[Video] Damon Horowitz at TEDxSoMA - Why Machines Need People

推友@alisohani 強力推薦 Aardark  共同創辦人 Damon Horowitz 今年一月在 TEDxSoMa 的一場演講 Why Machines Need People，TEDxSoMa 網站簡明扼要的說明 Damon 了他進入職場後的精彩轉折，同時也在文中說明了演講的重點。這是一個放下職場光環，回到學校念哲學博士，再回職場創業的牛人，這裡不是說有 PhD 學位的人都叫做哲學博士的那個“哲學”，他是真的到 Stanford 主修哲學！

這個當初對於技術懷抱宗教情懷 (when I went into college, I became very religious)，篤信技術（I believe in technology）威力的牛人，在這個演講裡給我們的 final take away 是 Technology cannot solve all of our problems for us; the task of thinking is still ours。有意思，是不？

補充一點，Damon 說話的速度很快，還好Youtube 的字幕功能已經進化到夠強悍的地步。

[Video] Weird, or just different?

fcamel在他的部落格裡介紹了一個 CD Baby 創辦人Derek Sivers 的演說:"Weird, or just different?"，內容很有趣，短短兩分多鐘，主旨就是：縱然你有很好的理由相信你自己是對的，但千萬要記住，與你相反的意見也可能是對的 （Whatever brilliant ideas you have or hear, the opposite may also be true.）。

[看圖不說話] 如果這是歷史

我知道全世界（好吧，說全世界有點誇張，資訊界的某些人）都在辯論 Facebook 會不會比 1984 裡面的老大哥還可怕，而信奉水果教的信徒們，則在擔心為了要看色情影片 的而背叛教主 Steve Jobs 的隱私會不會被人揭露。像我這種只關心小我得失，一點都沒有身為地球公民的覺悟的角色，實在是太自私了，我的想法是：管他的，活到這把年紀，自私一點又何妨！？

See Also:

• 改論文的心情
• AAUGH

[詩戀] 欲買桂花同載酒

劉過《唐多令》

蘆葉滿汀洲，寒沙帶淺流。


二十年重過南樓。


柳下繫舟猶未穩，能幾日，
又中秋。


黃鶴斷磯頭，故人曾到否 ?


舊江山渾是新愁。


欲買桂花同載酒，終不似，
 少年遊。

Start my day with a cup of coffee

What makes a good paper?

IBM Almaden 研究中心 的研究員 Tessa Lau在 ACM 通訊的部落格發表了一篇文章，談到幾個學術會議的論文審稿過程的不足與爭議，文章末了她提出她心目中合格的 HCI  論文，應該要達到的標準，雖然她談的是她專長的  HCI 領域, 我認為這些標準對於資工領域的研究都是適用的，所以抄錄於後：

• Clear and convincing description of the problem being solved. Why isn't current technology sufficient? How many users are affected? How much does this problem affect their lives?
• How the system works, in enough detail for an independent researcher to build a similar system. Due to the complexities of system building, it is often impossible to specify all the parameters and heuristics being used within a 10-page paper limit. But the paper ought to present enough detail to enable another researcher to build a comparable, if not identical, system.
• Alternative approaches. Why did you choose this particular approach? What other approaches could you have taken instead? What is the design space in which your system represents one point?
• Evidence that the system solves the problem as presented. This does not have to be a user study. Describe situations where the system would be useful and how the system as implemented performs in those scenarios. If users have used the system, what did they think? Were they successful?
• Barriers to use. What would prevent users from adopting the system, and how have they been overcome?
• Limitations of the system. Under what situations does it fail? How can users recover from these failures?

午後