Ali Aydar Anita Borg Alfred Aho Bjarne Stroustrup Bill Gates
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Intro to Google for the Hill
Introduction to A company built on search Our mission Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful. As a first step to fulfilling this mission, Google’s founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin developed a new approach to online search that took root in a Stanford University dorm room and quickly spread to information seekers around the globe. The Google search engine is an easy-to-use, free service that consistently returns relevant results in a fraction of a second. What we do Google is more than a search engine. We also offer Gmail, maps, personal blogging, and web-based word processing products to name just a few. YouTube, the popular online video service, is part of Google as well. Most of Google’s services are free, so how do we make money? Much of Google’s revenue comes through our AdWords advertising program, which allows businesses to place small “sponsored links” alongside our search results. Prices for these ads are set by competitive auctions for every search term where advertisers want their ads to appear. We don’t sell placement in the search results themselves, or allow people to pay for a higher ranking there. In addition, website managers and publishers take advantage of our AdSense advertising program to deliver ads on their sites. This program generates billions of dollars in revenue each year for hundreds of thousands of websites, and is a major source of funding for the free content available across the web. Google also offers enterprise versions of our consumer products for businesses, organizations, and government entities. -
Thriving in a Crowded and Changing World: C++ 2006–2020
Thriving in a Crowded and Changing World: C++ 2006–2020 BJARNE STROUSTRUP, Morgan Stanley and Columbia University, USA Shepherd: Yannis Smaragdakis, University of Athens, Greece By 2006, C++ had been in widespread industrial use for 20 years. It contained parts that had survived unchanged since introduced into C in the early 1970s as well as features that were novel in the early 2000s. From 2006 to 2020, the C++ developer community grew from about 3 million to about 4.5 million. It was a period where new programming models emerged, hardware architectures evolved, new application domains gained massive importance, and quite a few well-financed and professionally marketed languages fought for dominance. How did C++ ś an older language without serious commercial backing ś manage to thrive in the face of all that? This paper focuses on the major changes to the ISO C++ standard for the 2011, 2014, 2017, and 2020 revisions. The standard library is about 3/4 of the C++20 standard, but this paper’s primary focus is on language features and the programming techniques they support. The paper contains long lists of features documenting the growth of C++. Significant technical points are discussed and illustrated with short code fragments. In addition, it presents some failed proposals and the discussions that led to their failure. It offers a perspective on the bewildering flow of facts and features across the years. The emphasis is on the ideas, people, and processes that shaped the language. Themes include efforts to preserve the essence of C++ through evolutionary changes, to simplify itsuse,to improve support for generic programming, to better support compile-time programming, to extend support for concurrency and parallel programming, and to maintain stable support for decades’ old code. -
Educating the Whole Person? the Case of Athens College, 1940-1990
Educating the whole person? The case of Athens College, 1940-1990 Polyanthi Giannakopoulou-Tsigkou Institute of Education, University of London A thesis submitted for the Degree of EdD September 2012 Abstract This thesis is a historical study of the growth and development of Athens College, a primary/secondary educational institution in Greece, during the period 1940-1990. Athens College, a private, non-profit institution, was founded in 1925 as a boys' school aiming to offer education for the whole person. The research explores critically the ways in which historical, political, socio-economic and cultural factors affected the evolution of Athens College during the period 1940-1990 and its impact on students' further studies and careers. This case study seeks to unfold aspects of education in a Greek school, and reach a better understanding of education and factors that affect it and interact with it. A mixed methods approach is used: document analysis, interviews with Athens College alumni and former teachers, analysis of student records providing data related to students' achievements, their family socio-economic 'origins' and their post-Athens College 'destinations'. The study focuses in particular on the learners at the School, and the kinds of learning that took place within this institution over half a century. Athens College, although under the control of a centralised educational system, has resisted the weaknesses of Greek schooling. Seeking to establish educational ideals associated with education of the whole person, excellence, meritocracy and equality of opportunity and embracing progressive curricula and pedagogies, it has been successful in taking its students towards university studies and careers. -
Larry Page Developing the Largest Corporate Foundation in Every Successful Company Must Face: As Google Word.” the United States
LOWE —continued from front flap— Praise for $19.95 USA/$23.95 CAN In addition to examining Google’s breakthrough business strategies and new business models— In many ways, Google is the prototype of a which have transformed online advertising G and changed the way we look at corporate successful twenty-fi rst-century company. It uses responsibility and employee relations——Lowe Google technology in new ways to make information universally accessible; promotes a corporate explains why Google may be a harbinger of o 5]]UZS SPEAKS culture that encourages creativity among its where corporate America is headed. She also A>3/9A addresses controversies surrounding Google, such o employees; and takes its role as a corporate citizen as copyright infringement, antitrust concerns, and “It’s not hard to see that Google is a phenomenal company....At Secrets of the World’s Greatest Billionaire Entrepreneurs, very seriously, investing in green initiatives and personal privacy and poses the question almost Geico, we pay these guys a whole lot of money for this and that key g Sergey Brin and Larry Page developing the largest corporate foundation in every successful company must face: as Google word.” the United States. grows, can it hold on to its entrepreneurial spirit as —Warren Buffett l well as its informal motto, “Don’t do evil”? e Following in the footsteps of Warren Buffett “Google rocks. It raised my perceived IQ by about 20 points.” Speaks and Jack Welch Speaks——which contain a SPEAKS What started out as a university research project —Wes Boyd conversational style that successfully captures the conducted by Sergey Brin and Larry Page has President of Moveon.Org essence of these business leaders—Google Speaks ended up revolutionizing the world we live in. -
Should Google Be Taken at Its Word?
CAN GOOGLE BE TRUSTED? SHOULD GOOGLE BE TAKEN AT ITS WORD? IF SO, WHICH ONE? GOOGLE RECENTLY POSTED ABOUT “THE PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE GUIDED US FROM THE BEGINNING.” THE FIVE PRINCIPLES ARE: DO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE USER. PROVIDE THE MOST RELEVANT ANSWERS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. LABEL ADVERTISEMENTS CLEARLY. BE TRANSPARENT. LOYALTY, NOT LOCK-IN. BUT, CAN GOOGLE BE TAKEN AT ITS WORD? AND IF SO, WHICH ONE? HERE’S A LOOK AT WHAT GOOGLE EXECUTIVES HAVE SAID ABOUT THESE PRINCIPLES IN THE PAST. DECIDE FOR YOURSELF WHO TO TRUST. “DO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE USER” “DO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE USER” “I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next.” Eric Schmidt The Wall Street Journal 8/14/10 EXEC. CHAIRMAN ERIC SCHMIDT “DO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE USER” “We expect that advertising funded search engines will be inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of consumers.” Larry Page & Sergey Brin Stanford Thesis 1998 FOUNDERS BRIN & PAGE “DO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE USER” “The Google policy on a lot of things is to get right up to the creepy line.” Eric Schmidt at the Washington Ideas Forum 10/1/10 EXEC. CHAIRMAN ERIC SCHMIDT “DO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE USER” “We don’t monetize the thing we create…We monetize the people that use it. The more people use our products,0 the more opportunity we have to advertise to them.” Andy Rubin In the Plex SVP OF MOBILE ANDY RUBIN “PROVIDE THE MOST RELEVANT ANSWERS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE” “PROVIDE THE MOST RELEVANT ANSWERS AS QUICKLY -
Eric Schmidt
Eric Schmidt Chairman Dr. Eric Schmidt Schmidt Futures Nominated by then-Chairman and Current Ranking Member Mac Thornberry (R-TX), House Armed Services Committee Dr. Eric Schmidt is the technical advisor to the board of Alphabet where he was formerly the executive chairman. As executive chairman, he was responsible for the external matters of all of the holding company's businesses, including Google Inc., advising their CEOs and leadership on business and policy issues. Prior to the establishment of Alphabet, Eric was the chairman of Google Inc. for four years. From 2001-2011, Eric served as Google’s chief executive officer, overseeing the company’s technical and business strategy alongside founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page. Under his leadership, Google dramatically scaled its infrastructure and diversified its product offerings while maintaining a strong culture of innovation, growing from a Silicon Valley startup to a global leader in technology. Prior to joining Google, Eric was the chairman and CEO of Novell and chief technology officer at Sun Microsystems, Inc. Previously, he served on the research staff at Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), Bell Laboratories and Zilog. He holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Princeton University as well as a master’s degree and Ph.D. in computer science from the University of California, Berkeley. Eric was elected to the National Academy of Engineering in 2006 and inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences as a fellow in 2007. Since 2008, he has been a trustee of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. -
In Greece Since 1948 the Fulbright Foundation US PRESIDENTS on International Exchanges and the Fulbright Program
In Greece since 1948 THE FULBRIGHT FOUNDATION US PRESIDENTS on International Exchanges and the Fulbright Program “This program is vitally important “This report … is largely devoted to “International exchanges are not in widening the knowledge and an aspect of the program too often a great tide to sweep away all technical ability of the peoples of overlooked … the extraordinary … differences, but they will slowly the twelve participating countries.” cooperation and assistance … from wear away at the obstacles to peace Harry S. Truman, letter to the Chairman, United States private groups … as surely as water wears away Board of Foreign Scholarships, on the This private cooperation … gives a hard stone.” Fulbright Program, May 11, 1951 the program its essential character George W. Bush, 1989 and effectiveness…” “The exchange of students … should Richard M. Nixon, message to Congress, “No one who has lived through be vastly expanded … Information June 15, 1970 the second half of the 20th century and education are powerful forces in could possibly be blind to the enor- support of peace. Just as war begins “The spirit of seeking understand- mous impact of exchange programs in the minds of men, so does peace.” ing through personal contact with on the future of countries…” Dwight D. Eisenhower, remarks at ceremony William J. Clinton, 1993 marking the 10th anniversary of the people of other nations and other Smith-Mundt Act, January 27, 1958 cultures deserves the respect and support of all.” “While many academic exchange “This Program has been most impor- Gerald R. Ford, remarks to foreign exchange programs have striven for excellence, tant in bettering the relations of the students, July 13, 1976 the Fulbright Program’s emphasis on United States with other parts of the mutual understanding has made it world. -
How the New World of Information Will Change Our Lives
Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 11, Number 1 Fall 1997 WHAT WILL BE: HOW THE NEW WORLD OF INFORMATION WILL CHANGE OUR LIVES By Michael L. Dertouzos.I New York. N.Y.: HarperCollins Publishers, lnc. 1997. < http ://www.harpercollins.com > Pp. 336. $25.00 (hard). ISBN 0-06-251479-2. The times they are a-changin ,.2 Mass communication its rise and its changes has dramatically affected life over the course of the twentieth century. We have seen vast changes in the ways we act, interact, work, think, and play. As our world has become smaller and more interconnected, our society has been transformed: our global consciousness rises as international events become our instant headlines, and new intra- and international frictions flare as class and cultural tensions are exacerbated and physical distance becomes increasingly irrelevant. As people become more focused on their individual interests, they have less inclination and time to engage in activities that reinforce community standards, understandings, and reference points. Thus, information access has given us great,Jr freedom to pursue our own desires, but it has also led to the atomization of families, communities, and nations. These trends have played them- selves out in political and social movements. Through it all, our legal system has adapted and adjusted to the paradigm shifts in our ways of living and making a living. It has heeded the whims of popular passion and the currents of contemporary conceptions of justice. What comes next for our legal system will be a reflection of what comes next for our society writ large. -
Bjarne Stroustrup
Bjarne Stroustrup 52 Riverside Dr. #6A +1 979 219 5004 NY, NY 10024 [email protected] USA www.stroustrup.com Education Ph.D. in Computer Science, University of Cambridge, England, 1979 Ph.D. Thesis: Communication and Control in Distributed Computer Systems Thesis advisor: David Wheeler Cand.Scient. in Mathematics with Computer Science, Aarhus University, Denmark, 1975 Thesis advisor: Brian H. Mayoh Research Interests Distributed Systems, Design, Programming techniques, Software development tools, and Programming Languages Professional Experience Technical Fellow, Morgan Stanley, New York, January 2019 – present Managing Director, Division of Technology and Data, Morgan Stanley, New York, January 2014 – present Visiting Professor, Columbia University, New York, January 2014 – present Visiting Professor in the Computer Lab and Fellow of Churchill College, Cambridge University, Spring 2012 Visiting Professor in the Computer Science Department, Princeton University, Fall 2011 The College of Engineering Chair Professor in Computer Science, Department of Computer Science, Texas A&M University, October 2002 – January 2014 Department Head, AT&T Laboratories – Research, Florham Park, New Jersey, July 1995 – October 2002 Distinguished Member of Technical Staff, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, June 1987 – July 1995 Member of Technical Staff, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, March 1979 – June 1987 Honors & Awards 2019: Honorary doctor of University Carlos III in Madrid, Spain. 1 2018: The John Scott Legacy Medal and Premium from The Franklin Institute and the City Council of Philadelphia to men and women whose inventions improved the comfort, welfare, and happiness of human kind in a significant way. 2018: The Computer Pioneer Award from The IEEE Computer Society For bringing object- oriented programming and generic programming to the mainstream with his design and implementation of the C++ programming language. -
UC Berkeley Previously Published Works
UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works Title Building the Second Mind, 1961-1980: From the Ascendancy of ARPA-IPTO to the Advent of Commercial Expert Systems Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7ck3q4f0 ISBN 978-0-989453-4-6 Author Skinner, Rebecca Elizabeth Publication Date 2013-12-31 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Building the Second Mind, 1961-1980: From the Ascendancy of ARPA to the Advent of Commercial Expert Systems copyright 2013 Rebecca E. Skinner ISBN 978 09894543-4-6 Forward Part I. Introduction Preface Chapter 1. Introduction: The Status Quo of AI in 1961 Part II. Twin Bolts of Lightning Chapter 2. The Integrated Circuit Chapter 3. The Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Foundation of the IPTO Chapter 4. Hardware, Systems and Applications in the 1960s Part II. The Belle Epoque of the 1960s Chapter 5. MIT: Work in AI in the Early and Mid-1960s Chapter 6. CMU: From the General Problem Solver to the Physical Symbol System and Production Systems Chapter 7. Stanford University and SRI Part III. The Challenges of 1970 Chapter 8. The Mansfield Amendment, “The Heilmeier Era”, and the Crisis in Research Funding Chapter 9. The AI Culture Wars: the War Inside AI and Academia Chapter 10. The AI Culture Wars: Popular Culture Part IV. Big Ideas and Hardware Improvements in the 1970s invert these and put the hardware chapter first Chapter 11. AI at MIT in the 1970s: The Semantic Fallout of NLR and Vision Chapter 12. Hardware, Software, and Applications in the 1970s Chapter 13. -
Academic Program Review
Academic Program Review April 16-18, 2012 Department of Computer Science and Engineering Room 301 Harvey R. Bright Building Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 1 Contents I Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4 I.1 Charge to Review Committee ............................................................................................. 4 I.2 Schedule of Review/Itinerary ............................................................................................. 5 I.3 Administrative Structure .................................................................................................... 6 II Brief History ............................................................................................................................... 7 II.1 Founding of Department .................................................................................................... 7 II.2 Founding and Development of Related Centers ................................................................ 7 II.3 Review and Changes in Past Seven Years ........................................................................ 15 II.4 Date of Last Program Review ........................................................................................... 16 III Vision and Goals ................................................................................................................... 16 III.1 Strategic Plan ................................................................................................................... -
Page Ndcal Complaint
1 JOHN JASNOCH SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 2 707 Broadway, Suite 1000 San Diego, California 92101 3 Telephone: (619) 233-4565 Facsimile: (619) 233-0508 4 Email: [email protected] 5 THOMAS L. LAUGHLIN, IV SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 6 The Chrysler Building 405 Lexington Avenue, 40th Floor 7 New York, New York 10174 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 8 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff 10 [Additional counsel on signature page.] 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 15 WEST PALM BEACH FIRE PENSION FUND, Case No. 16 Plaintiff, 17 v. VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER 18 LAWRENCE “LARRY” PAGE, SERGEY M. DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT BRIN, ERIC E. SCHMIDT, L. JOHN DOERR, 19 DIANE B. GREENE, JOHN L. HENNESSY, ANN MATHER, PAUL S. OTELLINI, K. RAM 20 SHRIRAM, SHIRLEY M. TILGHMAN, MICHAEL J. MORITZ, ARTHUR D. LEVINSON, 21 ROBERT ALAN EUSTACE, OMID R. KORDESTANI, JONATHAN J. ROSENBERG, 22 SHONA L. BROWN, and ARNNON GESHURI, 23 Defendants, 24 and 25 GOOGLE, INC, 26 Nominal Defendant. 27 28 VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT 1 PROLOGUE 2 “[T]here is ample evidence of an overarching conspiracy between” Google and the other defendants, and of “evidence of Defendants’ rigid wage structures and 3 internal equity concerns, along with statements from Defendants’ own executives, are likely to prove compelling in establishing the impact of the anti-solicitation 4 agreements . .” 5 In re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litig., No. 11-cv-2509, 2014 WL 3917126, at *16 (N.D. 6 Cal. Aug. 8, 2014). 7 Plaintiff West Palm Beach Fire Pension Fund (“West Palm” or “Plaintiff”), on 8 behalf of Google, Inc.