They don't need to pay the editors a thing. The editors just need to have been early adopters. You can bet your bottom bitcoin that anyone raving about it has a stash of them saved up.
Have you ever met someone who is *actually* autistic? Not someone who has Asperger's and is socially awkward, but someone who has the full-blown condition?
When I was in secondary school, we took a course where we interacted with autistic people on a day-to-day basis. Autistic people can not be expected to care for themselves in any way. Forget taking advanced maths. It's a hard slog to get these guys washed and dressed every day.
I think both the OP and the GP are romanticising the condition. Yes, sometimes people on the so-called autistic spectrum have "sitzenfleich" - the ability to sit down and slog through difficult technical material, day after day, hour after hour. Don't count on it though. In general, it's just a very sad condition that limits a person's ability to understand and communicate with others.
On the other hand, using this method, you can only ever draw with any strategy - including rock-rock-rock-rock-.... With this in mind, is it really the best strategy?
I guess the point is that people tend to deviate from this strategy and the computer can take advantage of those deviations.
I would be very interested to know how the learning algorithm works. Given that the program is taking advantage of your deviations from the 1/3-1/3-1/3 strategy, it follows that the computer is itself deviating from that strategy. Therefore there should be some strategy that beats the computer on average.
I guess you could continue this reasoning ad infinitum, but I would say that the meta-meta-meta strategies would converge to 1/3-1/3-1/3 pretty quickly.
Erdos offered many prizes for the solution of problems that he thought were difficult or out of reach of the mathematics of his time. These prizes were sometimes huge, worth tens or even hundreds of thousands of US dollars in today's money.
Erdos used to joke that he would get in trouble for violating minimum wage laws.
There's a brilliant historical example of this. G.H. Hardy, one of the foremost mathematicians of his day, once gave number theory and general relativity as examples of mathematical disciplines that were interesting in their own right, but which were unlikely to ever produce anything useful. Nowadays, relativity underpins the GPS system, and number theory provides the basis for a large amount of cryptography.
Facebook has five hundred million users. Is each user really worth a hundred dollars? Facebook is going public soon. What are the chances that this 'leaked' report is designed to pump up the stock, and therefore Goldman's profit?
The hard sciences aren't immune to this kind of thing either. The Bogdanov affair wasn't as serious as the Sokal affair, but it's still in the same ball park.
Most slashdotters would be running ad blocking software anyway. I know I am. I'd also never buy something based on seeing it in a banner ad.
On the other hand, I'd actually think about buying iRacer, watching Top Gear, or buying the magazine after reading this interesting article. That's how the web is meant to be used.
Sorry for replying to my own post, but I guess I meant any non-supercomputer. Apparently they've managed to get clusters to play at amateur Dan level over the last couple of years.
For the record, the go ranking system works out as
30 Kyu... 1 kyu 1 dan amateur... 5 dan amateur european... 9 dan amateur european
5 dan amateur european is about equal to 1 dan professional, due to inconsistencies in rankings between countries.
Ugh. What's with perpetuating this nonsense? A computer did not beat the top ranked Western chess player. Rather, a group of people _reprogrammed the computer after each match_ to beat the top ranked Western chess player.
TFA, it is annoyingly vague on an important point: What is the rank of the Japanese player that lost?
And as others have pointed out, let see a computer take down a top ranked (10th Dan) player at Go. The best a machine has done (I think) is winning against a 5th Dan.
That's only on a 9x9 board. A competent low Kyu or Dan player could crush any computer on a 19x19 board.
For people who don't play go: the difference between 9x9 and 19x19 is a bit like the difference between ping-pong and tennis.
I wish it weren't so, but when you involve most people's kids in a story, all critical or rational thought goes out the window. That's just the way things are.
Slashdot Mirror
They don't need to pay the editors a thing. The editors just need to have been early adopters. You can bet your bottom bitcoin that anyone raving about it has a stash of them saved up.
Actually it does, but by half the amount predicted by general relativity. This was known to Cavendish in the late eighteenth century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity#Deflection_of_light_by_the_Sun
Have you ever met someone who is *actually* autistic? Not someone who has Asperger's and is socially awkward, but someone who has the full-blown condition?
When I was in secondary school, we took a course where we interacted with autistic people on a day-to-day basis. Autistic people can not be expected to care for themselves in any way. Forget taking advanced maths. It's a hard slog to get these guys washed and dressed every day.
I think both the OP and the GP are romanticising the condition. Yes, sometimes people on the so-called autistic spectrum have "sitzenfleich" - the ability to sit down and slog through difficult technical material, day after day, hour after hour. Don't count on it though. In general, it's just a very sad condition that limits a person's ability to understand and communicate with others.
Ardra's return is imminent! It's the only way to explain the quakes!
On the other hand, using this method, you can only ever draw with any strategy - including rock-rock-rock-rock-....
With this in mind, is it really the best strategy?
I guess the point is that people tend to deviate from this strategy and the computer can take advantage of those deviations.
I would be very interested to know how the learning algorithm works. Given that the program is taking advantage of your deviations from the 1/3-1/3-1/3 strategy, it follows that the computer is itself deviating from that strategy. Therefore there should be some strategy that beats the computer on average.
I guess you could continue this reasoning ad infinitum, but I would say that the meta-meta-meta strategies would converge to 1/3-1/3-1/3 pretty quickly.
There's no way Assange or anyone internet-related will get it after the North African uprisings. Mohamed Bouazizi might have got it if he hadn't died.
Erdos offered many prizes for the solution of problems that he thought were difficult or out of reach of the mathematics of his time. These prizes were sometimes huge, worth tens or even hundreds of thousands of US dollars in today's money.
Erdos used to joke that he would get in trouble for violating minimum wage laws.
There's a brilliant historical example of this. G.H. Hardy, one of the foremost mathematicians of his day, once gave number theory and general relativity as examples of mathematical disciplines that were interesting in their own right, but which were unlikely to ever produce anything useful. Nowadays, relativity underpins the GPS system, and number theory provides the basis for a large amount of cryptography.
It just goes to show that you never can tell...
Facebook has five hundred million users. Is each user really worth a hundred dollars? Facebook is going public soon. What are the chances that this 'leaked' report is designed to pump up the stock, and therefore Goldman's profit?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdanov_Affair
The hard sciences aren't immune to this kind of thing either. The Bogdanov affair wasn't as serious as the Sokal affair, but it's still in the same ball park.
Would it be correct to call Marion Barry, former mayor of Washington, a cracktivist?
Sounds like they got back-traced. Consequences will never be the same.
Most slashdotters would be running ad blocking software anyway. I know I am. I'd also never buy something based on seeing it in a banner ad.
On the other hand, I'd actually think about buying iRacer, watching Top Gear, or buying the magazine after reading this interesting article. That's how the web is meant to be used.
"Hah! Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry? Do they?"
If you read the link in the article, you'll see that Eyebeam is more like an art project than a security research project.
If pressed, many logicians will admit that the modern foundation of mathematics (ZFC) is probably inconsistent.
See this article:
http://www.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/papers/warn.pdf
The author discusses an informal survey he took among loogicians on page three.
If someone ever discovers a paradox, we can simply scale back to some other system and keep most of what we know, but still...
Sorry for replying to my own post, but I guess I meant any non-supercomputer. Apparently they've managed to get clusters to play at amateur Dan level over the last couple of years.
For the record, the go ranking system works out as
30 Kyu ... 1 kyu 1 dan amateur ... 5 dan amateur european ... 9 dan amateur european
5 dan amateur european is about equal to 1 dan professional, due to inconsistencies in rankings between countries.
Ugh. What's with perpetuating this nonsense? A computer did not beat the top ranked Western chess player. Rather, a group of people _reprogrammed the computer after each match_ to beat the top ranked Western chess player.
TFA, it is annoyingly vague on an important point: What is the rank of the Japanese player that lost?
And as others have pointed out, let see a computer take down a top ranked (10th Dan) player at Go. The best a machine has done (I think) is winning against a 5th Dan.
That's only on a 9x9 board. A competent low Kyu or Dan player could crush any computer on a 19x19 board.
For people who don't play go: the difference between 9x9 and 19x19 is a bit like the difference between ping-pong and tennis.
"What does not kill me, makes me stronger." .
That's what my dad used to say.
Until the accident.
Yes, the penny dropped when I looked up Steven Rado as mentioned in the summary.
Here's his website. It's one step away from timecube.
http://www.aethro-kinematics.com/
He seems to be supporting the idea of the luminiferous aether, a concept which physics abandoned over 100 years ago.
I wish it weren't so, but when you involve most people's kids in a story, all critical or rational thought goes out the window. That's just the way things are.
Let's go with
4+3+2 = (inf{n: two nilpotent endomorphisms from C^n with the same minimal polynomial and the same rank are not always similar}) + 2
But hey this is the 'land of the free' ... right?
To paraphrase one of Dave Foster Wallace's characters, that's freedom from, not freedom to.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.