hello to all and i am enrolled in that class, but i have some questions, on what time will the class start? and what is the age specification on this?
I really like that T-shirt hahah I hope a nice class in a pretty interesting topic. I got a bachellor degree in CS (10 yr ago) and a Master in Software Engineering (7 yr ago) I just need dust my knowledge. c u soon dudes.
To claim money is no incentive for a teacher is ludicrous. It may not be a primary incentive or motive, but start a university announcing you will not be paying your professors and see how many apply. That is absolutely ridiculous. But hey, you know what? You might still even then get one or two, what you and Matt Damon cannot see is how many you will not get.
@aaronpeiser I didn't say incentive. Everything about a job is an incentive, good or bad. I shouldn't really speak for others since I'm not very good at understanding people so I'll speak for myself: what money gets my employer is the assurance that I will spend 8 hours a day 5 days a week at the office. Whether I do my job and do it well is something else. And scientists seem to think I'm not the exception in this. Why that is you better ask them. @theRSAorg has a great presentation on it.
@sorin7486 Like I said, start this university that will offer free online classes everywhere and see how successful it is. The only plausible way of making this work is having government completely taking over all education which is the absolute last thing you want. Look how horrible the US public school system already is. And guess what? It's still not any more free, in fact likely more expensive due to the lack of proper incentive to conserve someone else's tax money. It's cute in theory only.
@Gyohdon yeah I'm quite well acquainted with it. It's what communists tried. And as someone that grew up in a country where it happened, believe me I know. The only major difference was they weren't trying to manage natural resources as much as human resources. And the reason it failed was because no master plan will ever work at that scale. What we need is the opposite: we need a new economy to grow organically, to evolve. The end result might be similar but there's only one way to get there.
@sorin7486 You're not quite well acquainted with it, because it's not what communists tried. Communists were still using money, human labor and politics. A Resource Based Economic model takes place without money and politics and with minimized human labor.
@Gyohdon believe me it's the same freaking thing. Money existed only as a system of distributing resources since all prices were fixed by the state and you can't have a governing system without politics. If you believe that then you know less about people than I do, and that's scary. Let me give you an example: RBE doesn't mean limitless resources and there's always going to be someone that will go too far (consume too much).. so you have to draw a line and doing that involves politics.
@sorin7486 No, money existed as a form of barter. Barter and distribution are different.
You also don't need a governing system. Therefor, you don't need politics.
RBE isn't limitless resources, correct. However, you don't have to have people that go too far and consume too much (I don't think that's even possible in the way the RBE system works). You educate them that their needs are enough and their wants are a luxury.
@Gyohdon son are you trying to teach me how communism worked? It wasn't barter it was distribution, planned from the top for the entire country. The only difference between what you're talking about and them is that we didn't have technology to do our work for us, people had to work to earn their keep. As I said, they were managing human resources. Whereas about education who does that and how? Communists were talking the same way and when it didn't work they just forced it on people.
@Gyohdon I'm sorry too, I didn't mean to overreact. But believe me there were lots of young people thinking the way you do some 65 years ago.. it didn't work out and we have to learn from that. I think it's because we fancy ourselves to be smarter than we are. You can't just design a society on paper, it has to evolve.. just like nature.
@Gyohdon & @sorin7486 The Resource Based Economy: "A global society without money but with abundance for all and joy for everyone." I hope that's not serious. I'm not sure how you can get an economy more based on available resources than capitalism, regulated through prices reflecting the strict relationship between the supply and demand of resources. Money is nothing more than a nominal means of exchanging and quantifying the real value of resources.
@aaronpeiser Bullshit. The real values of resources are not dependant on supply and demand because supply and demand only reflect the wants of society, not the needs. And human needs are way more important than human wants. Also, money corrupts and creates inequality. To deny that is a simple lie.
And yes, it is serious. A global society without money and with abundance (in stead of profit-based scarcity) CAN work. We have the technology.
@Gyohdon A want and a need are not mutually exclusive categories Gyohdon, they are they are simply desires of different extremes. In capitalism, prices do not reflect to real value of resources when externalities are introduced into the market, but it is not hard to see that they still converge to real value more often than any centrally controlled economy. I don't know how you can read thevenusproject without seeing all the bs and fluff. It's like reading a 4 page essay on nothing.
Then why is there 1% of the world doing absolutely nothing, owning 40% of the world's wealth?
Then why are our wallets worth a hundred maybe a thousand wallets from third-world countries?
How can you seriously blind yourself with this bullshit-capitalist propaganda? There are enough people that don't do anything of real value (Wall Street), that are richer than any of us. Explain that.
@Gyohdon Propaganda? This is a Principles 101 course in Economics we're discussing right now. The most wealthy do nothing? What are you talking about? Did money just appear in their wallets? No, these people created their wealth through allocating *resources* as efficiently as possible to meet things most demanded in search of profits. You're not interested in a "resource based" economy. You're interested in redistribution, which destroys wealth to be distributed in the first place.
@aaronpeiser Allocating resources as efficiently as possible?!
Now you're simply talking out of your ass. The top 1% Bankers do not allocate resources as efficiently as possible. The steal from the people by loaning money on interest, while they themselves create the money to pay this interest with.
@Gyohdon When I say efficiently as possible I'm talking about within the bounds of their own rationality, which is not always completely rational so there is still waste, but less waste than a centrally planned economy where the free market doesn't exist to determine the real value of resources via prices. Also banker's create otherwise wealth by reducing asymmetric information in financing the allocation of resources to meet societies demands. They actually increase distribution in the market.
@Gyohdon And those third world countries are victims of poor governments that do no promote free trade while providing a sound legal system that protects property rights, liberty, and a sound business environment minimizing uncertainty in the market. You are completely right in realizing that we have enough food produced to feed the world, but if you just redistributed it, what would be anyone's incentive to produce the food in the first place?
Third World Countries are the victims of the Western World's corporations and banking systems exploiting and misusing their governments for their own personal profit. The same corporations and banks that control our governments through lobbying.
If you call me a conspiracy theorist, just look at Obama's latest actions. Not a single one of them is for the people of the US. They were all for the rich, wealthy businessmen.
@Gyohdon I'll still eat if I don't produce it, because someone else will apparently according to you. In truth, some will still produce it but it will be completely undersupplied. You are introducing externalities in the market. I can eat for free. I'm not required to pay (via working) for it, and not enough people will produce it to meet demand given no reward, much like would occur with education if schools were forced to distribute it all online for free unfortunately.
@aaronpeiser I'm not sure either but we better figure something out cuz the way things are going pretty soon there might not be enough jobs for all of us. Just google "THE SCARIEST JOBS CHART EVER" and pick the first result.
@sorin7486 I wouldn't worry so much about jobs. Technology has changed our means of production so significantly in the last few decades that human capital needs serious time to re-educate itself and also needs plenty of room/space to innovate (which in the US, we're lacking at the moment). I know we've been throwing books all around here but I really think you'd enjoy reading Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, he really explains all these concepts in interesting detail.
This is how education should be. Recorded on video and shared to the masses, not limited to 30 people in a classroom. Kahn Academy has already shown how effective this method of teaching can be and if every school did this, the world would progress so much quicker.
Guys there is a Q&A support community for this course (unofficial but student made):
aiqus
(add d0t and com to the end of it, (youtube thinks I'm spamming))
Yet, this use of spam is for a good cause! (If it can be considered spam at all).
Nonetheless, with 100,000+ classmates we are definitely going to need a place to collaborate, and help each other out. So please help us get the online classroom community started, and please help spread the word!
Guys there is a Q&A support community for this course (unofficial but student made):
aiqus
(add d0t and com to the end of it, (youtube thinks I'm spamming))
Yet, this use of spam is for a good cause! (If it can be considered spam at all).
Nonetheless, with 100,000+ classmates we are definitely going to need a place to collaborate, and help each other out. So please help us get the online classroom community started, and please help spread the word!
why u bother writing comments...it says that the book is not required...i hope you guys aren't in the 98.000 and signed up like these idiotic petitions online.
"Access to a copy of Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach may be helpful but is NOT REQUIRED. Peter Norvig is co-author of this text and is DONATING all royalties earned from his text to charity. "
For those of you that don't want to purchase the book you can download it (around 25-30mb) in PDF format by searching 'Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach' at the filestube website .
I just looked up the textbook on Amazon and it's 100$... and I can't even get it as an ebook so shipping it in paper form half way around the world is going to take forever.
Education is seriously messed up, we need a reset!
@sorin7486 What are you talking about 'we need a reset'? This is a reset- a free online course, assuming you purchase (or download) the textbook. How're you seriously complaining?
@MrJosiahT I'm not complaining about this course mate I'm complaining about everything else. I mean I heard education is expensive in the US but this is ridiculous. It's a god damn rip off if you ask me. And they're doing the same thing all over the world: jacking prices up while quality goes down. Maybe Stanford isn't affected by the second part but I'm pretty sure that makes it an exception.
@sorin7486 Costs/Prices will get as high as demand takes it, and unfortunately programs like FAFSA continually drive demand up by sending, many times, people less interested and driven in pursuing and/or even finishing a degree. This higher demand leads to higher prices which keep others who arn't part of the "special" class that get's subsidized/free tuition out, not to mention this "subsidized/free" tuition comes out of the pockets of many of these left out people.
@aaronpeiser I am sorry sir but would you mind terribly stepping into the 21 century? We have the technology today to make education practically free, and the only thing standing in the way is this idea people have that it can never be separated from money. The notion that you always need one to get the other is absolute nonsense: the point of education is not to get you a better paying job and you can't really buy a good education. Heck, most good education isn't sold for money anyways.
@sorin7486 Technology does eliminate the basic principles of economics. Education, like any other service, will always be attached to money. If everyone gave it out for free, where would we get the money to compensate the instructors? Why would anyone be an instructor if they have no means of making a living? This is a positive externality, which has the consequence of undersupplying education in the long run. Fortunately we have schools like Stanford that still see doing this in their interest.
@aaronpeiser well as Matt Damon put it: "a teacher wants to teach". At least in my country I don't believe education is expensive because teachers need to make a living but because some people need to make a profit. It's the best way to siphon money out of the budget and no one can argue against it: "it's education".
When it comes to the bigger economic problem I can only recommend the book Free: The Future of a Radical Price. It makes a better point than I can ever hope and it's free online.
@sorin7486 Matt Damon is economically ignorant beyond words. A teacher does want to teach, and perhaps some still would in any condition, but few would, certainly less would. Those with well developed skillsets that are more valued elsewhere will likely go elsewhere as opposed to providing quality instruction. Matt Damon's claim that incentives play no role in our decision making is a disingenuous to say the very least. You're right about the inefficiencies in tuition to an extent though.
@aaronpeiser I didn't quote Matt Damon because I think he's an authority but because I though it was funny. He is also correct: money isn't what motivates people doing cognitive jobs. There is scientific evidence to support that and you can look it up if you wish. You also seem to think that competent people would never be interested in teaching, apart from the few exceptions. I had enough great teachers to be convinced otherwise. The problem is the system is incapable to recognise them.
Do you have any plans to do this again in the future? I would really like to participate but I will be in my final year at university and I don't want to overload myself.
hello to all and i am enrolled in that class, but i have some questions, on what time will the class start? and what is the age specification on this?
keithosmarferrer 4 months ago
I really like that T-shirt hahah I hope a nice class in a pretty interesting topic. I got a bachellor degree in CS (10 yr ago) and a Master in Software Engineering (7 yr ago) I just need dust my knowledge. c u soon dudes.
Regards from Mexico.
buk3r 4 months ago
Didnt know Michael Keaton where into the AI field.
yksnimus 5 months ago
Im from Chile, South America and this online course is a great idea, i want to learn about AI
SirLoquendero90 5 months ago
PS: Who says youtube comments are useless? Where else can you get into such a discussion with random people from around the world ? :)
sorin7486 5 months ago
Advanced class baby!
Linkage1992 5 months ago
processcies?
clumma 5 months ago
To claim money is no incentive for a teacher is ludicrous. It may not be a primary incentive or motive, but start a university announcing you will not be paying your professors and see how many apply. That is absolutely ridiculous. But hey, you know what? You might still even then get one or two, what you and Matt Damon cannot see is how many you will not get.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser I didn't say incentive. Everything about a job is an incentive, good or bad. I shouldn't really speak for others since I'm not very good at understanding people so I'll speak for myself: what money gets my employer is the assurance that I will spend 8 hours a day 5 days a week at the office. Whether I do my job and do it well is something else. And scientists seem to think I'm not the exception in this. Why that is you better ask them. @theRSAorg has a great presentation on it.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 Like I said, start this university that will offer free online classes everywhere and see how successful it is. The only plausible way of making this work is having government completely taking over all education which is the absolute last thing you want. Look how horrible the US public school system already is. And guess what? It's still not any more free, in fact likely more expensive due to the lack of proper incentive to conserve someone else's tax money. It's cute in theory only.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser you should really read that book mate :)
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 & @aaronpeiser
You guys should look into a Resource Based Economy.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon yeah I'm quite well acquainted with it. It's what communists tried. And as someone that grew up in a country where it happened, believe me I know. The only major difference was they weren't trying to manage natural resources as much as human resources. And the reason it failed was because no master plan will ever work at that scale. What we need is the opposite: we need a new economy to grow organically, to evolve. The end result might be similar but there's only one way to get there.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 You're not quite well acquainted with it, because it's not what communists tried. Communists were still using money, human labor and politics. A Resource Based Economic model takes place without money and politics and with minimized human labor.
A RBE has never been tried before.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon believe me it's the same freaking thing. Money existed only as a system of distributing resources since all prices were fixed by the state and you can't have a governing system without politics. If you believe that then you know less about people than I do, and that's scary. Let me give you an example: RBE doesn't mean limitless resources and there's always going to be someone that will go too far (consume too much).. so you have to draw a line and doing that involves politics.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 No, money existed as a form of barter. Barter and distribution are different.
You also don't need a governing system. Therefor, you don't need politics.
RBE isn't limitless resources, correct. However, you don't have to have people that go too far and consume too much (I don't think that's even possible in the way the RBE system works). You educate them that their needs are enough and their wants are a luxury.
You don't need politics for any of that.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon son are you trying to teach me how communism worked? It wasn't barter it was distribution, planned from the top for the entire country. The only difference between what you're talking about and them is that we didn't have technology to do our work for us, people had to work to earn their keep. As I said, they were managing human resources. Whereas about education who does that and how? Communists were talking the same way and when it didn't work they just forced it on people.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 I didn't realize we were still talking about Communism. Sorry.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon I'm sorry too, I didn't mean to overreact. But believe me there were lots of young people thinking the way you do some 65 years ago.. it didn't work out and we have to learn from that. I think it's because we fancy ourselves to be smarter than we are. You can't just design a society on paper, it has to evolve.. just like nature.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 I know that. But the basics of the understanding for this society can be put on paper.
And the basics of understanding are in the Resource Based Economic Model.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon & @sorin7486 The Resource Based Economy: "A global society without money but with abundance for all and joy for everyone." I hope that's not serious. I'm not sure how you can get an economy more based on available resources than capitalism, regulated through prices reflecting the strict relationship between the supply and demand of resources. Money is nothing more than a nominal means of exchanging and quantifying the real value of resources.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser Bullshit. The real values of resources are not dependant on supply and demand because supply and demand only reflect the wants of society, not the needs. And human needs are way more important than human wants. Also, money corrupts and creates inequality. To deny that is a simple lie.
And yes, it is serious. A global society without money and with abundance (in stead of profit-based scarcity) CAN work. We have the technology.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon A want and a need are not mutually exclusive categories Gyohdon, they are they are simply desires of different extremes. In capitalism, prices do not reflect to real value of resources when externalities are introduced into the market, but it is not hard to see that they still converge to real value more often than any centrally controlled economy. I don't know how you can read thevenusproject without seeing all the bs and fluff. It's like reading a 4 page essay on nothing.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser Money converges to real value?
Then why is there 1% of the world doing absolutely nothing, owning 40% of the world's wealth?
Then why are our wallets worth a hundred maybe a thousand wallets from third-world countries?
How can you seriously blind yourself with this bullshit-capitalist propaganda? There are enough people that don't do anything of real value (Wall Street), that are richer than any of us. Explain that.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon Propaganda? This is a Principles 101 course in Economics we're discussing right now. The most wealthy do nothing? What are you talking about? Did money just appear in their wallets? No, these people created their wealth through allocating *resources* as efficiently as possible to meet things most demanded in search of profits. You're not interested in a "resource based" economy. You're interested in redistribution, which destroys wealth to be distributed in the first place.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser Allocating resources as efficiently as possible?!
Now you're simply talking out of your ass. The top 1% Bankers do not allocate resources as efficiently as possible. The steal from the people by loaning money on interest, while they themselves create the money to pay this interest with.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon When I say efficiently as possible I'm talking about within the bounds of their own rationality, which is not always completely rational so there is still waste, but less waste than a centrally planned economy where the free market doesn't exist to determine the real value of resources via prices. Also banker's create otherwise wealth by reducing asymmetric information in financing the allocation of resources to meet societies demands. They actually increase distribution in the market.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@Gyohdon And those third world countries are victims of poor governments that do no promote free trade while providing a sound legal system that protects property rights, liberty, and a sound business environment minimizing uncertainty in the market. You are completely right in realizing that we have enough food produced to feed the world, but if you just redistributed it, what would be anyone's incentive to produce the food in the first place?
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser To fucking eat.
Third World Countries are the victims of the Western World's corporations and banking systems exploiting and misusing their governments for their own personal profit. The same corporations and banks that control our governments through lobbying.
If you call me a conspiracy theorist, just look at Obama's latest actions. Not a single one of them is for the people of the US. They were all for the rich, wealthy businessmen.
Gyohdon 5 months ago
@Gyohdon I'll still eat if I don't produce it, because someone else will apparently according to you. In truth, some will still produce it but it will be completely undersupplied. You are introducing externalities in the market. I can eat for free. I'm not required to pay (via working) for it, and not enough people will produce it to meet demand given no reward, much like would occur with education if schools were forced to distribute it all online for free unfortunately.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser I'm not sure either but we better figure something out cuz the way things are going pretty soon there might not be enough jobs for all of us. Just google "THE SCARIEST JOBS CHART EVER" and pick the first result.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 I wouldn't worry so much about jobs. Technology has changed our means of production so significantly in the last few decades that human capital needs serious time to re-educate itself and also needs plenty of room/space to innovate (which in the US, we're lacking at the moment). I know we've been throwing books all around here but I really think you'd enjoy reading Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, he really explains all these concepts in interesting detail.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
Finally, some quality education, very excited.
AkuzaGhost 6 months ago
awsome !! i really love the flexibility on online courses. learn anything, anywhere and by the best :)
msgero01 6 months ago
i'm enrolled !!!! i'm very excited on the first day of class, who wants to be my seatmate ?
keithosmarferrer 6 months ago
This is how education should be. Recorded on video and shared to the masses, not limited to 30 people in a classroom. Kahn Academy has already shown how effective this method of teaching can be and if every school did this, the world would progress so much quicker.
inlinevoid 6 months ago 3
Guys there is a Q&A support community for this course (unofficial but student made):
aiqus
(add d0t and com to the end of it, (youtube thinks I'm spamming))
Yet, this use of spam is for a good cause! (If it can be considered spam at all).
Nonetheless, with 100,000+ classmates we are definitely going to need a place to collaborate, and help each other out. So please help us get the online classroom community started, and please help spread the word!
u3s1r4 6 months ago
Can you guys use Wacom tablets and blackscreens with color? I'm sure it will be good anyway. Thank you.
chocobofarmer2021 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Guys there is a Q&A support community for this course (unofficial but student made):
aiqus
(add d0t and com to the end of it, (youtube thinks I'm spamming))
Yet, this use of spam is for a good cause! (If it can be considered spam at all).
Nonetheless, with 100,000+ classmates we are definitely going to need a place to collaborate, and help each other out. So please help us get the online classroom community started, and please help spread the word!
0s1r15 6 months ago
why u bother writing comments...it says that the book is not required...i hope you guys aren't in the 98.000 and signed up like these idiotic petitions online.
N4R4YAN 6 months ago
@Pokman115 :
A solid understanding of probability and linear algebra will be required.
Xeronimo74 6 months ago
@NObushma : read what the site says .............
"Access to a copy of Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach may be helpful but is NOT REQUIRED. Peter Norvig is co-author of this text and is DONATING all royalties earned from his text to charity. "
Xeronimo74 6 months ago
For those of you that don't want to purchase the book you can download it (around 25-30mb) in PDF format by searching 'Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach' at the filestube website .
saturn118 6 months ago
I wish to attend!!!!
how to get the book?
I'm glad to take this online course!
Idlilianas 6 months ago
I just looked up the textbook on Amazon and it's 100$... and I can't even get it as an ebook so shipping it in paper form half way around the world is going to take forever.
Education is seriously messed up, we need a reset!
sorin7486 6 months ago
@sorin7486 What are you talking about 'we need a reset'? This is a reset- a free online course, assuming you purchase (or download) the textbook. How're you seriously complaining?
If education needs a reset- go reset it.
MrJosiahT 6 months ago
@MrJosiahT I'm not complaining about this course mate I'm complaining about everything else. I mean I heard education is expensive in the US but this is ridiculous. It's a god damn rip off if you ask me. And they're doing the same thing all over the world: jacking prices up while quality goes down. Maybe Stanford isn't affected by the second part but I'm pretty sure that makes it an exception.
sorin7486 6 months ago
@sorin7486 Costs/Prices will get as high as demand takes it, and unfortunately programs like FAFSA continually drive demand up by sending, many times, people less interested and driven in pursuing and/or even finishing a degree. This higher demand leads to higher prices which keep others who arn't part of the "special" class that get's subsidized/free tuition out, not to mention this "subsidized/free" tuition comes out of the pockets of many of these left out people.
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser I am sorry sir but would you mind terribly stepping into the 21 century? We have the technology today to make education practically free, and the only thing standing in the way is this idea people have that it can never be separated from money. The notion that you always need one to get the other is absolute nonsense: the point of education is not to get you a better paying job and you can't really buy a good education. Heck, most good education isn't sold for money anyways.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 Technology does eliminate the basic principles of economics. Education, like any other service, will always be attached to money. If everyone gave it out for free, where would we get the money to compensate the instructors? Why would anyone be an instructor if they have no means of making a living? This is a positive externality, which has the consequence of undersupplying education in the long run. Fortunately we have schools like Stanford that still see doing this in their interest.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser well as Matt Damon put it: "a teacher wants to teach". At least in my country I don't believe education is expensive because teachers need to make a living but because some people need to make a profit. It's the best way to siphon money out of the budget and no one can argue against it: "it's education".
When it comes to the bigger economic problem I can only recommend the book Free: The Future of a Radical Price. It makes a better point than I can ever hope and it's free online.
sorin7486 5 months ago
@sorin7486 Matt Damon is economically ignorant beyond words. A teacher does want to teach, and perhaps some still would in any condition, but few would, certainly less would. Those with well developed skillsets that are more valued elsewhere will likely go elsewhere as opposed to providing quality instruction. Matt Damon's claim that incentives play no role in our decision making is a disingenuous to say the very least. You're right about the inefficiencies in tuition to an extent though.
aaronpeiser 5 months ago
@aaronpeiser I didn't quote Matt Damon because I think he's an authority but because I though it was funny. He is also correct: money isn't what motivates people doing cognitive jobs. There is scientific evidence to support that and you can look it up if you wish. You also seem to think that competent people would never be interested in teaching, apart from the few exceptions. I had enough great teachers to be convinced otherwise. The problem is the system is incapable to recognise them.
sorin7486 5 months ago
I took an AI class with the same book, but unfortunately it consisted primarily of NLP. I am glad to be able to take this online course!
Zambini845 6 months ago
buenísimo!
jsbc003 6 months ago
buenísimo!
jsbc003 6 months ago
will we be able to transfer this as an actual course credit?
OriginalDarkAardvark 6 months ago
Cornell student here, bring it on Stanford
pandaman0529 6 months ago
Ooh, this course would've been so awesome to take. If only I had some time to spare...
LunchAnderson 6 months ago
Signed up as well! I'm glad I'll be putting my knowledge of linear algebra and probability to good use.
CGBSpender1 6 months ago
i'M ready to take this course
By the way , nice shirt :)
abshammeri 6 months ago
Awesomesauce
Trolybab666 6 months ago
This is fantastic, thank you guys! I'm enrolling as well.
xchimino2 6 months ago 25
@xchimino2 see ya there ,me too enrolling
idriss0007 6 months ago
@sebthrun -- thanks a lot for offering this!
Also, is it possible to lock the exposure? (Most cameras offer "exposure lock", but I am not sure how it works with those classroom cameras.)
When the hand comes in & out of the viewable screen, the camera tries to adjust the exposure and the brightness changes a lot
raysonlogin 6 months ago
I have signed up but I am not sure where I will find time to devote to it due to it starting in the middle of my semester.
S2333 6 months ago
Do you have any plans to do this again in the future? I would really like to participate but I will be in my final year at university and I don't want to overload myself.
jackmcdonald128 6 months ago
I love that shirt. Seriously!
Signed up and ready to learn.
marshmallowhailstorm 6 months ago 24
@marshmallowhailstorm Agreed!
VinTheFox 6 months ago
Thank you very much for this exciting course! See you in the fall..
newastrophysics 7 months ago
Really excited to take this course in the Fall !
ilhaanawesome 7 months ago
I can't wait! Thank you! See you in fall.
sashaschmendrik 7 months ago