Creating a Mobile-First Responsive Web Design
Content Fragments and conditionally load them using JS.BMI and risk of dementia in two million people over two decades: a retrospective cohort study.
Nice lay summary of this article at AlzForum.
Summary of policy gradients using backprop (last ten minutes):
The 'policy' is defined as the probabilities of taking an action given a history of observations: \(p(a_t | h_t)\), with \(h_t = (o_0, o_1, ..., o_t)\).
Reward comes from each action as \(r_t(a_t)\), expected return is: $$ J(\theta) = E[ \sum_{t=0}^{T} r_t(a_t)] $$
The gradient of the expected reward with respect to the parameters \(\theta\) (= "which direction should I change \(\theta\)?") is taken as follows:
Sample (& average over) many action sequences (= play many games), for each sequence \((a_0,a_1, ..., a_T)\) computing:
---- The sum of, for each action \(a_t\) in the sequence:
---- ---- [which direction to change theta to make my action \(a_t\) more (log) probable given history \(h_t\)] * [the total reward gotten from this action and subsequent actions]
The whole thing can be read as: if an action in a game led to high rewards, try to do that action more often when in the same situation.
Starts off on a difficult foot by attempting to deny common conceptions about how advertising works, and even legitimizes their function, but comes full circle to strong indictment of the insidiousness of brand ubiquity.
The innate qualities of intellectual pr operty, however, in combination with INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: POLICY FOR INNOVATION 15 strong economic motivations have led U.S. intellectual property policy to operate according to rights - based, non - utilitarian theory, possibly as a result of lobbying (capture theory).
Lobbying has led to a rights-based non-utilitarian theory copyright policy in the US at the present time (2014).
The U.S. social contract establishes a utilitarian basis for protection of intellectual property rights: protection as a means of encouraging innovation.
The social contract of the US Constitution provides a utilitarian basis for protection of intellectual property rights.
As intellectual property lacks scarcity, and the protection of it fails the Lockean Proviso, there is no natural right to intellectual property. As such, the justification for intellectual property rights arises from the social con tract, and in the case of the United States, the Constitution.
The justification for intellectual property from the social contract established by the US Constitution; it otherwise has no justification by natural right because it fails the Lockean Proviso.
In the final analysis, intellectual property shares much of the origins and orientation of all forms of property. At the same time, however, it is a more neutral institution than other forms of property: its limited scope and duration tend to prevent the very accumulation of wealth that Burke championed.
Beginning the issue with “are” or “is” often leads to a clearer and more concise expression of the issue than beginning it with “may,” “can,” “does,” or “should.” The latter beginnings may lead to vague or ambiguous versions of the issue. Examine the following alternative statements of the judicial issue from Aiken Industries, Inc. (TC, 1971), acq.: Issue 2 (Poor): Are the interest payments exempt from the withholding tax? Issue 2 (Poor): Should the taxpayer exempt the interest payments from withholding tax? In the first version of issue 2 above, to which interest payments and which withholding tax is the writer referring? The issue does not stand alone since it cannot be precisely understood apart from separately reading the brief�s facts. The extreme brevity leads to ambiguity. In the second version, the question can be interpreted as a moral or judgment issue rather than a legal one. Whether the taxpayer should do (or should not do) something may be a very different issue than the legal question of what the law requires. A legal brief, however, should focus on the latter. Rewriting issue 2 as follows leads to a clearer expression of the precise issue: Issue 2 (Better): Are interest payments exempt from the U.S. 30% withholding tax when paid to an entity established in a tax treaty country for no apparent purpose other than to escape taxation on the interest received?
Extreme brevity leads to ambiguity. The summary of the issue should be written to avoid opening the question to interpretation as a moral or judgment issue; instead focus on the legal question.
Survey design The survey was intended to capture as broad and complete a view of data production activities and curation concerns on campus as possible, at the expense of gaining more in-depth knowledge.
Summary of the survey design
To summarize the survey's findings: Curation of digital data is a concern for a significant proportion of UCSB faculty and researchers. Curation of digital data is a concern for almost every department and unit on campus. Researchers almost universally view themselves as personally responsible for the curation of their data. Researchers view curation as a collaborative activity and collective responsibility. Departments have different curation requirements, and therefore may require different amounts and types of campus support. Researchers desire help with all data management activities related to curation, predominantly storage. Researchers may be underestimating the need for help using archival storage systems and dealing with attendant metadata issues. There are many sources of curation mandates, and researchers are increasingly under mandate to curate their data. Researchers under curation mandate are more likely to collaborate with other parties in curating their data, including with their local labs and departments. Researchers under curation mandate request more help with all curation-related activities; put another way, curation mandates are an effective means of raising curation awareness. The survey reflects the concerns of a broad cross-section of campus.
Summary of survey findings.
Listen to me, then, while I recapitulate the argument:—Is the pleasant the same as the good? Not the same. Callicles and I are agreed about that.
Beginning of summary of argument. Repeated once more for good measure