04-18-2005, 03:51 PM
whyBish,Apr 17 2005, 12:48 AM Wrote:In case you didn't see this in slashdot:
Story:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/...rank.reut/
Commentary:
http://duhblog.com/space/start/2005-04-15/1
Slashdot not linked as their commentary was one paragraph
The 'conference site:
http://www.iiisci.org/sci2005/website/default.asp
The auto generator site:
http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scigen/
Try some of the autogeneration, it is very well done :P
" We now consider existing work. Bose and Harris [7,12,24] and Sasaki and Jackson [21] presented the first known instance of autonomous modalities. Similarly, Q. Qian developed a similar system, nevertheless we verified that our framework is optimal [11,26,23]. On the other hand, these methods are entirely orthogonal to our efforts.
A major source of our inspiration is early work by Sun [3] on embedded algorithms. This solution is less flimsy than ours. Juris Hartmanis et al. described several cacheable approaches, and reported that they have profound influence on peer-to-peer configurations [10,13,13]. Thus, the class of heuristics enabled by our methodology is fundamentally different from previous solutions [8].
"
[right][snapback]74211[/snapback][/right]
Such comfort, to know that PT Barnum is still right.
Occhi
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete