Re: Another take on self-learning

   From: Paolo <[email protected]>

   On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 06:08:22PM +0400, Eugene Crosser wrote:
   > Here is one more theoretical development which may (or may not) be of 
   > interest in the context of document classification:
   > 
   > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4982

   thanks for the pointer(s). Yeah, I think it is surely of interest for doc - 
   actually, generic objects - classification; pity it's a 'patented theory'.
   Their shrewd biz model resembles MS' 'open' stuff: luring (open) devel to 
   use some (almost) open/free stuff and build biz/value on and around [other]
   _core_ nonfree, patented, stuff. And should you think of building your own
   _core_ stuff, be prepared to challenge a thick patents portfolio.

   Devels are advised to carefully read and weight the (not so) fine prints
   before jumping on Numenta's ship. 
   Better study how brain works and figure out your own way to match it; HTM
   looks like a label to something around since long in the field.

I saw this and said "you _patented_ this?  Buddy, this is something
from the 1980's (specifically, Hopfield networks).  I +do+ hope
you didn't omit those from your prior art, because otherwise you're
patent application itself is defective."

Then I got to the proprietary part.  "May only be used with Numenta's
runtime engine.  Sure.  Riiiight.  In other words, you want me to
do work for you for free so that you can make more money."

Bottom line: ignore.  This may well be another Steorn.  Or less.

   - Bill Yerazunis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/