Actually, that's the law: if you're employed as a programmer, any programming you do in your free time is copyrighted by your employer. At least in the Netherlands. (More info at http://www.iusmentis.com/copyright/crashcourse/ownership/ .) And yeah, that's pretty sick from an employee perspective, but great if you want to protect yourself as a company. When I was employed, I actually read my contract, so I had a side-note added with exceptions. If you're involved in any open source project, that's probably a smart thing to do. (Again, at least in the Netherlands, but I'm pretty sure that's not unique, since copyright laws tend to be very old.)
Knowing how to cure all diseases would be a very high goal that stands above what doctors accomplished up to the present time.
The challenge that I gave is below what physicists "know" today.
When a physicist studies Qunatum Mechanics, he knows that on the macroscopic scale, QM will behave like classical electromagnetism. The problem that I raise, is that physicists don't know classical electromagnetism well enough in the first place. They can't calculate motion of macroscopic objects. I don't think it's wise to try to study QM before they solved that challenge, the same way it won't be wise to start learning Special Relativity before you studied Newtonian Mechanics.
Fair enough, I stand corrected, I commented as I did because I interpreted it as a typical "science can't explain everything therefore it is useless" or "your theory isn't perfect therefore my theory must be correct" rant.
When a physicist studies Qunatum Mechanics, he knows that on the macroscopic scale, QM will behave like classical electromagnetism.
Why do you say this? Quantum Mechanics in the classical limit does not become classical electrodynamics. How could it? QM is non-relativistic. Classical electrodynamics is relativistic. QM in the classical limit becomes classical (Newtonian) mechanics.
I admit I haven't studied QM, but I believe that it's relativistic. Maybe you have confused General Relativity with Special Relativity? QM is incompatible with GR, but I think it's based on SR.
Well, it isn't, and no, I haven't confused General with Special Relativity, trust me on that :) Maybe you confused Quantum Mechanics with Quantum Field Theory?
Just because you don't need to write your own sorting algorithms don't mean you don't have to know how to write one. First of all it is a good introduction to algorithms, analysis and construction and you still have to know the complexity of each to choose the correct one in some cases.
Part V Uncertain Knowledge and Reasoning
13 Uncertainty
14 Probabilistic Reasoning
15 Probabilistic Reasoning Over Time
16 Making Simple Decisions
17 Making Complex Decisions
Part VI Learning
18 Learning from Observations
19 Knowledge in Learning
20 Statistical Learning Methods (pdf)
21 Reinforcement Learning
Part VII Communicating, Perceiving, and Acting
22 Communication
23 Probabilistic Language Processing
24 Perception
25 Robotics
Part VIII Conclusions
26 Philosophical Foundations
27 AI: Present and Future
Bibliography (pdf and counts)
Index (html or pdf)
Yes, but I am not aware of any program running in it. c.f. XMonad. It seems that the style is for complied code (and thus low-profile) with dynamic recompilation. This is effectively a REPL, but you technically do recompile. So more of a RCPL?
