LIST OF WWE PERSONNEL?!?
- Member for
- 3 years 12 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|26 min 49 sec ago||This is great ... I'm at a||
This is great ... I'm at a conference this week with some downtime in the middle, so this will give me something football-related to read. Thanks!
|1 day 20 hours ago||Sometimes the little things||
Sometimes the little things do add up -- the tempo, the attention to details, the tracking of competitive progress, the drumbeat for merit and against entitlement.
Yes, the real proof will be in the way the teams plays and wins this fall. A given.
But there's a difference with Harbaugh -- (1) his intensity appears to be genuine; (2) he surrounds himself with other hyper-achievers like himself; (3) the message seems consistent, which means it will work its way into every corner and crevice; and (4) they are taking a wrecking ball to the notion of seniority. Plus -- (5) Harbaugh has had true success at every level, so there's a method to his madness.
|2 days 16 hours ago||Nice! This is the kind of||
Nice! This is the kind of football nuts-and-bolts I love to read. Thanks!
|2 days 19 hours ago||Go over to his site ... he||
Go over to his site ... he has 7 criteria he grades 1 to 7 ... so top score is really 49, but he throws in a 1-point kicker to round to 50.
I think a 49 point scale is kinda-sorta cool ... the 1-7 x 7 criteria model is eye-catching.
|2 days 19 hours ago||In your criteria you include||
In your criteria you include "footwork". With respect to the offensive line, what are some examples of bad footwork, typical footwork, good footwork ... and what offensive lineman (playing anywhere -- HS, college, pros) has great footwork? And why?
I suspect that varies by O-Line position. I would guess tackles need really good lateral. Not sure if Centers require that as much as maintaining base.
Anyway ... I'm just curious what "footwork" translates to specifically.
|2 days 19 hours ago||Of all the coaches I'm||
Of all the coaches I'm digging Drevno the most right now. There's something about him -- some focused intensity thing.
|6 days 23 hours ago||But if I'm that poor, I'm not||
But if I'm that poor, I'm not spending $120 on tickets.
If I'm really that poor -- and I was back when I was in college -- I don't buy football tickets. Instead, I work on Saturdays ... and Sundays, and any other day I can get hours.
|1 week 1 day ago||human endeavors that go||
human endeavors that go beyond our ability to replicate or understand using binary code
Indeed. This is why, for example, IBM Watson does not operate on a if-then-else rules design, but more of a word/phrase/sentence tree mapping algorithm. It attempts to "understand" -- meaning: draw conclusions from -- what humans have put down in word format. It is, however, very reliant on humans having put down meaningful information in the first place. It doesn't "think" beyond the information given it.
There's some fascinating work going on in quantum computing where the computing is not merely 0's and 1's, but states between "on" and "off." I don't understand all that. I applaud those who do. But even still, I'm not sure that by itself will create true AI (I doubt it), or merely provide for more efficient -- and therefore, faster -- computation.
|1 week 1 day ago||Pulling the topic back to||
Pulling the topic back to Michigan football for a moment ... we have very sophisticated simulators for many things, most notably flight. Is there any reason why the same technology could not be applied to training and practicing football?
The graphics are far enough along that a simulation could be used to give QBs a "game like" experience at least for reading the defenses.
But what about more fundamental things like blocking? Could computer simulation and robotics effectively be used to simulate a really good offensive lineman so D-lineman could practice getting around or through them?
|1 week 1 day ago||There's something more to||
There's something more to human thought and consciousness than processing power, but I can't prove that or even define it. The boundary is, I think, at the point of creativity. A purely programmatic system can play chess, but it couldn't conceive of the game out of nothing. Similarly, it could replicate the Mona Lisa, but not create it ... or a well-crafted poem that appeals to the core emotions.
One could argue that the human mind is simply far enough advanced to make creation appear like something more than a programmatic response. I tend to think the human has something more than mere neurons and biochemicals. But that's a topic not allowed on this site. :-)
|1 week 1 day ago||By the way, I spoke with one||
By the way, I spoke with one of the lead architects for the Watson "Jeopardy" system ... one of the sources for its information repository was Wikipedia arcticles. As a source of general knowledge required by the game "Jeopardy," it was good enough ... as evidenced by the fact the system won the competition.
For medical diagnostics it'll be all about correlating bits of information from an ocean of medical journals looking to tie together patterns related to symptoms and test results.
Re: Jeopardy ... apparently the algorithm designers for the early Watson prototypes did not anticipate how Jeopardy statements are sometimes stated in the negative, which requires the participant to seek the opposite. That was corrected, but it shows how the "thinking" was only as good as the algorithm controlling it. Watson performed fairly poorly in early testing before things were ironed out.
|1 week 1 day ago||Boiled to its essence, this||
Boiled to its essence, this is the "I think, therefore I am" concept. That is not a wholly satisfying statement, though ... what does thinking really mean?
I don't know. But Harbaugh does! Harbaugh!
|1 week 1 day ago||I am pessimistic by nature||
I am pessimistic by nature ... but I rank AI fairly low on the scale of things I'm pessimistic about. There's a bunch of things that will spell our doom before Computer Overlords take control.
|1 week 1 day ago||Chess||
IBM's "Deep Blue" chess program that beat Kasparov was "brute force" -- it calculated out millions of potential moves into the future and assigned value weighting. It was, for its time, a leading example of massive parallel processing to calculate out the moves and weighting. Not "intelligence" per se, just a whole crap-ton of processing horsepower thrown at the problem.
|1 week 1 day ago||There's no question computing||
There's no question computing devices are doing more and more amazing things. Quite often that is the result of brute-force processing done very quickly.
IBM's "Watson" technology is essentially a massive unstructured text processor -- it can be programmed to understand (and "learn") answers lying buried in oceans of unstructured text data. The Watson system that won "Jeopardy" did so because it could quickly process through all the pre-loaded reference text and derive a confidence measure for an answer. It did so more quickly than the human competitors.
Very good technology -- watch for it at a hospital near you (it will absolutely, definitely be used in medical diagnostics in the future) -- but it is a far cry from anything like a self-aware, self-activating sentience. I'm personally skeptical we'll ever see devices that take on a truly self-aware understanding. They may appear to be such, but my guess is even the most savvy of AI devices will be, compared to the human brain, still fairly limited.
|1 week 1 day ago||This reflects my thinking ...||
This reflects my thinking ... this is not isolated to the NFL.
As others have commented, the NFL cares about the character issue only insofar as it affects their business bottom line. Individual NFL owners or executives might care more, but collectively the NFL self-interest is in their business success. Ditto Wall Street; ditto the movie industry; ditto practically everything.
Re: the OP comment about people needing to take responsibility ... agree, but in contemporary culture that message is at best obscured, and at worst contradicted. Sadly, there's a rather strong overall message of disconnecting consequences from actions.
Individuals (such as some football coaches) try to teach responsibility for actions, but they are fighting against a very, very strong headwind.
|1 week 2 days ago||Tucson here ... trucks for||
Tucson here ... trucks for sure. I've seen my share of Dodge ... but also Ford, Chevy, Toyota and Nissan. But at the end of the day ... trucks.
|1 week 2 days ago||As well as crowded. Holy||
As well as crowded. Holy cow, there'll be -- what? -- five QBs lining up for reps?
(Morris, Speight, Malzone, Gentry and now Korn ... assuming Korn can practice but not play.)
|1 week 4 days ago||Secretariat winning the||
Secretariat winning the Belmont in 1973. His winning by 31 lengths was absolutely stunning.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Spring practice can't arrive||
Spring practice can't arrive quickly enough.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||I like the combination of||
I like the combination of extra crunchy peanut butter and yellow mustard.
Seriously ... it's great.
Hate, hate, hate mushrooms.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||I caught the first two||
I caught the first two episodes. I like it. But it's a lot like Breaking Bad in so many ways.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Citizen Kane suuuuuucks Agree||
Citizen Kane suuuuuucks
So many of the "great" movies are just awful -- Citizen Kate, On the Waterfront, From Here to Eternity, Giant. They are labeled great by people who remember an era and look fondly on it through their rear view mirror.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Whoa. You are missing out.||
Whoa. You are missing out. But to each their own.
I've never seen "The Wizard of Oz." Never.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||"Spaceballs" is the worst||
"Spaceballs" is the worst piece of crap movie of all time. Not. Funny. I walked out halfway through.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Karen Carpenter's is the best||
Karen Carpenter's is the best female voice I've ever heard.
Absolutely ... the no-talent hacks on "American Idol" can learn a thing or two by listening to Carpenter. Hint: vocal control is more important than hitting the big notes and trying to gospel-warble everything, damn it.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||It's just like the reaction||
It's just like the reaction to the late 70's Disco and Bubblegum ... Punk emerged (Sex Pistols, Clash).
By the late 80's the hair bands and the synthesized pop stuff was big ... and Grunge emerged (Nirvana, etc.)
New things are almost always in response to existing things.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||The Beatles were influential,||
The Beatles were influential, but that's not the same thing as good.
It's like the movie "Citizen Kane" ... on so many lists as the best movie of all time ... and the reasons they cite is how groundbreaking the cinematography was. Well, maybe ... but the movie itself is crap.
Stones/Who >> Zeppelin >>>> Beatles
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Also, the Eurythmics. Annie||
Also, the Eurythmics. Annie Lennox is amazing.
Re: The Pretenders ... Chrissie Hynde is one of the best female rock vocalists of all time.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||I got to the "get off my||
I got to the "get off my lawn" stage of life pretty quickly
If you're 25 and already have that mindset, then you are well on your way to elite curmudgeon status. Dream the dream, young man.