and all in the laboratory - all observed directly (Weinberg et al., 1992).
-->"there is no evidence. (is there any evidence at all that there is definately NO god?). "
There's a great deal of evidence that the Christian god is fabricated out of whole cloth. Similar evidence exists for every other god described in any human culture. By induction, I can extend that evidence to a tentative statement "There is no god."
-->"If you can't disprove His existence, then shut the hell up and leave those of who DO believe alone."
I will not and cannot shut up. Your ideas are dangerous because anyone who believes your notions of what science is and what a scientific theory consists of is trodding down the path of ignorance. That costs actual human lives!
Ahhhhh! This is more of the problem with education in this country. Returning schools to the community will only ensure that poor communities have poor education and rich communities will have variable education. Are you rich? Well you can afford to move to a school district that will at least have a lot of money for education. Whether the school is any good is a whole separate issue. If you're not rich, then you will have to blame your own tough luck and quit whining. Are you well educated? Well, if you want your children to have a shot at also being well educated, you need to do two things: get rich, and move to a school district that provides good education, with enough funding. Out of all the school districts in this country, probably only about 10% will fall into the "good" category. The rest fall into the categories of "well-funded" or "crappy." The federal government must set proper standards that are followed by all schools, regardless of where those schools are located. Schools that do not meet the standards must be improved and adequate funding must be provided.
To cap my point off, I am confident that if I start a school where students will learn that the Earth is in the midst of a battle between warring alien races, then I will have many many students. But, it should be illegal for me to even start such a school.
Creationism should not be part of a science class because it is not a scientific theory.
I find it interesting that though my previous comment was on topic, and accurate, it has been labelled as flamebait.
I spoke my mind without concern for how others would react. That means that I did not post my opinion to start a flame war. If some people cannot handle the truth and consider my comments flame bait, then so be it. It's yet another example of how an initiative to improve education is desperately needed.
I read the web site and I saw written nowhere that creationists and other irrational people are a huge threat to education. I agree with them that science education in this country is a mess. The fact that most adults believe that the universe was created by a god is proof of that. One of the critical things that we must do is defend schools against such things as public prayer, religion, and especially creationism. When dogma is taught as science all truth is in jeopardy.
The difference between the TI-99/4A is that it was a crappy computer! I know because that was my first machine.
The basic language that came with the machine was alright, but it lacked any sort of peek or poke command. There was no way to program to the hardware without getting some expensive assembler cartridge. It was also dog slow compared to the competition. The an empty for-next loop iterated about 180 times per second.
And if you breathed on the cartridge when it was in the slot the machine would crash.
The "curse" of the TI was simply a bunch of pissed off users yelling "FUCK" because they just lost a lot of work in a crash.