Ugg, he gets Nyquist wrong too? Nyquist says you have to sample at more than twice the largest frequency component in your system; not exactly equal to. It seems pedantic, but one should get it wrong on a test, and one could get bad data in the RL.
Thanks for your GREAT comments! First, I've read Moore's original paper, and he was definitely discussing transistor counts. But many people *interpret* the "law" to refer to clock speeds, hard disk densities, and so on. Around 1999 people were even talking about internet data rates doubling every 100 days :-)
I'll need to express myself more precisely in the future, great catch!
And Nyquist is obviously *above* double the bandwidth. But are any real-world signals truly bandlimited?...
I think you got a very serious analysis there from the other talk-backers - regarding your character, motives, relationships with colleagues and students e.t.c.
It's strange that you missed this professional analysis.
People, I'm the speaker responding to your comments that I did not mention the identity of Ilya Poltorak, the now-famous undergraduate. Some of you may not realize that the fast algorithm is (1) by far the weakest contribution presented, (2) the algorithm appeared in [Sarvotham,Baron,Baraniuk] in 2006, and Ilya implemented that algorithm faster than the 2006 implementation. He has been going great work, but we haven't yet published anything. Please keep things in proportion...
No, it wasn't me. I was just feeling for the student ;-)
But really, sounds to me like that student did a giant share unlike some who were named. The only thing I can think of is that he just thinks less of his students than his colleagues, even if they are brilliant. And to make it even more sad, he realizes they are, but still cannot see beyond the divide he made in his head.
I could be wrong tho, maybe the student's name is just complicated or something :-P
Also, it just sees like he's trying to put something over on everyone. Like he just lashed things together and relies on very smart person like the student he mentioned.
its acutally the same as our senses or senses from higher animals are working.
ThaFacka 11 months ago
TLDR
bypasslogin 1 year ago
In brief what is this lecture about?
A fast logarithm for 100k 15sec things?
kadmany 1 year ago
"as I mentioned"
bluesrunthegame 2 years ago
It bothers me when technical people get moore's law wrong. Moore said nothing about clock rates, only about transistor/gate density on a chip.
coolsnowmen 2 years ago
Ugg, he gets Nyquist wrong too? Nyquist says you have to sample at more than twice the largest frequency component in your system; not exactly equal to. It seems pedantic, but one should get it wrong on a test, and one could get bad data in the RL.
coolsnowmen 2 years ago
Thanks for your GREAT comments! First, I've read Moore's original paper, and he was definitely discussing transistor counts. But many people *interpret* the "law" to refer to clock speeds, hard disk densities, and so on. Around 1999 people were even talking about internet data rates doubling every 100 days :-)
I'll need to express myself more precisely in the future, great catch!
And Nyquist is obviously *above* double the bandwidth. But are any real-world signals truly bandlimited?...
barondror 2 years ago 9
I think you got a very serious analysis there from the other talk-backers - regarding your character, motives, relationships with colleagues and students e.t.c.
It's strange that you missed this professional analysis.
ilyakis84 2 years ago
Being Psychologists - it's interesting that you have the ability to understand this complicated technical stuff too.
Actually, Dror is a very serious and smart guy, and he's totally OK with his students, colleauges e.t..c.
And... I think that it could be useful to practice some modesty and not being too hasty to judge, basing on an immediate unbalanced impression.
ilyakis84 2 years ago
Who are the psychologists? I must be missing something...
barondror 2 years ago
After the credit was given, I can concentrate on the main theme and say - what a great talk!
snamepi 2 years ago 5
People, I'm the speaker responding to your comments that I did not mention the identity of Ilya Poltorak, the now-famous undergraduate. Some of you may not realize that the fast algorithm is (1) by far the weakest contribution presented, (2) the algorithm appeared in [Sarvotham,Baron,Baraniuk] in 2006, and Ilya implemented that algorithm faster than the 2006 implementation. He has been going great work, but we haven't yet published anything. Please keep things in proportion...
barondror 2 years ago 2
This guy should have his own "The Office" show. What a clown.
roverr1 2 years ago
Very interesting in the beginning, but it got very complicated very fast :)
badmephisto 2 years ago
Hehe. Yeah.
54:42. "4th semester undergraduate"? Doesn't he have a name? Everyone else remotely associated was mentioned.
"Thanks for mentioning me at Google, PROFESSOR".
someman7 2 years ago
What a wad he his not to mention your name.
It's worse than stealing ideas.
roverr1 2 years ago
No, it wasn't me. I was just feeling for the student ;-)
But really, sounds to me like that student did a giant share unlike some who were named. The only thing I can think of is that he just thinks less of his students than his colleagues, even if they are brilliant. And to make it even more sad, he realizes they are, but still cannot see beyond the divide he made in his head.
I could be wrong tho, maybe the student's name is just complicated or something :-P
someman7 2 years ago
I think he made the divide in his head.
Also, it just sees like he's trying to put something over on everyone. Like he just lashed things together and relies on very smart person like the student he mentioned.
roverr1 2 years ago
i got to watch this about five time to play wizards of the coast magic
CiphersSon 2 years ago
What??
paxcoder 2 years ago