I would first like to say that this is my first post on this blog, and I am very excited about that. My nephews have not treated me with much respect, but they are finally letting me speak for myself. I am very happy about this. Did I mention that I was very excited to be posting?
The FCN Team asked me to get to the bottom of the Mommy G problem so our readers would know who they could trust (which apparently means beg for brownies). I have created an authentication system so everyone can know who is in and who is out. Let me explain how it works and then how to use it.
It works by first assuming that given users have characteristics T1:Tn which indicate identities. The parameter d is a dampening factor that can be set between 0 and 1. I usually set d to 0.85. I define C(A) as the number of characteristics stemming from the user. So the identity breakdown of user A is given as follows:
I(A) = (1-d) + d(I(T1)/C(T1)+...+I(Tn)/C(Tn))
Identity of I(A) can be calculated using a simple iterative algorithm which corresponds to the principal eigenvector of the normalized characteristic matrix, which can then be scaled according to the centralized networking architecture of the verification system.
Now that you know how it works, let me tell you how to use it.
If the identity of a person is called into question, click on their user name. This will take you to their profile information. At the bottom of the profile, a list of blogs will appear. One of these blogs should be the FCN Certificate of Authenticity (FCNAuthentic.BlogSpot.Com). If no such certificate appears, this person is a fraud.
I have tracked down the real Mommy G by computing alternative identity vectors and cross-referencing them with known and implicit characteristics. The closest match was given the certificate. All Mommy Gs appearing without this certificate presumably serve burnt brownies.
Now if only she would accept my blog invite.
- Uncle Wally
The FCN Team asked me to get to the bottom of the Mommy G problem so our readers would know who they could trust (which apparently means beg for brownies). I have created an authentication system so everyone can know who is in and who is out. Let me explain how it works and then how to use it.
It works by first assuming that given users have characteristics T1:Tn which indicate identities. The parameter d is a dampening factor that can be set between 0 and 1. I usually set d to 0.85. I define C(A) as the number of characteristics stemming from the user. So the identity breakdown of user A is given as follows:
I(A) = (1-d) + d(I(T1)/C(T1)+...+I(Tn)/C(Tn))
Identity of I(A) can be calculated using a simple iterative algorithm which corresponds to the principal eigenvector of the normalized characteristic matrix, which can then be scaled according to the centralized networking architecture of the verification system.
Now that you know how it works, let me tell you how to use it.
If the identity of a person is called into question, click on their user name. This will take you to their profile information. At the bottom of the profile, a list of blogs will appear. One of these blogs should be the FCN Certificate of Authenticity (FCNAuthentic.BlogSpot.Com). If no such certificate appears, this person is a fraud.
I have tracked down the real Mommy G by computing alternative identity vectors and cross-referencing them with known and implicit characteristics. The closest match was given the certificate. All Mommy Gs appearing without this certificate presumably serve burnt brownies.
Now if only she would accept my blog invite.
- Uncle Wally
4 comments:
Very good, this definitely helps me weed out all those masquerading mommy G's...
Ps: ( What happened with Luce>?)
That is an extremely complicated process. I'm impressed. I think the funniest thing about this post is that you probably actually DO understand all that stuff you just wrote.
Eigenvector! Clever - but this is a bunch of balogna!!!! And your equation looks strangely like Google's PageRank algorithm....
I couldn't figure out the equation. And no, i did not try hard at all. And no i did not read it more than once. But still.
Post a Comment