Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    artificial intelligence

ivanv's Achievements


Quark (2/13)



  1. i think You have a big one for me. i might like to have it to help all earth beings. alan2here, i'd like U to have my one among other if U can use it. a concept for programming, one beginning programming lang for all other langs where can compressed data be helpful. maybe U'd like to combine something with my one, if U want to. here is page: https://sites.google.com/site/synthprogramminglanguage/
  2. Don't give up, feeling is outstanding when U manage to nail down into machine some i.e. real-time physics engine that does above-average things. C# and C++ for beginning they teach there? In my opinion, after intro fight with procedural programming it would be much easier to understand object oriented concept that honestly rocked on computer industry. Why don't they teach firstly some simpler languages like Pascal and QBasic? After all, as far as I remember from computer theory, Pascal is the language that was invented mainly for learning purposes. QBasic is pretty simple too. Both of them use "procedural programming" arrangement of code, which is much simpler than dealing with modern classes, inheritance, objects, interfaces and other cool mumbo-jumbo implementation. Any of those two would be a good start, i'm not aware of anything simpler that exist in presence. I like Pascal more than QBasic, it has stronger compile time variable type checking that helps in detecting errors. Borland Turbo Pascal and MS QBasic can be easily found on Internet, only a few megs of download, both DOS applications, sorry. Certainly there are short "tutorials" available for download. Although it has its fans, C++ is the pain in the ass for me at code-compile-run developing process, but it provides higher level language features while it is pretty fast, near to machine code, which is sometimes a crucial thing for game development. Someone should finally make a compiler for Java or C# that would be as fast as C++ compiled code. C++ is experiment of history if I'm asked. Java and C# are more mature, they are widely accepted stuff now and I'm sure that they would rock in game industry if they would achieve only 70% of C++ speed.
  3. U might like OWL 2 Web Ontology Language . It's about noting knowledge. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-syntax-20091027/ Interesting topics to me is automatic algorithm construction, but includes investigating constructive logic and theorem proving that is not completely standardized yet. So many distributed chaotic documentation, count on loosing many time to get the picture (took years for uneducated person as I was). However, it can be applied to ontology manipulation afterwards. Algorithms (which can be related to proofs) can be represented by systematic transformation of ontologies which are really just systems of data variables. Expect horrible time with documentation if U choose this one. Good luck, whatever U choose Oh, silly me, I thought it's a coledge work, I'm not familiar to foreign school systems, i should check next time. Yes, a school teacher mentor might be a great idea. Try to check just OWL2 with that person of trust. It is pretty simple to investigate and it is blazing up-to-date technology proposed by internet standards consortium. Sorry for mistake :}
  4. These are some things that can be done in organizing open source crew: (link removed by moderator)
  5. Hi Iota I think U have found one of zillions system files in Ur computer. Only programmers that made these files can understand what is in them. This file might have doc extension, but I don't believe it is a word doc format, i think it only has the same doc extension (extension of the file doesn't neccessairly explains what the file contains). Only files made for exchanging (docs, images, music, ...) are ought to be viewed by end users. System files that are ought to be viewed by users are usually called configuration files and there is real hacking heaven there, but U can crush down the whole system if U do weird things in them. I use Internet to get informations about specific config files of specific programs, but usually programs handle these files automatically through their user interface. Oh, extensions of files might be hidden when working with Windows, so U might be able to see only names of files. If U are interested about system files in Ur computer, U can google around web a little bit to find out how extension names are turned to show in windows.
  6. This is a sneak peak to the technology planed to implement on the site: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hUtbGM_-_VM
  7. Hi Baby Astronaut Basically, We already have one defined computer language that is wired in processor, namely Assembler. Assembler has enough commands to program just anything we can imagine. When we want to program a new computer language, firstly we have to define it in our mind (on paper). Once we know how our new language behaves, the rest is easy: we just have to translate that behaviour to assembler, maybe even indirectly by using higher order language like c, or whatever. We just have to shape up assembler (c, ...) commands to do the stuff we have imagined. That easy. Right now two basic paradigms of programming language behaviour people managed to shape up: imperative - line by line executing of commands of mostly copying or modifying and copying one memory cell to another. Examples are c, Java and all major stuff used in classic business world. The great thing happen here is object oriented approach, a real cutie, if U ask me. functional - something like ms excel, change one variable, all related variables change accordingly automaticly. Examples are Haskell and other adventureous crew. Relatively new stuff, they are fighting through heavily rooted imperative paradigm. I can't wait for something new to pop up. There are also some aspects of technical realization like choosing interpreter/compiler behaviour, but these are just finesses. The major thing is to manage to come up with something new on the paper, other is peace of cake, as we use already invented technologies to describe what we imagined.
  8. I've been studied one side of AI for some time, so I'd like to share my insights to those who are starting to investigate this field. I encountered two main approaches in AI: neural networks: didn't went in details here, but the principal is simulating human brain neural network. It reminds me at statistical analysis of gathered data and reinforced learning. Practical example is a robot which when put in environment of i.e. poison and healthy cubes can recognize and collect only healthy cubes, but only in some degree of correctness. The more cubes collected, the more accurate next estimation of healthy cube is. theorem proving: this is what I investigated more thoroughly. Idea is in calculating how to transform system A from starting state combination S1 to wanted state combination S2, using only provided methods M-s for which we can predict how they impact the system. And system can be anything, from set of logic or math formulas to real life examples such are engine systems or set of mutually interacting molecules. I spent some time thinking of behaviour mechanism that would run some theorem proving system, but with no luck. I decided to stop on guided learning and automated extraction of transforming sequence when question asked (current technologies already provide mechanisms for that). This approach reflects what web 3.0 should be. On the web exist several already somewhat filled knowledge bases that can be used to extract explicite and implicite answers: http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/yago-naga/yago/ https://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/fndrupal/index.php?q=frameIndex http://verbs.colorado.edu/~mpalmer/projects/verbnet.html I hope this would be helpful.
  9. This is a basic prototype of the site: http://styled.host-ed.me/build/index.html It shows itself among other partially structured projects. Screenshoot:
  10. Indeed, tries are attempted to interest people about "Free Nation" while trying not to compromise collaboration attitude i'm trying to breath into the project. It started as idea of gathering open source crews to bring a decent open source cloud OS and wide palette of quality cloud apps. As I entertain sympathies for open source because it does promote creativity of individuals, i thought it might be a good idea to catch that revolutionary "occupy ..." flame and make also an complementary experiment to apply open source philosophy to manufacturing, service providing, teaching, or any value providing workgroup. This might be the right time for it. If these workgroups would know about each other, they could mutually support each other, knowing that used services are babies of healthy environment in which every individual is considered as valuable and important person in her workgroup. I'm pretty certain that this approach could successfully apply to open source software workgroup system and i would like to interest other kinds of workgroups to give it a chance. I'm trying to propose an graphic online tool for organizing new workgoups, planning structural relationships between these and simply maintaining index of these. This tool needs yet to be defined firstly. Current stage of the project is setup of starting strategy, so creative help is needed. If U're interested, here is the link i've already shared with U: https://groups.googl...rum/free-nation
  11. Is this our chance to put things right: https://groups.googl...rum/free-nation ? (Free Nation is an initiative to gather up over web to form a perfect working community. It is a try to even more elevate human aspects of business relationships between each member or group.)
  12. Suppose one fine day in future, people gather up to form a perfect working group. What characteristics would that group have? Would it have strong or weak hierarchy, would it be faced to promote relaxed working environment or would it be faced to encourage members to work hard and to expose their best to outer world, would it be seamless across all segments or would it allow deviations in particular areas, would it accept new members, what rights would members have, how would it compare to today's most popular firm organizations, how important money would be, ... and stuff like that? I'm really curious about Ur opinions :|
  13. welcome to radio chaosssssssss :| It seems that short sentences lose meanings when exchanged lot of times. Works good for art, but for constructive logic it makes sense only if blind trusting each other. Long argumented sentences usually leave little room for misunderstanding. They prove to ourselves our objectivity. Long sentences also prove our real intentions to the other side. Or, if U wish U can leave radio chaossssssssssss thrive here :| Maybe some infinitely productive idea breaks through one fine day?
  14. I hope they do no mistakes in making planes. I'd hate to see screws and engine parts falling off from wings while riding on 10000 feets. I guess they have to pass some higher force atest for that part, otherwise...
  15. Hi student! Boy, that's so ambitious (http://www.northropgrumman.com/). A little bit more and they are up to building spaceships I wonder what working atmosphere they are maintaining? I believe that is a kind of firm that people are spending a half of life to get educated enough to offer something to them. But if U want a job there, don't give up, U'll think of something one day Did U try to elaborate the whole site, put interesting things on paper and spend few days on thinking what improvements U could bring in their business, from tech side? They are hardly to immediately accept any suggestions (no matter how good they are), but imho practical improvements could look pretty good once written down, if they are concise enough to read them in three minutes. This way more precise department of interest can be isolated. Best wishes
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.