The C++ jobs I've been approached about are in the music and gaming industries. Both jobs are audio-related. I have a strong background in audio signal analysis and processing, despite my minimal C++ chops.
The authors of this book also offer an excellent free online course that covers some of the same material. I found it incredibly well presented and easy to follow, without being superficial.
There is no such thing as a sentence, or a phrase, or a part
of speech, or even a "word"---these are all pareidolic
fantasies occasioned by glints of sunlight we see reflected
on the surface of the ocean of language; fantasies that we
comfort ourselves with when faced with language's infinite
and unknowable variability.
The author's job title might have given this away. In Canada (assistant|associate|full) professors are tenured or tenure track, and hence higher status. Any other title could be assumed to mean non-tenure track and under-employed, hence lower status.
I enjoy my homogenous Facebook feed, full of people who share my views and my life circumstances, just as much as the next guy.
But I also sometimes enjoy reading posts I disagree with, and posts from people who aren't part of my "tribe". If Facebook had a knob that could amplify the stuff it thinks I won’t like (less Bernie Sanders, more conservative talk radio! less wedding pictures, more farmville invites!), I’d turn it once in a while, just to go on a little social vacation.
>In the last 15 years or so, researchers have created a number of tools to probe the geometry of these hidden structures. For example, you might build a model of the surface by first zooming in at many different points. At each point, you would place a drop of virtual ink on the surface and watch how it spread out.
It sounds to me like this 'ink drop' is a metaphor to explain some state-of-the-art dimensionality reduction technique. Does anyone know the common name of this technique?
I'm talking about cases where human involvement is minimal. If all I need to do to make a painting is press the "run" button, there's not much intention there. I haven't expressed anything.
You could certainly make the case for "expressive individuality" in the program making the art, especially if it was written by just one person. But computer programs, IMHO, fail the "valid art" test for other reasons. Of Dutton's twelve criteria they miss at least two: representation (6) and emotional saturation (9).
To me, computer generated art always feels less remarkable than traditional art. If you present me with two paintings that are identical, pixel for pixel, and tell me that one is human authored and the other computer authored, I'd be less interested in the computer authored one. I'd spend less time thinking about it.
I always found this fact fascinating. Why would I attribute different levels of worth to two artifacts that were totally identical, save for their method of construction?
I didn't have a good answer to this until I read a book by aesthetician Dennis Dutton (The Art Instinct). Dutton presents a 12 factor model of art, and claims that artifacts exhibiting all 12 criteria tend to be unambiguously judged as "valid art", while artifacts that miss some but exhibit most are considered "edge cases", things that reasonable people can dispute the artistic validity of.
One of Dutton's 12 criteria is "expressive individuality". Most art objects are the products of a single person's imagination. Computer generated art tends to lack this trait, and this, I think, is why it feels less valid than human-made art.
What amazes me about mosh is how it handles transitions in and out of the private wifi network at my school. When I want to ssh to school machines from off campus, I generally need to use a VPN. Without the VPN the machines are unreachable: if I ping them, no packets are returned; ssh attempts fail. Using mosh, though, I've found that I can start a session at school and resume it off campus, no VPN necessary. This seems like magic to me. Can anyone explain how mosh does this?
Also, we probably have a lot more footage of 1985. Since video recording equipment got cheaper, more videos got made. Since many of those videos still exist, 1985 is still "present" in 2015 to a much greater degree than 1955 was in 1985. The same holds true for audio recordings.
>The only time I ever hear this application is for the joke, “Aye you got Kik?”, normally seen as someone trying to “spit game” to attract a partner. It’s really difficult for me to describe it here but it isn't super relevant.
This paragraph is mystifying. Can someone explain what he's talking about here?
There's a special irony to the fact that this high fidelity audio format is being promoted by Neil Young. Young's a rock musician. He's been around loud noises (e.g. rock concerts) most of his life. He's also 69 years old. Our ability to hear high frequencies decreases dramatically with age and exposure [1]. If anyone were able to discriminate 24/192 from 16/44.1, it sure as heck wouldn't be an elderly rock musician.