Auto-generated paper 'accepted' for 'conference'

[whyBish]

In case you didn't see this in slashdot:

Story:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/...rank.reut/

Commentary:
http://duhblog.com/space/start/2005-04-15/1

Slashdot not linked as their commentary was one paragraph

The 'conference site:
http://www.iiisci.org/sci2005/website/default.asp

The auto generator site:
http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scigen/

Try some of the autogeneration, it is very well done :P

" We now consider existing work. Bose and Harris [7,12,24] and Sasaki and Jackson [21] presented the first known instance of autonomous modalities. Similarly, Q. Qian developed a similar system, nevertheless we verified that our framework is optimal [11,26,23]. On the other hand, these methods are entirely orthogonal to our efforts.

A major source of our inspiration is early work by Sun [3] on embedded algorithms. This solution is less flimsy than ours. Juris Hartmanis et al. described several cacheable approaches, and reported that they have profound influence on peer-to-peer configurations [10,13,13]. Thus, the class of heuristics enabled by our methodology is fundamentally different from previous solutions [8].
"

[whyBish]

And one to send to Blizzard :P

" Suppose that there exists massive multiplayer online role-playing games such that we can easily visualize cache coherence. Any intuitive refinement of DHTs will clearly require that the much-tauted empathic algorithm for the exploration of the producer-consumer problem by Wang and Harris [14] is Turing complete; Yew is no different. This seems to hold in most cases. We show a decision tree detailing the relationship between our application and the improvement of lambda calculus in Figure 1. We use our previously harnessed results as a basis for all of these assumptions. This is an unfortunate property of Yew."

[Archon_Wing]

Well, that just shows how much some of these evauluaters know. ;)

[Occhidiangela]

In case you didn't see this in slashdot:

Story:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/...rank.reut/

Commentary:
http://duhblog.com/space/start/2005-04-15/1

Slashdot not linked as their commentary was one paragraph

The 'conference site:
http://www.iiisci.org/sci2005/website/default.asp

The auto generator site:
http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scigen/

Try some of the autogeneration, it is very well done  :P

" We now consider existing work. Bose and Harris [7,12,24] and Sasaki and Jackson [21] presented the first known instance of autonomous modalities. Similarly, Q. Qian developed a similar system, nevertheless we verified that our framework is optimal [11,26,23]. On the other hand, these methods are entirely orthogonal to our efforts.

A major source of our inspiration is early work by Sun [3] on embedded algorithms. This solution is less flimsy than ours. Juris Hartmanis et al. described several cacheable approaches, and reported that they have profound influence on peer-to-peer configurations [10,13,13]. Thus, the class of heuristics enabled by our methodology is fundamentally different from previous solutions [8].
"
[right][snapback]74211[/snapback][/right]

Such comfort, to know that PT Barnum is still right.

Occhi

[Griselda]

Such comfort, to know that PT Barnum is still right.

Occhi
[right][snapback]74331[/snapback][/right]

Hey, Occhi, did you know that there's a claim that PT Barnum never did say, "There's a sucker born every minute?" You can read more about it here. All of the websites that have information on this seem to be "scooping" each other, so of course I can't verify the validity of this. So, I'm either a sucker for believing one side, or a sucker for believing the other. Either way, Barnum, or was it Hannum, was right. :P

[Lady Vashj]

This is a paper that one Amanda Walker supposedly wrote. (I made the name up, so don't call me Amanda.) I actually understand a few of the buzzwords in there, and duly translated, it's...well, read on.

"Though many skeptics said it couldn't be done (most notably Jackson), we construct a fully-working version of our heuristic. We have not yet implemented the virtual machine monitor, as this is the least compelling component of our system. "

Translation notes:
Heuristic is an adjective, not a noun, so it's impossible to construct a fully-working version of it. The second sentence translates as "We don't have the nonexistent watchdog because it's the least interesting thing involved." Indeed.

[Rinnhart]

10/10 on the Awesome Meter.

[whyBish]

Translation notes:
Heuristic is an adjective, not a noun

Disturbing. I even looked this up in dictionary.com and it confirms your view.

However (as dictionary.com also shows), in software development/CompSci heuristic is commonly used as a noun (almost a synonym for algorithm)
so much so that it hurts my head to think of it as an adjective :P

[Occhidiangela]

Hey, Occhi, did you know that there's a claim that PT Barnum never did say, "There's a sucker born every minute?"  You can read more about it here.  All of the websites that have information on this seem to be "scooping" each other, so of course I can't verify the validity of this.  So, I'm either a sucker for believing one side, or a sucker for believing the other.  Either way, Barnum, or was it Hannum, was right.  :P
[right][snapback]74338[/snapback][/right]

"There is a sucker born every minute, and two to take him."

If that is misattribution, so be it, it's still true.

Occhi