chromophore

Joined 17 years ago

Karma

430

Submissions

95

Member since

Jul 5

View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Where does the Sigmoid in Logistic Regression come from? (Rather, why log-odds?) onionesquereality.wordpress.com

2 chromophore 10 years ago 0 comments

Darwinian Evolution is a form of PAC (Machine) Learning onionesquereality.wordpress.com

2 chromophore 15 years ago 0 comments

Blind Mathematicians onionesquereality.wordpress.com

21 chromophore 15 years ago 3 comments

Comment · 16 years ago

to be precise - http://web.cs.wpi.edu/~guttman/cs521_website/Dougherty_lectu...

Comment · 16 years ago

Look at the notes similar to the one linked at the end of this website. http://web.cs.wpi.edu/~guttman/cs521_website/index.html

I think this is a very helpful page.

Comment · 16 years ago

MATLAB is a language? ;-)

N is a Number : A Portrait of Paul Erdős onionesquereality.wordpress.com

4 chromophore 16 years ago 1 comments

Comment · 16 years ago

The comments are as retarded as the article itself.

Typical western comparison as one commenter put it as.

Comment · 17 years ago

This has been here before : http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=795388

Comment · 17 years ago

Unfortunate because it has distorted the original idea beyond recognition. :) A lot of people know F. J. Dyson only for Dyson "spheres" (the original conception was that of a swarm, SF modified the idea to a sphere, then shell). Though it's obvious he did a lot of other work and that the Dyson sphere was nothing as compared to what he has done. It was just a thought experiment.

Comment · 17 years ago

Of course it has. Dyson Spheres are famous in SF. The Matrioshka Brains are just distant relatives of the same.

Comment · 17 years ago

http://home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Fermilab_s...

The link above is to a fermi lab program to look for Dyson spheres. The Matrioshka brain is a subset of the Dyson sphere. Something made famous, unfortunately, by Trekkers.

Comment · 17 years ago

I notice some people above saying that it could be a mistake. I think it could be. But it is less likely that it was.

I say that because Pachauri had been saying for a year that the Indian government was being arrogant by not agreeing to their "findings". And he rejected research such as this : http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/MoEF%20Discu... Compiled by people who have 3-4 decades of experience in Himalayan glaciology.

Please do check that review paper. It is not easy to find.

Comment · 17 years ago

And I prefer the book by Bishop, It strikes a fine balance between the maths and the ideas.