The IT University of Copenhagen is an independent educational and research institution, dedicated to the digital world. The university works to make Denmark exceptionally good at making value through IT by providing contemporary study programmes and research at the highest academic level.
The university has around 2,500 students with very different backgrounds and nationalities. We offer study programmes of high quality and an interesting study environment with the newest research within digital communication, business, software development and games. All our study programmes are research-based and we have around 70 full-time researchers, 50 external lecturers and 65 PhD students.
Research and teaching To us, IT is much more than zero's and one's. We view the big picture and care just as much about pragmatism and how IT affects us as human beings as whether hard- and software is functioning properly.
Feels like a concentrated shot of clever ideas. Tim Roughgarden is as pedagogical as always, great session, thanks for sharing! I did recognize a few examples from his great book series "Algorithms Illuminated". Now, I feel like browsing though them again. His companion video lectures, on Coursera and elsewhere, to learn algorithms or just refresh one's knowledge, are highly recommended too.
@38:30 Let me see if I understood the proof. Let every problem be described by the set of natural numbers which are answered "yes" by that problem. The set of all such problems is of size equal to the set of subsets of the natural numbers. The set of subsets of the natural numbers is of cardinality 2^{N} where N is the number of natural numbers. But |2^N| ~ |R| as every real number can be written out in binary. with {0,1} at each of the |N| digits. So there are |R| problems. But the set of all programs is |N| as each program can be written as a string. Such strings can be sorted (say alphabetically) and enumerated as (1,2,3... infinity) Thus the size of the set of all problems (|R|) is greater than size of the set of all programs (|N|) . Therefore there are some problems that cannot be solved by programs.
She gets a lot more of her sentences finished in this video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-z__t7WkQ2c4.html , I found it way more informative.
In the US the four branches are 1. Physical/Biological 2. Social/Cultural 3. Archaeology 4. Linguistic and now some say that applied anthropology should be its own branch, but its a bit all-encompassing so I think of it as a vein of anthropology that runs through all the branches
The term "Neosexism" seems dangerously loose and political, at least given the examples you provide: 2:18, To ask someone to substantiate their claim in the context of discrimination is misogyny? 2:26, I think this argument revolves around the point that perceptions of Patriarchy in some feminist movements are causing the delegitimization of male struggles (such homelessness, military enrollment, incarceration): it is a fairly common feminist point that such problems cannot be attributed to systemic discrimination against men because of the presence of Patriarchy and as such, male problems are created by males and are their own to deal with. Of course, not all feminists adhere to this point, myself included. My point is just this: to simply label the argument at 2:26 "misogyny" is a gross over-simplification. You exert that to conceive hypocrisy in certain feminist movements is to be misogynistic, and you thus heavily contaminate your model with own political convictions (I assume you labelled the data set). By this definition, am I now being neosexist because I am not unconditionally back-patting these scientific findings related to misogyny? Should this comment be flagged as "misogynistic" by your model? Or be removed completely? I am curious to hear your thoughts on this
i can't help but be reminded of all the ways that gender plays a role in academia while watching this. interviewer was annoying and came off amateurish.
I would have to agree with a lot of the comments. It's discomforting to have him interrupt. It feels like his timing doesn't allow her enough to express the extent of the questions he's asking and thoughts he's desiring her to expand.
It would have been great if he didnt intrup her all the time. It was difficult for me as a listener to concertrate as she couldnt carry on the discussion for more than few minutes without getting constanty interupted.
I can feel Dr. Pink's struggle in even finishing her sentences sometimes. Which is a shame because she is saying extremely interesting things and why, why would you ever interrupt that!
It's funny that he has been busting to interrupt her all this time and then he has nothing to say. You can tell she is a good listener, as she patiently waits.
As someone who friended you on Facebook simply to hear you talk about exactly this, it is a joy to finally hear your voice and its enthusiasm. Bravo, sir!
Here and when I heard & read the corresponding lecture 8 or 9, I can't help thinking of the resemblence bet. this TV spectrum auction problem and what is happening in Egypt when the government is trying to sell lands to be part of huge projects & investments... From a point of view it is just like what u say in mins 58 - 60 (quite a loss to leave these areas to old houses when it can get billions) -However, the problem here is more complicated because unlike TV channels, people have social values for their homes and do not like to be bought out or shifted to other houses (again with yet another question on the valuation or equivalence of the new houses) . Can u develop a formula to find a true valuation for the households to get (I mean a method to be sure the government is fair to them)??? They do complain sometimes... I mean along with the problem of the last house holder asking for much more money, there's the problem/possibility of him being under a lot of pressure to sell . Can algorithmic game theory really be a fair judge in this matter???
On the first part, actually in practical life a lot of people may prefer to take the longer wider road (high way for example) because it is healthier to car engines, and to people mood also than being stuck in the crowd of a rush hour
There are 5 main branches of Anthropology. 1. Socio-Cultural anthropology 2. Biological or physical anthropology 3. Archaeological Anthropology 4. Linguistic Anthropology 5. Applied Anthropology
The two people here are operating at different 'speeds' so to speak but a lovely conversation nonetheless. Cheers to Yves on his research achievement. One.
Very helpful video on Pi! I made this catchy and educational music video for Pi because math is so much fun! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QxSAObrLyt0.html
With regards to the Dutch tulip mania, an explanation more rational than "people went crazy all of the sudden" exists, which is described in the 2007 paper by Earl Thompson entitled "The tulipmania: Fact or artifact?". In short, he claims that tulip speculators managed to convince the Dutch parliament to convert tulip futures contracts into options contracts, thus inadvertently enabling risk-free tulip speculation. After this, tulip bulb-prices went through the roof, and a couple of months thereafter tulip bubble-trading was forcibly halted. Wikipedia has good overview of the claims in the paper: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania#Legal_changes
Minecraft actually added a "win condition" five years ago in the form of defeating the Ender Dragon, with scrolling end credits and everything. However, it is almost only speed runners who play with this as the goal of the game; everybody else ignores it. This can be seen as a mockery of the attempts of axiomatizing the definition of a game, since this would have turned something "clearly not a game" into something "clearly a game" by adding an arguably irrelevant feature.
