1. "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by Vinoba Oct 12, 2011
- 37627 views
It is a free course. Started yesterday, but you can still register. Over 160,000 have already registered.
There are two levels, beginner's and advanced. for advanced level there is a full exam at the end of it all.
"A bold experiment in distributed education, "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence" will be offered free and online to students worldwide from October 10th to December 18th 2011. The course will include feedback on progress and a statement of accomplishment. Taught by Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig, the curriculum draws from that used in Stanford's introductory Artificial Intelligence course. The instructors will offer similar materials, assignments, and exams."
2. Re: "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by useless Oct 13, 2011
- 37619 views
Did you read the TOS at
https://www.ai-class.com/registration/tos
? I have a feeling if you develop an Ai after taking this course, they own it.
Are you building, or growing, an AI?
useless
3. Re: "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by Vinoba Oct 13, 2011
- 37533 views
Did you read the TOS at
https://www.ai-class.com/registration/tos
? I have a feeling if you develop an Ai after taking this course, they own it.
Are you building, or growing, an AI?
useless
I posted the information for everybody to see and take a free course if they wanted to. It is an exercise in self education.
I have no plans to build or grow any AI.
4. Re: "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37536 views
Did you read the TOS at
https://www.ai-class.com/registration/tos
? I have a feeling if you develop an Ai after taking this course, they own it.
I don't think so. For instance (my emphasis):
USER PROVIDED CONTENT.
The Online Course may provide you with the ability to upload certain information and materials for use with the Class Sites or Online Course ("User Content"), e.g., questions, hypothetical, examples, etc. KnowLabs does not claim ownership of any User Content you may submit or make available for inclusion on the Class Sites or Online Course. Accordingly, subject to the license granted to KnowLabs below, User will be the sole and exclusive owner of any and all rights, title and interest (including without limitation all copyrights and renewals and extensions thereof) and trademark rights in and to the User Content.
They do claim ownership of the class materials, which makes sense. So you couldn't simply take their code and build off of it. Could you cite something that claims otherwise? I may have missed it, as I just skimmed the TOS.
Matt
5. [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37503 views
I'd like to ask the forum's contributors, as a courtesy, to follow Kat's standard of using [OT] as the first characters when starting a new thread or topic on this forum when the topic is unrelated to, or only marginally related to Euphoria.
(This is a personal request, not endorsed by the dev team, the forum web site team, or any other team. It's from myself and myself alone.)
6. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37515 views
I'd like to ask the forum's contributors, as a courtesy, to follow Kat's standard of using [OT] as the first characters when starting a new thread or topic on this forum when the topic is unrelated to, or only marginally related to Euphoria.
Why?
7. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37514 views
I'd like to ask the forum's contributors, as a courtesy, to follow Kat's standard of using [OT] as the first characters when starting a new thread or topic on this forum when the topic is unrelated to, or only marginally related to Euphoria.
Why?
I think this makes it easier for new users (new to forums in general, that is) to figure out what goes when considering what's on topic and what's off topic.
Also, this makes it easier to filter out [OT] posts when searching.
Do you disagree? You've followed this standard before, e.g. http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/89370.wc
8. Re: Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37499 views
I'd like to ask the forum's contributors, as a courtesy, to follow Kat's standard of using [OT] as the first characters when starting a new thread or topic on this forum when the topic is unrelated to, or only marginally related to Euphoria.
Why?
I think this makes it easier for new users (new to forums in general, that is) to figure out what goes when considering what's on topic and what's off topic.
Also, this makes it easier to filter out [OT] posts when searching.
I'm not a fan of this, personally. These prefixes just clutter up the subject, making it a little bit more difficult to read.
Matt
9. Re: "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by useless Oct 13, 2011
- 37490 views
Did you read the TOS at
https://www.ai-class.com/registration/tos
? I have a feeling if you develop an Ai after taking this course, they own it.
I don't think so. For instance (my emphasis):
USER PROVIDED CONTENT.
The Online Course may provide you with the ability to upload certain information and materials for use with the Class Sites or Online Course ("User Content"), e.g., questions, hypothetical, examples, etc. KnowLabs does not claim ownership of any User Content you may submit or make available for inclusion on the Class Sites or Online Course. Accordingly, subject to the license granted to KnowLabs below, User will be the sole and exclusive owner of any and all rights, title and interest (including without limitation all copyrights and renewals and extensions thereof) and trademark rights in and to the User Content.
They do claim ownership of the class materials, which makes sense. So you couldn't simply take their code and build off of it. Could you cite something that claims otherwise? I may have missed it, as I just skimmed the TOS.
Matt
They point to books and other websites they own, which you may take seriously, and build from, inadvertently violating the TOS or trademark. I also expect any comments you make regarding the material they own could be incorporated into that which they own, as not being directly related course material, in which case you may lose control of it. For instance, they keep mentioning the university regarding quality and difficulty and course organisation, but this is not a university sponsored course. The TOS is very long for a non-accredited course which you are being a beta tester for, so i distrust it. As an example of verbosity obscuring the base material, they own "HTM" as their version of a neural net, but they almost never say "neural net" or "NN" in the print on the other websites. My opinion, which others share, is NN have been soundly discredited as a general purpose Ai.
useless
10. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by Vinoba Oct 13, 2011
- 37460 views
I'd like to ask the forum's contributors, as a courtesy, to follow Kat's standard of using [OT] as the first characters when starting a new thread or topic on this forum when the topic is unrelated to, or only marginally related to Euphoria.
(This is a personal request, not endorsed by the dev team, the forum web site team, or any other team. It's from myself and myself alone.)
I don't know how many forums you have used in the past and what your methodology is. In a previous discussion, you were not very familiar with classifying or grouping together.
I go to about 30 forums. The best ones have grouping and sub-grouping - usually two levels and then individual threads. That way people can post in their own areas of interest and old posts can be easily seen. This forum is just linear and date based. If the managers come up with the more sophisticated methods of posting, it would be good for everybody - perhaps this has been discussed before and rejected - I don't know.
As far as forum etiquette goes, I go along with what everybody else is doing. I have never been cautioned in the past about my methods of posting - that is now about 6-7 years of forum posting. Occasionally a mod would move my post from one category to another, that's about it.
There are literally over 100 free forum software and many forums are using this type of software which allows categorizing. My memory tells me to mention PHPBB, but there are others. If you want people to identify threads in a better manner, you should urge the managers here to change the foum software and even change the server. However, that is not my problem.
11. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by BRyan Oct 13, 2011
- 37505 views
If you are interested AI then maybe you could post on this forum.
12. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by Vinoba Oct 13, 2011
- 37502 views
If you are interested AI then maybe you could post on this forum.
To some people AI appears to be an alien animal. To me and to a lot of people it is an interesting subject closely related to software programming. I found about it in a computer software forum -NOT IN A AI related forum, and I thought it would be of interest to some people here who want to look at other software, in particular an offering by Stanford for free which has been heavily subscribed to eh extent of 160,000 people taking the course. YOU DO NOT COME ACROSS SUCH OFFERINGS AND FOR FREE FROM WORLD'S TOP UNIVERSITIES TOO OFTEN. Perhaps I should have worded it something like "Euphoria wrapper for AI software!"
13. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37536 views
In a previous discussion, you were not very familiar with classifying or grouping together.
I do not recall this discussion. Link?
The best ones have grouping and sub-grouping - usually two levels and then individual threads. That way people can post in their own areas of interest and old posts can be easily seen. This forum is just linear and date based. If the managers come up with the more sophisticated methods of posting, it would be good for everybody - perhaps this has been discussed before and rejected - I don't know.
Agreed. This is the best way forward. Most forums have a special "off-topic anything goes" subforum, which would be the best solution here.
As far as forum etiquette goes, I go along with what everybody else is doing. I have never been cautioned in the past about my methods of posting - that is now about 6-7 years of forum posting.
I can't argue with that. The courtesy that I requested was a continuation of a style that was inherited from our older mailing list, and may be unique to this location.
Furthermore, it's something that not everyone agrees is necessary or even wanted on the current forum's incarnation.
Occasionally a mod would move my post from one category to another, that's about it.
I believe that this is the only thing that I am asking for, at least in spirit.
There are literally over 100 free forum software and many forums are using this type of software which allows categorizing.
Including this one.
If you want people to identify threads in a better manner, you should urge the managers here to change the foum software and even change the server. However, that is not my problem.
That was not my goal. In any case, this forum already has a system of categorization and I could tag any posts to any category or categories that I though were appropriate. (As could you.)
Neither do I believe that there is a problem. I was making a personal request for a favor from others - but I do not wish this to be a point of contention. If you had considered this to be "your problem" then I think we could have come to a common resolution that a technological fix would be best here. But you clearly don't care, so we can't. You are free to continue posting here, using whatever subject lines you like, in the manner that you are doing so now. If there was a real problem, a mod would have taken care of it already.
14. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37443 views
To me and to a lot of people it is an interesting subject closely related to software programming.
I agree.
I thought it would be of interest to some people here who want to look at other software
No objection, at least from me.
Perhaps I should have worded it something like "Euphoria wrapper for AI software!"
I am thankful for the accurate subject line.
YOU DO NOT COME ACROSS SUCH OFFERINGS AND FOR FREE FROM WORLD'S TOP UNIVERSITIES TOO OFTEN.
MIT's OpenCourseware had been around for a few years, I think. I'd have assumed that this sort of thing would only become more and more common (and more popular) over time.
15. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by useless Oct 13, 2011
- 37463 views
To some people AI appears to be an alien animal. To me and to a lot of people it is an interesting subject closely related to software programming. I found about it in a computer software forum -NOT IN A AI related forum, and I thought it would be of interest to some people here who want to look at other software, in particular an offering by Stanford for free which has been heavily subscribed to eh extent of 160,000 people taking the course. YOU DO NOT COME ACROSS SUCH OFFERINGS AND FOR FREE FROM WORLD'S TOP UNIVERSITIES TOO OFTEN.
I repeat, just once, http://www.ai-class.com/ is NOT a university class. It is not associated with Stanford, it is not accredited as a classroom, it has no college class credits associated with it. You cannot use it for anything, if you have been to a uni, this class is not worth putting on your resume. The class is a beta edition of a class they wish to sell, you are a tester for them, it says so in the TOS. It's only value is if you have nothing else, cannot read their book on your own, or are enthralled with the teachers. You might consider it practice for college, i don't know.
useless
16. Re: [OT [OT] Off Topic guideline request] AI Class
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37465 views
I repeat, just once, http://www.ai-class.com/ is NOT a university class. It is not associated with Stanford, it is not accredited as a classroom, it has no college class credits associated with it. You cannot use it for anything, if you have been to a uni, this class is not worth putting on your resume. The class is a beta edition of a class they wish to sell, you are a tester for them, it says so in the TOS. It's only value is if you have nothing else, cannot read their book on your own, or are enthralled with the teachers. You might consider it practice for college, i don't know.
This is pretty much what I thought too, Kat.
As a side-effect, one might increase one's understanding of the topic.
17. Re: [OT [OT] Off Topic guideline request] AI Class
- Posted by ghaberek (admin) Oct 13, 2011
- 37631 views
I am currently taking the Introduction to Databases and Introduction to Machine Learning courses. I consider them beneficial for several reasons:
- My main interest in these classes is that they provide me free practice for other online courses. I've never attended an online course and I was never sure that I could keep up with it (i.e. "remember to go to class").
- It's also good practice since I haven't taken a college course in over five years, and I am considering going back to school, since I only have an Associate of Applied Science degree.
- I don't care if it's not actually worth anything. It's worth it to me to learn things for free, especially if I can check my progress as I go (i.e. assignments, quizzes, tests).
- And as Derek mentioned, I may actually learn something. In fact, I'm pretty sure I already have, and I wasn't even trying!
-Greg
18. Re: [OT [OT] Off Topic guideline request] AI Class
- Posted by useless Oct 13, 2011
- 37521 views
Heys Greg. I never said it wasn't worth taking the course, i was just saying it's not a real college course like Vinoba was making it out to be. I don't know what's in the course, so i have no opinion on the contents. I do suspect they stress neural nets as the proper or best way to build an Ai, which i have a negative opinion on.
The best use i have seen of NN was photo recognition, and there's some wild mistakes made by the best NN. Using them to pick out people in public places, like airports, has been a waste of time and money, many systems have been removed. In some cases, there were many false positives, and no true positives.
The biggest problem i see with them is once trained they may work acceptably, but if you teach them just one more thing, they break. Each new item to train on costs a potentially huge non-linear increase in training time. One or both of these instructors wrote a book wherein they want to precisely replicate part of the human brain in silicon (or software on whatever).... i think the instructors are broken.
Many Ai courses are heavy into math, and i have yet to envoke calculus to have a conversation with a human, and i never use statistics to pick the next word randomly, and i never take a cue from an Elizabot.
Learning is usually a good thing. YMMV.
useless
19. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37472 views
I think this makes it easier for new users (new to forums in general, that is) to figure out what goes when considering what's on topic and what's off topic.
Also, this makes it easier to filter out [OT] posts when searching.
Do you disagree? You've followed this standard before, e.g. http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/89370.wc
I do understand what you are saying, its just that I'm not sure that using the [OT] or any other prefix is a good way to achieve it. Now, assuming that [OT] stands for Off Topic, it begs the question - What is the topic that this post is not about?. The first response might be Euphoria, which assumes that the topic of this entire forum is the programming language. But who has decreed that?
I suspect that this forum is more generally a place in which members of the Euphoria community (how ever that is defined) can post stuff that could be of interest to other members. I'd hate to see the forum become a boring - fixated - place.
However, I can still see that filtering out uninteresting posts, or filtering in specific posts, would a useful idea. And I think that the forum already has such a feature, which is greatly under utilized.
I bring your attention to the fact that any post can be categorized, and to any category you like. The administrators can ensure that categories are not misused. Now we might like to make categorizing posts a bit more intuitive or easy, but the basic structure is already in place.
20. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37447 views
I bring your attention to the fact that any post can be categorized, and to any category you like. The administrators can ensure that categories are misused.
Oh, just wait!
More seriously, though. If we had a very high volume of posts, I think breaking up the forum would make more sense. The activity goes in spurts usually, and even then isn't too terribly high volume. I like having everything in one place (so long as it isn't overwhelming, which I don't think this forum is) rather than having to go multiple places to read everything.
Matt
21. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37445 views
... administrators can ensure that categories are misused.
Oh, just wait!
LOL ... fixed.
22. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37456 views
... administrators can ensure that categories are misused.
Oh, just wait!
LOL ... fixed.
Hah, I prefered the original version!
23. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by Vinoba Oct 14, 2011
- 37393 views
1. I was NOT making it out to be a free credit course. It is a very good learning exercise from a a good university. Those who want to take it should take it.
2. About grouping together of topics, and suggesting non-standard things like [OT], just go and see what others are doing. In this quest, you have to forget about Euphoria and see the best free software and free site is available.
Here are three URLs to start your search.
http://www.forummatrix.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software
http://www.forum-software.org/
24. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37353 views
In a previous discussion, you were not very familiar with classifying or grouping together.
I do not recall this discussion. Link?
I'm still waiting on this.
In this quest, you have to forget about Euphoria
This is where our problem is.
suggesting non-standard things like [OT],
Non standard?
http://email.about.com/od/netiquettetips/qt/et_ot_subject.htm
25. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37347 views
If we had a very high volume of posts, I think breaking up the forum would make more sense. The activity goes in spurts usually, and even then isn't too terribly high volume. I like having everything in one place (so long as it isn't overwhelming, which I don't think this forum is) rather than having to go multiple places to read everything.
Just my 2 cents:
A smart forum would be able to show all posts (or thread) from all subforums in a single spot in a linear fashion - the way things look now - in addition to the more common multiple places view.
26. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37352 views
If we had a very high volume of posts, I think breaking up the forum would make more sense. The activity goes in spurts usually, and even then isn't too terribly high volume. I like having everything in one place (so long as it isn't overwhelming, which I don't think this forum is) rather than having to go multiple places to read everything.
Just my 2 cents:
A smart forum would be able to show all posts (or thread) from all subforums in a single spot in a linear fashion - the way things look now - in addition to the more common multiple places view.
Yes, definitely. The beauty of this forum is that its all ours, running on euphoria, and it's actually fairly easy to work with (the hardest part is getting a development environment set up).
Matt
27. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37386 views
I do understand what you are saying, its just that I'm not sure that using the [OT] or any other prefix is a good way to achieve it.
Fair enough.
Now, assuming that [OT] stands for Off Topic, it begs the question - What is the topic that this post is not about?.
It should be obvious most of the time. Even if the on-topic topic itself (though theme is my prefered term) is not too clearly defined, it should be easy to determine if a given post is on or off topic. This is subjective, so there will be exceptions, but most of the time a post would clearly be on topic or off topic.
The first response might be Euphoria, which assumes that the topic of this entire forum is the programming language. But who has decreed that?
I suspect that this forum is more generally a place in which members of the Euphoria community (how ever that is defined) can post stuff that could be of interest to other members. I'd hate to see the forum become a boring - fixated - place.
Does it have to be decreed? The community comes together here, but underneath the group there's an underlying purpose or theme that binds it together. It may ineffable, ambiguous, and multi-faceted, but it exists.
Forums that do not have any underlying theme exist, and most forums that do have one also have a subforum for off-topic threads.
However, I can still see that filtering out uninteresting posts, or filtering in specific posts, would a useful idea. And I think that the forum already has such a feature, which is greatly under utilized.
I bring your attention to the fact that any post can be categorized, and to any category you like. The administrators can ensure that categories are not misused. Now we might like to make categorizing posts a bit more intuitive or easy, but the basic structure is already in place.
You are not saying this outright, and it's possible that I'm misunderstanding, but I get the impression that you're trying to say that nothing is off-topic here - that this distinction is not applicable to this forum. (Or at least, that this should not be the case.)
We actually have an off-topic category in the categorization system, http://openeuphoria.org/category/members.wc?category=OffTopic and as things exist right now, any user of this forum could tag posts as off topic. I believe I'm not the only one who thinks that off topic threads is a useful distinction for this forum.
Currently, however, no one tags their posts in this manner. I think that the categories system we have is brilliant, but it's not the zero effort of a user who chooses to add OT or to post in the "Anything and Everything" subforum.
Also, if someone other than the original author of a post tags it as off topic, that's the same as if a viewer chose to edit the subject line of the original post to add the OT prefix imvho. There's nothing inherently wrong with this, but it means something to me when the original author refuses to tag their own posts as off topic.
28. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37337 views
Currently, however, no one tags their posts in this manner. I think that the categories system we have is brilliant, but it's not the zero effort of a user who chooses to add OT or to post in the "Anything and Everything" subforum.
How do you even tag something? I don't see anything about how to do that for a post.
If we're serious about this, we need a reasonable way to do it. Then, I could see a simple way to filter based on tags, so you would in effect have multiple lists, and people could view things in a much more customized way.
Matt
29. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37338 views
Currently, however, no one tags their posts in this manner. I think that the categories system we have is brilliant, but it's not the zero effort of a user who chooses to add OT or to post in the "Anything and Everything" subforum.
How do you even tag something? I don't see anything about how to do that for a post.
If we're serious about this, we need a reasonable way to do it. Then, I could see a simple way to filter based on tags, so you would in effect have multiple lists, and people could view things in a much more customized way.
Hm, the link is missing in the individual message (that can be easily fixed)! View the thread and you'll see a "Categorize" link.
Then use the "Category Cloud" link on the right that is there on all pages.
Jeremy
30. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37327 views
Currently, however, no one tags their posts in this manner. I think that the categories system we have is brilliant, but it's not the zero effort of a user who chooses to add OT or to post in the "Anything and Everything" subforum.
How do you even tag something? I don't see anything about how to do that for a post.
If we're serious about this, we need a reasonable way to do it. Then, I could see a simple way to filter based on tags, so you would in effect have multiple lists, and people could view things in a much more customized way.
Matt
To add a post to a category you need to type in an url something like this:
To remove:
Having easy to use buttons for this would be nice.
31. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37313 views
Currently, however, no one tags their posts in this manner. I think that the categories system we have is brilliant, but it's not the zero effort of a user who chooses to add OT or to post in the "Anything and Everything" subforum.
How do you even tag something? I don't see anything about how to do that for a post.
If we're serious about this, we need a reasonable way to do it. Then, I could see a simple way to filter based on tags, so you would in effect have multiple lists, and people could view things in a much more customized way.
Hm, the link is missing in the individual message (that can be easily fixed)! View the thread and you'll see a "Categorize" link.
Then use the "Category Cloud" link on the right that is there on all pages.
For example, I categorized the Popup thread. Take a peek now at the Category Cloud (or the popup thread).
- http://openeuphoria.org/category/members.wc?category=Win32Lib
- http://openeuphoria.org/forum/116707.wc?last_id=116710
- http://openeuphoria.org/category/cloud.wc
Jeremy
32. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by useless Oct 14, 2011
- 37308 views
1. I was NOT making it out to be a free credit course. It is a very good learning exercise from a a good university. Those who want to take it should take it.
It is NOT from a university. It is from only these two people who teach it.
useless
33. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by useless Oct 14, 2011
- 37306 views
Since most of the posts to this thread are about posting, will they be re-categorised and moved to a new thread?
And how? Can i open/edit someone else's post and "vote" it to a new category? Can we make new category tags, such as "Rubbish"? Will we have a category to discuss what each tag means? If someone posts a question about closing a window, will re-tagging it, possibly correctly, to be a win32lib issue, make it impossible to locate again?
useless
34. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37332 views
1. I was NOT making it out to be a free credit course. It is a very good learning exercise from a a good university. Those who want to take it should take it.
It is NOT from a university. It is from only these two people who teach it.
Who are, apparently, professors at Stanford. I don't think anyone believes they'll get Stanford credit or anything, but you make it sound like it's something that has absolutely nothing to do with Stanford, which seems misleading to me.
Matt
35. Re: "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37276 views
1. I was NOT making it out to be a free credit course. It is a very good learning exercise from a a good university. Those who want to take it should take it.
It is NOT from a university. It is from only these two people who teach it.
Who are, apparently, professors at Stanford. I don't think anyone believes they'll get Stanford credit or anything, but you make it sound like it's something that has absolutely nothing to do with Stanford, which seems misleading to me.
Matt
Of course, there's a difference between something offered by professors in their individual capacity - without invoking the official blessings of their employer - and something that's sponsored by, or at least approved by and recommended by a university.
36. Categories of Life
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 14, 2011
- 37337 views
Since most of the posts to this thread are about posting, will they be re-categorised and moved to a new thread?
That's a good idea.
And how? Can i open/edit someone else's post and "vote" it to a new category?
No. This was the original idea with categories and the wiki, but it was abandoned due to the limitation of users being able to only edit their own posts.
Can we make new category tags, such as "Rubbish"?
Yes.
Will we have a category to discuss what each tag means?
No. (At least not yet.) We do have a wiki page for that, though.
If someone posts a question about closing a window, will re-tagging it, possibly correctly, to be a win32lib issue, make it impossible to locate again?
That ultimately depends on the searcher. However, you can add multiple tags - so a post will be in several categories. Additionally, categories won't affect the content-based search we have now, so if all else fails...
37. Re: [OT] Off Topic guideline request
- Posted by useless Oct 14, 2011
- 37412 views
1. I was NOT making it out to be a free credit course. It is a very good learning exercise from a a good university. Those who want to take it should take it.
It is NOT from a university. It is from only these two people who teach it.
Who are, apparently, professors at Stanford. I don't think anyone believes they'll get Stanford credit or anything, but you make it sound like it's something that has absolutely nothing to do with Stanford, which seems misleading to me.
Matt
Think of it this way: this class is to Stanford as OOEU is to Euphoria.
Or this way: {two professors} != {entity Stanford}
Or this way: Derek != OpenEuphoria
useless
38. Re: [OT] "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 15, 2011
- 37402 views
1. I was NOT making it out to be a free credit course. It is a very good learning exercise from a a good university. Those who want to take it should take it.
It is NOT from a university. It is from only these two people who teach it.
Who are, apparently, professors at Stanford. I don't think anyone believes they'll get Stanford credit or anything, but you make it sound like it's something that has absolutely nothing to do with Stanford, which seems misleading to me.
Matt
To quote that article:
All three are being offered in partnership with the Stanford Center for Professional Development (SCPD)
And to quote the website of SCPD at scpd.stanford.edu
The Stanford Center for Professional Development connects professionals worldwide to the research and teaching of Stanford University faculty in the School of Engineering and related academic departments. Qualified individuals may study for master of science degrees on a part-time basis, pursue graduate certificates and professional certificates, take individual graduate courses and professional courses, participate in workshops, view free online seminars and more. Courses are delivered online, on the Stanford campus in the heart of Silicon Valley, and at the work site.
And here is their address:
Stanford Center for Professional Development Stanford University 496 Lomita Mall, Durand Building 3rd Floor Stanford, CA 94305 Telephone: 650 204-3984 scpd-customerservice@stanford.edu
From this I conclude that SCPD is at least akin to a branch of Stanford.
Think of it this way: this class is to Stanford as OOEU is to Euphoria.
Isn't OOEU a superior object oriented superset to Euphoria? Something that's better in every possible way?
Or this way: {two professors} != {entity Stanford}
Or this way: Derek != OpenEuphoria
I think there are some very good arguments to refute your last example. ;)
Anyways, you are right. Those two professors are not the same as Stanford. I'll go further and concede that SCPD is a different entity than Stanford itself as well.
There's certainly a difference between these classes and the Stanford Engineering Everywhere courses that are offered by that university for free (at http://see.stanford.edu/see/courses.aspx ).
Still, you are wrong. This class is offered by more than just "only these two people" - they are offering it in partnership with Stanfordian entity which implies they get to use Stanford's brand and money.
Someone might attempt to argue on a technicality, that despite getting Stanford's brand and funding, these classes are technically not offered by Stanford itself.
To quote Matt's article again
The new courses are only the latest effort by Stanford to share information and ideas with the public online.
So Stanford is claiming that these classes are part of Stanford's efforts, or offerings. I think that Stanford should be the authoritive entity for that kind of claim.
(Like most, if not all, free online courses, you don't get the accreditation and other benefits from being admitted to a college. That doesn't change the fact that these classes are being offered by Stanford.)
39. Re: "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence"course from Stanford
- Posted by useless Nov 01, 2011
- 36978 views
