periheli0n

35 ms·

331.
by periheli0n 6y ago
In the EU, money for fundamental research comes from the government. I agree that this means less money and perhaps more bureaucracy, but als less dependence on economic trends and fads in the industry, and the ability to focus on fundament
332.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Google earns money with advertising. They also do some kick-ass CS research, but that’s not what makes the money. In fact, ad sales fund Google’s research.
333.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Hm. One can do awesome CS research without having to make tons of money. One can also make money with other people’s/universities’/countries’ CS research while doing zero CS research in-house. Research and money making are pretty
334.
by periheli0n 6y ago
I thought the question was about research strength, not money-making strength. Although capitalisation is not really about making money rather than promising to make money later. Pretty much orthogonal to the aim of research.
335.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Whereas in Europe university driven innovations are often placed in the public domain, especially in France. What is better for society? Depends on the viewpoint I guess.
336.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Normalised for population, Switzerland blows the competition out of the water. The Swiss have twice the Nobel laureates per capita than the US, 2.5 times more than the Uk, seven times more than Germany.
337.
by periheli0n 6y ago
But how to tell if a university is really the best or just pretends to be?
338.
by periheli0n 6y ago
I tend to disagree. Good universities (as well as other schools) feed students’ curiosity and sense of exploration. Bad ones just push them through an educational assembly line where they graduate at the end. The former boosts students’ sel
339.
by periheli0n 6y ago
“Best universities” according to which measure? I find it super difficult to come up with a hard set of criteria that measure the performance of an educational institution. Number of graduates? Number of research papers published? Amount of
340.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Totally agree. Midway through the post I thought she‘d recommend to read a in a nonlinear way. This has recently worked for me with science textbooks.
341.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Locally, neuromodulators disperse through diffusion, unlike neurotransmitters which are hardly given a chance to travel far from the synaptic cleft they are released into, due to reuptake channels and enzymatic degradation. But neurons tha
342.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Except the HTM theory and Hawkins’ talks, which, while perhaps not totally holding up to scientific scrutiny, are inspiring. A bit like prose for the AI/neuroscience-inclined audience.
343.
by periheli0n 6y ago
As someone who is quite versed in Neuroscience and AI, and who has read Hawkins’ papers, I am still waiting to see the gross simplifications be filled with depth. He does go into more detail than what’s written, but it is more sidestepping
344.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Yep. What is so grossly wrong about Hawkins’ statement is that it implies that the “old brain” and the “new brain” could exist in separation, like modular units. This is BS. Most learning in the “new brain” would not work without the “old b
345.
by periheli0n 6y ago
Whenever I hear Hawkins speak I wonder whether he’s a genius or a glorious charlatan. His theories on brain function are interesting, but he always makes these gross simplifications that don’t really fly. That old brain/new brain thing
346.
by periheli0n 6y ago
If it’s any consolation—the situation is not much better in Germany.
347.
by periheli0n 6y ago
For starters, users pay for that email service with money. This only works if users are willing to pay.