> ... Minsky ... invented neural networks
A little baldy put. Minsky did study them and famously proved
severe limitations on the learning capability of the simple
perceptron model. Mathematical models of neural networks
originaated with McCulloch and Pitts; perceptrons with
Rosenblat.
doug
> From: Nemo
> I will, no doubt, be flayed on this list but I tend to use "=>".
Hey, if it works for you, go for it.
After the Nth time I got confused as to exactly which machine I was
typing to, I hacked the shell on my V6 Unix to read its prompt from
".profile". (Very clean, only one added line of code in the existing
code.)
Noel
We gained Marvin Minsky on this day in 1927; he was an AI researcher,
computer scientist, invented neural networks etc, and is now thought to be
cryogenically preserved.
-- Dave
Hi,
I usually just lurk on this list, but I've been curious lately about the origin of the symbols at the end of various interactive prompts.
ksh (etc), bash, sh use $ for non-root, and # for root
csh, tcsh and zsh use % for non-root and # for root
fish and things like mysql, ftp, and interactive shells for a lot of scripting languages use >
rc uses ;
Where do these different conventions originate?
B
Maybe I am being a tad sensitive this morn but...
>> On 8 Aug 2018, at 04:00, tuhs-request(a)minnie.tuhs.org wrote:
[...]
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of TUHS digest..."
let us please honour this request.
Thank you.
N.
[Lots and lots and lots of stuff removed]
> The Bourne shell (V7) had setable PS1 (start of command) and PS2 (continuation prompts)
When PS2 came on the scene, Bob Morris noticed that it most often appeared
because of a missing close quote. Therefore he set PS2="hit interrupt".
> From: Dave Horsfall
> However, we gained Jon Postel in 1943; with umpteen RFCs to his name, he
> could pretty much be described as the Father of the Internet.
The problem with using the number of documents as a gauge for that is that Jon
often acted as scribe, so that for many things published under his name, he
was acting more as editor.
As to who (if anyone) does deserve that title, I'm also not sure about the
importance of Cerf and Kahn. NOTE: I am not saying they _didn't_ make the key
contribution - I just haven't looked into it in enough detail to say.
For example, before the TCP/IP effort got rolling, there was something called
the International Packet Network Working Group (INWG) which had a big role,
but which has been poorly documented. There's a note called "The Internet: On
its International Origins and Collaborative Vision" by Rhonda Hauben,
available here:
http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/haubenpap.rtf
which covers it some, and there's a more recent thing by Alex Mackenzie which
is probably better, but I'm too lazy to go find it.
Louis Pouzin (or whoever it was at CYCLADES who actually had the idea to move
the reliability out of the packet switches, and into the hosts), also would
have a good claim to the title.
Anyway, sorry for the offtopic, but my 'fake history' alarm went off...
Noel
> From: Bakul Shah
> What counts as a "formal spec"?
If you aren't familiar with the work in the field (it's been going on long
enough, it was around when I was an undergrad), some of the earlier messages
in the thread, e.g.:
https://minnie.tuhs.org//pipermail/tuhs/2018-August/014365.html
might provide some thing you could follow. (I'm not into that stuff, so I
point you in the right direction.)
Noel