vph

I don't believe it.

One speculation is that Wright was able to ...

Apparently, he was able to prove, but did not allow others to keep copies of the evidence. At best, you can suspect. But how can you conclude so strongly that this was a "scam"?

There's not much wrong with such legacy systems. Unfortunately, they are more like exceptions. Most likely, your legacy systems break and you have no idea how to fix them. Or, you have to hire one guy for life because he is the only one who can maintain and fix your systems. And you pray that he doesn't get sick or hit by the bus.

Because the future is whatever you're building software in today.

This is a seriously unhealthy attitude for software engineering. This attitude will create legacy systems and legacy systems that will live on forever.

Intel, Westinghouse, biotech in general, and Dow do a pretty good job on the applied piece IMHO.

Private companies are in a great position to do applied research, but they are often slow or unwilling to distribute the research results for the benefit of everyone.

I believe that whoever is in charge of federal funding in R&D will have to be extremely smart and balanced in his views because R&D plays a great role in the economy and future of this country. The right approach is a balanced between fundamental and applied research. And it's not just balanced but which areas to invest money into.

To be fair, scientists by and large understand the need of replication, and evaluation in general. It's just in certain fields (e.g. psychology) or circumstances with human subjects, it's very expensive or even infeasible to have well controlled repeated experiments.

What does this do that nano doesn't?

To be fair, author should stick "Great" in front of each region.

A similar quote by Michael Jordan: “I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”

Don't mean to sound like an insult, but this is the first tool (that I know of) intentionally designed to make people stupider.

Personally, I think the Go community is a little unhealthily obsessed with this particular metric.

Let's not forget that Go was invented to solve Google's problems, one of which is it took hours to compile their C,C++ codes. Compile time of Go 1.7, despite the improvement, is still 2x that of Go 1.4.

Somehow, I feel that the big deal here is the cleverness to use words like "neurons", "deep learning" and "human intuition" (the "intuition" here appears no more than simply taking the route giving max probability of success).

I think you are teasing me, but my answer would be: no, it doesn't count. The Turing test is about "understanding". The filtering of those images has no understanding of what the images are about.

This is not a Turing test. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I bet that none of this was drawn by a computer. Most likely, those that were supposedly "drawn by computers" were pictures drawn by humans but applied various type of filtering (e.g. those by the deep learning algorithms).

The implication is that art and career are mutually exclusive, meaning once you become professional, you can't do art anymore. This assumption is not necessarily true.

Personally, I have never trusted these social network companies in terms of working with/for the platforms. Sure, when they are in trouble, when they need developers, they will say things like this. And when they are strong, they will close up and can't care less about their developers. It's the same with Facebook, etc.

You can't eat the same foods people ate 20 years ago. The cows aren't the same. The chickens aren't same. Cows and chickens today are more obese and eat more antibiotics than they used to be.

Don't know about other countries. But in the USA, the six people who make the team are selected among high schoolers after rounds of competition. It does reflect very much a country's math education. But math education is just part of a much larger equation.

A Rust programmer can't seem to be Rusty. The more he's Rusty, the more he knows about it, which seems like a contradiction.

I don't get this guy. He seems smart and naive at the same time. He's living right under the nose of one of the largest spy agencies in the world: the KGB. Okay, I can see he doesn't want to talk about them. Fine. But he seems to call for the destruction of the American spy agencies. Really? Russia, China, and all of our "allies" ain't going to close their spy agencies even if the US does. What do you want? America with no spies operating in a this world? How about we give up all of our weapons too? That will make the world a safer better place? Right? I just don't get this guy.

Edward Tufte already called for the demolition of PowerPoint. PowerPoint is still alive and well. It won.

The truth is PowerPoint is a very effective tool and you used it properly. If you are ignorant, lazy or stupid, no great tool can help you.

I will believe it when I see it.

This is a biased if not myopic view of higher education. To Peter Thiel, the best route for a high school graduate is to go to Silicon Valley and do a start-up. While that might be the best option for a very few, it just doesn't work for a general public.

Beside, this article started with "higher education", but never even touched upon what that word meant. It's higher education, it's education. By and large, college provides the best environment for young people to meet and learn from professors and from their peers. The college experience is a very special experience for learning. College is not just an investment of how much money you put in and how much your salary will be after you get out.

Even if Bill Gates and Zuck Markerburg dropped out of Harvard, I am sure they learned a lot while being there, and perhaps beyond what they probably were aware of at the time. Bill Gates for example coauthored a paper with Cristo Papadimitriou (a giant in Computer Science) while at Harvard. I bet Bill had great opportunities to meet and learn from many great people while being there.

This finding is not surprising and is a result of shortsightedness by technology companies, IMHO. They placed more importance in video games, multimedia than the simple readability of texts. First, they moved away from antiglare, matte screens. They favor flashy, shiny highly reflect displays, which show shiny videos and images very well, can are subpar compared to matte screens when reading in different lighting conditions. Second, they put less money in developing technologies similar to the Kindle readers, which prioritize reading.

I am sick and tired of reading reviews of devices based on their ability to watch videos and play games. I want to get things done. I want screens that do not reflect. I want screens on which I can read comfortably in different lighting situations. Give me those.

Those cartoons are offensive to a group of religious people. The cartoonists had the right to freely express themselves. All of us should defend their right to express their opinions, but we don't have to agree with them and popularize something we disagree with. I think the NYT, CNN, Fox News, etc. made the right decision not showing these offensive images.

If you want to go to "brand name" universities, then yes $100K easily. But if you want to seek an education, state universities are much cheaper.

100 is a nice, round and even number. It's also a marketing ploy. Truth is none of these guys can make an accurate prediction about what AI can do in 20 years.

All this person is focusing on is $, $, $, and more $. If you want money, get a MS degree. PhD's don't get you high-salary jobs.

Our justice system is adversary in the sense that the prosecutors will do their best within the law to prosecute and the defense lawyers will do their best within the law to defense the accused. Sometimes, a prosecutor or lawyer can be overzealous in doing his/her job, but it is very dangerous to punish them for being overzealous because such punishment will endanger a system that has worked so well.

Aaron Swartz's should not have taken his own life.