Slashdot Mirror

Check out their GVU pages (some profs hold appointments in both psych and CS)

GaTechGVU

Check out this
comprehensive guide to Linux Latency.

Yes, they do think that. The rules schools make you agree to tend to be even worse than employment contracts, and you have less (zero) ability to get out of them.

For a pretty standard example that I'm familiar with, Georgia Tech: if it's for a class or you use their 'resources' (dorm? network connection? stuff you learned in class? conversation with a prof?), it's theirs: "Ownership rights to Intellectual Property developed by faculty, staff or students of GIT shall reside with the inventor or creator of such Intellectual Property provided that: (1) there is no use, except in a purely incidental way, of GIT resources in the creation of such Intellectual Property (unless such resources are available without charge to the public); (2) the Intellectual Property is not prepared in accordance with the terms of GIT contract or grant; (3) the Intellectual Property is not developed by faculty, staff or students as a specific institution assignment. The nature and extent of the use of Institution resources shall be subject to institution regulations."

They will kindly split the money to be made from your own creation with you; but it still means you technically can't create GPLed code for class, since you don't own the copyright.

In practice, it seems ignored, but I *hate* relying on selective enforcement. So much for bettering all humanity or any such noble goal; money gets in the way.

Also at Georgia Tech. See the university's '98 press release.

Czech Republic

ftp://mandrake.redbox.cz/ Mandrake/iso/
France

ftp://fr2.rpmfind.net/ linux/Mandrake/iso/ (Lyon)

ftp://ftp.ciril.fr/pub/linux/mandrake/iso/ (Nancy)
Germany

ftp:// ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/Mandrake/iso / (Esslingen)
Iceland

ftp://ftp.mbl.is/pub/mandrake/ iso/ (Reykjavik)
Italy

ftp://bo.mirror. garr.it/mirrors/Mandrake/iso/ (Bologna)

http://bo.mirror. garr.it/mirrors/Mandrake/iso/ (Bologna)
Slovakia

ftp://hq. alert.sk/pub/linux/distributions/mandrake/iso/

ftp://spirit. profinet.sk/mirrors/Mandrake/iso/ (Bratislava)
Taiwan

ftp://mdk.linux.org.tw/ pub/mandrake/iso/
United States

ftp://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/m andrake/Mandrake/iso/ (North Carolina)

ftp://ftp-linux.cc.gatech.edu/pub/linux/distributi ons/mandrake/iso/ (Georgia)

ftp://ftp.math. utah.edu/pub/linux/Mandrake/iso/ (Utah)

ftp://mirror.mcs.anl. gov/pub/Mandrake/iso/ (Illinois)

"First of all, C# is not a Java clone. In the design of C#, we looked at a lot of languages. We looked at C++, we looked at Java, at Modula 2, C, and we looked at Smalltalk. There are just so many languages that have the same core ideas that we're interested in, such as deep object-orientation, object-simplification, and so on."

The computer science department at Georgia Tech has had something similar for a couple of years now. Their eclass program, (with this class as an example) would allow the professor to write onto a large screen with an electronic marker. This writing would then be both projected on the screen as well as captured for later review. The room was also set up for audio and video captures. It worked very well, leading me to believe that this will soon become mainstream.

The computer science department at Georgia Tech has had something similar for a couple of years now. Their eclass program, (with this class as an example) would allow the professor to write onto a large screen with an electronic marker. This writing would then be both projected on the screen as well as captured for later review. The room was also set up for audio and video captures. It worked very well, leading me to believe that this will soon become mainstream.

Any theory of social stratification should take the above case (which seems almost too black-and-white, but trust me, it was not made up) into account. These guys have the same cultural background, the same social class - but the one had what it takes to make it in this world and come out higher up the economic food chain than he started, the other apparently didn't, and ended up on the bottom.

That's the great thing about theories, there are so many to choose from. Bordieu's theory of habitus comes to mind. People are not born equal, but accrete a physical body, mental disciplines, and social connections based on their immediate neighbours. Basically, rich people are trained to be rich, poor to be poor, and so on. But these are not absolutes, they just tend to steer an individual along a certain lifepath and limit the trajectory of their ascent or descent within society. And so social stratification endures, reproduces, and resists change. Bound by culture, human society is an amazing, adaptive meta-organism that outlives the death of its individual cell bodies.

11. Is habitus totally atomistic? That is, does it reduce society to a = large collection of individuals, to be sorted or re-sorted at the whim = of the sociologist? According to Brubaker, Bordieu is not setting up a = theory to tackle a particular problem, but rather a heuristic to help = solve whatever problem concerns one at that particular moment. Further, how similar can two individual "habituses" (Habiti? Habitae? = Aardvarks?) be if they are dependent upon initial conditions - which = Bordieu states are objectively unknowable and only inferred from the = "symptoms" of lifestyle?

Sociologists even have their own versions of organizational emergence theories, or interactionism.

Bordieu came to mind because he died quite recently.

The professor is Professor Jim Greenlee, he has fabulous quotes such as
you must code until your fingers are bloody stumps and you wake up with a keyboard imprint on the side of your face
and they're collected at http://swiki.cc.gatech.edu:8080/cs2130/57

I admit that this comment is going to sound very ad hominum: We need to examine Obasanjo's claims carefully. He's worked for Microsoft very recently.

Ordinarily, I wouldn't call attention to this, but Microsoft as a company has a really bad track record of astroturfing just about any kind of on- or off-line forum:

• CompuServe forums
• Political Action Committee
• "Independent" research groups
• Letter writing campaigns
• MSNBC articles
• online poll 1, online poll 2
• ZDNet talk backs

Sorry, Dare, but that's the facts: if you lie down with pigs, you wake up smelling a bit like pig excrement.

From a technical viewpoint, the term unsafe refers to whether the program is known to be safe. Before a program is converted from intermediate language (IL) to native code, there's a part of the runtime security system known as the verifier that looks at the IL to determine whether it's safe to execute. In this context, safe means that the verifier can prove that the IL doesn't do anything unsavory.

IL safety is important for certain Microsoft .NET scenarios--it's nice to know that the chunk of code that you downloaded from a Web site isn't going to do anything bad to your machine. The default policy for remote code (either from a Web site or from a net share) is that the code must be verified safe to execute.

In other situations, it's useful to write code that can't be verified to be safe. In C#, any use of pointers generates unsafe code, as does any use of interop, such as COM interop or platform invoke.

Since you don't want to write such code inadvertently, C# requires you to use the unsafe keyword on your class or method whenever you write code that deals with pointers. When you use the unsafe keyword, the resulting IL is marked as unsafe and can only run in a fully trusted environment (usually, security policy only trusts local assemblies). In the current version of the runtime, unsafe is defined at an assembly level, so having any unsafe code in assembly makes the entire assembly unsafe.

Check out the IARC competition website. There are teams' webpages linked from there, too. My school (UT Austin) is planning its first ever entry for the 2002 competition.
The task this year is to fly 3 kilometers along 4 waypoints, identify a building and an open entrance on the building, deploy a subvehicle (not necessary, but practically necessary) through the entrance, and have the subvehicle return reconaissance to the judges 3km away.
Many people opt to use R/C helicopters and modify them (we are using an XCell .60 Gas Graphite by Miniature Aircraft USA).

One of the wonderful things about being part of the scientific community is seeing how stories get recycled and rehashed by major news outlets. Similar work has already been done with people:

Try the Aware Home at Georgia Tech. I'm told the sheer volume of stray RF emissions from the place will do things like keep your car alarm remote from working.

I'm a student at GATECH which also charges students for a technology fee, one of the reasons being that it's easier to get such fee past the regents than a tuition increase, and that there is always a need for new technology that would not be covered in any other form (it's easy to buy computers for research, but unless large industry donors are interested in a particular program, it's hard to find the money for classroom computers). I have also been one of the student members of the technology fee commitee (2 undergrad students, 2 grad students, 4 faculty) for the last 3 years.

Georgia Tech also asks for computers being owned by undergrad students, and curiously this instead of reducing the demand for campus clusters, has increased it, as the well as the demand for campus printers. All the dorms and the greeks have campus internet connectivity, and wireless access is being implemented on many buildings (some of it from these technology funds).

The process in place (which we will be modifying very soon) requires that schools, departments, and student organizations write proposals requesting the use of such fees. And once a year the schools rank their proposals, and the main commitee reviews these proposals and suggest fund assignments accordingly. Being in a campus-wide committee lets us see the clear disparity between campus entities, while some are asking for $500K+ mostly useless items in their proposals, others just ask for $1K- for memory upgrades to their 300MHz computers.

Over the last 3 years I have seen the technology requests raise from 35 or so proposals to 130, and from barely $2E6 to almost $9E6. Of these, about 2/3 are computers, or somewhat computer related proposals. However a significant amount, which are normally large ticket items, are for tools that could not be funded otherwise. i.e. mass spectrometers, CNC machines, oscilloscopes, plasma cutters, compressors, pumps, differential GPS systems, liquid flow demostration equipment, electric properties labs, etc.

However the majority of the funds are being used for campus-wide or college-wide software licenses, computer clusters, presentation-enabled rooms, student participations systems, "smart" boards, student-managed web/mail/file/streaming servers, video cameras, video editing stations, bewolf clusters, and even basic security systems (as a means to protect our investments).

We do make a point of not spending the funds in basic infrastructure (like lab remodeling) or salaries (unless a short-term student position is very-well justified), or on items that are mostly research-oriented, or clearly professor-centric (i.e. a new top of the line laptop, or palm device).

After my long tenure in the committee, this has become very clear:

• If we left the IT department in charge of the money there would be nothing left for the real needs of the campus. Their proposals normally exceed 50% of the available funds, have long lists of personnel, and exagerated items (do dorm rooms really need 100Base-T ports with direct connection to the central ATM gateways?), and even though many "presentation-enabled" classrooms have been outfitted (at $20K a pop), and most of them are normally unused, we get 10+ new requests for these a year.
• Students have to be part of the process, otherwise the real needs would probably be masked by an apparently good proposal that has no real use for the student body, or by a very bad one that has a great potential (this has been shown many times in our meetings).
• Something that is lacking in our process, but that is clearly necessary, is that students have to be the ones that evaluate the spendings (i.e. judge how much utilization a computer cluster, or some particular software has, do a follow-up on the use of promising new technologies, verify if a piece of equipment is being applied to its intended use, etc.), after all, we are the ones being taxed with this fee.

1. Build it into the application. Numerical methods developers have been known to do this.
   Many people in the parallel discrete event simulation community do this, sometimes using
   compiler assisted tools.
   
2. Build it into a middleware layer --- this is the approach typically taken by many database management systems, in parallel discrete event simulation toolkits , and in distributed process migration toolkits such as Condor and BSP
   
3. Build it into the kernel --- this was done by keykos and the eros group. If the kernel has support for persistent objects and the application uses this support, process restart is well defined. I've seen limited forms of suspend and wakeup for mobile devices as well, but this requires an explicit suspend/restart rather than fast crash recovery like eros has.
   

Allow me to present some random thoughts in defense of GA Tech's cheatfinder:

First, the program is used to finger potiential cheats... all suspects are examined by humans who are aware that the cheatfinder may report false positives. It's not as if the cheatfinder automatically files charges with the Dean's office. In this sense, the cheatfinder serves to augment (not replace) human intelligence in a way that would otherwise be infeasible in a class with 600 students.

Second, the assignments are non-trivial, so design can vary substantially. Even when the things are simple, it can be awful damning when two people choose the same design approach to all problems on their homework (especially when the problems are conceptually independent of each other, or when two students' answers share the same monstrously silly mistake).

Third, an incredible number of people cheat; most of these people don't get caught, or if they are caught, they don't get punished, or if they do get punished, it's a light wrist-slap for the first offense (say... receiving an "F" in the class and a note on the transcript instead of expulsion). Because The College of Computing has a program, they catch the highest number of cheaters. I feel sorry for all of the honest students (especially those in the harder majors) who must compete against cheaters their entire academic career: their degree is devalued in the marketplace by the behavior of others.

Fourth, the cheatfinder program recognizes and adapts for common structures in student programs: if fifty percent of the class shares a common structure, there are at least three explanations: (1) fifty percent of the class coluded with each other, (2) the problem is "naturally constrained" so as to be most readily solvable in this one fashion, or (3) the professor goofed and gave the problem as an example in class. Cheatfinder is smart enough to realize that (1) is unlikely, and so considers the duplicated structures to be innocent. So if the entire class cheated and turned in the same exact assignment, the cheatfinder would not report it.

Fifth, counter to some suggestions by fellow slashdotters, it is best to run this thing at the lower levels of the program. The higher level classes aren't focused on "how to program" and generally don't afford as many opportunites for cheating (many, but not all, of GA Tech's 4000 level classes have every student-team work on a different project). At the higher levels, code reuse can be a good thing, provided that proper credit is given to the real author and that the essential learning challenge is not removed.

Now for the disclaimer: I am a Georgia Tech TA, but I have not had direct exposure to the cheatfinder. Most of my claims are based on heresay and private conversations with those who do work on the cheatfinder. Some claims are based on my own experience TA'ing and trying to prosecute people.

Georga Tech's Honor Code for CS1321 - Introduction to Computing

Georga Tech's Honor Code for CS1321 - Introduction to Computing

What he didn't mention is that Microsoft never invented those things -- they're simply exploiting the "Ubiquitous Computing" research developed by other people at Xerox PARC, MIT Media Lab, and many others places.

Our product ConnectedTV, which we demonstrated at CES, is also inspired by the same Ubiquitous Computing research, as well as using other proven user interface techniques like pie menus.

Besides the personalized TV guide and universal remote control, it has many useful home control applications, as well. For an idea of where it's heading, please read some the literature.

We owe a lot to pioneering researchers like the late Mark Weiser (director of Xerox PARC Computer Science Lab), and visionary writers like the late Philip K Dick. May they forever continue to guide and inspire us from half-life.

-Don

"I am Ubik. Before the universe was, I am. I made the suns. I made the worlds. I created the lives and the places they inhabit; I move them here, I put them there. They go as I say, then do as I tell them. I am the word and my name is never spoken, the name which no one knows. I am called Ubik, but that is not my name. I am. I shall always be."

-Glenn Runciter

This is as complete and accurate an etext of the 1984
edition of True Names

True Names by Vernor Vinge

See, I've got these two friends, Flippy and Hambone, and I'm sure one of them would know what to name this dolphin, but I'm just not sure who which one would do a better job...

There is actually a long history of trying to develop "the" computer-vision library, but this one actually has an impressive cross-platform user base. To my knowledge, the 2nd most popular library is the Microsoft Vision SDK.

College degrees have a similar effect. Besides showing that a major university considers you qualified and educated in your field, it proves that you're willing and able to achieve a difficult and long-term goal set before you by yourself. The goal isn't to prove you know your stuff, but to prove you can prove it, and hang in there long enough to impress someone much bigger than your corporate boss.

The U.S. Military.

I have seen Uncle Sam, particularly the Navy (but other branches as well) produce more good, un-degreed but still extremely competent, engineers than any other school save my alma mater (and that's just because I knew folks that went there :), bar none. I've worked with them, I've worked for them, and they've got what it takes. And I'll probably be glad to have a few working for me one of these days.

The midshipman just chuckled to himself. He knew those signal flags said "GO NAVY BEAT ARMY"...

Palm's input method is actually somewhat different from Xerox's: it is considerably slower, it has some multi-stroke characters, and it requires you to look at the device. The specific Unistroke design in Xerox's input method is actually considerably nicer. Palm knew about the patent and thought that even if it was valid, it wouldn't apply to their input method. The other irony is that writing a simple, trainable multistroke character recognizer isn't hard at all, so Palm could have avoided this issue altogether.

Personally, I think a broad patent shouldn't have been granted, although a narrow patent on the particular Unistrokes alphabet might have been sensible. And I just don't see why Palm's method, which lacks just about all the nice features that Unistrokes have, would infringe. But people who get paid much more than you and me have been working long and hard on this, and that's the outcome.

at gerogia tech unix/linux skills are taught in the introduction CS classes. windows* is shunned upon as the weak-mans operating system.

They have a similar system at Georgia Tech, called the NAVE. It's a three sided, small scale cave. The interesting thing about it is that they did it on the cheap. Just a bunch of students with hammers and nails to put it together. I think they said it cost 60 grand total in parts.

The PC's driving the walls were running Windows. So when we got a demo, they rebooted the machines first off. They said to clear out all the OS cruft. The synchronization between the walls was not very good at times. I'd say large fractions of a second. Thats the one thing a big SGI gets you, really tight synchronization between the walls.

dave chen

or does nobody else give a flying rats ass about GNU? GNU is a communistic propoganda started by that hairy ape Richard Stallman It's so obvious that it sucks... anything written for free use and released on open source is pretty much telling the end-user "hi, download me so i can do no good to you and fuck up your computer".. it's a waste of time to even bother documenting free software... oh and not to mention... there's only ONE developer in this project... and there will only be one developer in this project... because everyone realizes how crappy GNU is... thank you... and remember... closed source/EULA is your friend

I was simply replying back to his sarcastic giberish with yet more sarcastic giberish. If you you want to have a serious discussion I am amenable. Check my profile, I have some experience in the field.

And by the way, Georgia Tech's Neely Reactor facility is not a power plant. It's a 5MW research reactor. 5MW isn't nearly enough to do any real power production. Check for yourself.

And as for your comment about waste going to dining halls, is that an attempt at humor regarding the poor quality of food there? You must understand any facility has to have a license from the NRC to handle, store and dispose of radioactive material. Disposal to a dining facility (or a schoolyard) isn't going to happen.

You can find the Squeak Zaurus port and the Squeak IPaq port on http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/458

You can find general information about Squeak (a dialect of SmallTalk-80) at http://www.squeak.org

Enjoy!

Stephan

It has protected-mode real-time tasks with latency guarantees.

So does an implementation of realtime linux:

http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/drops
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/fiasco
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/LinuxOnL4

It has scheduling machinery for processes that need N milliseconds every M milliseconds, like multimedia handlers.

So does the DWCS scheduler for Linux Systems:

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~west/dwcs.html

And it has fast interprocess communication that's not a bolt-on to UNIX.

Huh?

And it's a real ROMable microkernel.

How about holding various companies whose products are exploited the most (re: MS) liable for their lack of security?

There was a recent security seminar sponsored by the Georgia Tech Information Security Center by Gene Spafford who is the director of the Purdue CERIAS (Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security), where he mentioned the problems with security and the software industry. One of his slides in his presentation showed that Windows NT and Windows 2000 (combined), RedHat Linux and Solaris are respectively the first, second and third on the lists of OSes that have had vulnerabilities discovered in the past five years.

Legislation that aims to punish companies for writing insecure software would harm almost every company that writes any software that is aimed at being used in a server/multi-user environment since security is an absolute that most non-trivial software does not reach.

Secondly, who will be forced to pay when it comes to Open Source vulnerabilities? wu-ftp is notoriously broken , as is telnetd , sendmail, BIND and some would consider recent bugs in the Linux kernel as OS vulnerabilities. Opening the door to lawsuits to software developers for writing software would probably kill a number of projects rather quickly.

I'd rather that we let capitalism take its course. If customers want secure products then they should stop buying insecure products or they should communicate to the vendors that security is of importance to them. As long as consumers (both individuals and corporate entities) continue to accept the status quo then no change will be made but I don't believe that lawsuits will solve anything except make some lawyers rich and significantly increase the cost of software as the effects of the lawsuits are passed on to consumers.

How about holding various companies whose products are exploited the most (re: MS) liable for their lack of security?

There was a recent security seminar sponsored by the Georgia Tech Information Security Center by Gene Spafford who is the director of the Purdue CERIAS (Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security), where he mentioned the problems with security and the software industry. One of his slides in his presentation showed that Windows NT and Windows 2000 (combined), RedHat Linux and Solaris are respectively the first, second and third on the lists of OSes that have had vulnerabilities discovered in the past five years.

Legislation that aims to punish companies for writing insecure software would harm almost every company that writes any software that is aimed at being used in a server/multi-user environment since security is an absolute that most non-trivial software does not reach.

Secondly, who will be forced to pay when it comes to Open Source vulnerabilities? wu-ftp is notoriously broken , as is telnetd , sendmail, BIND and some would consider recent bugs in the Linux kernel as OS vulnerabilities. Opening the door to lawsuits to software developers for writing software would probably kill a number of projects rather quickly.

I'd rather that we let capitalism take its course. If customers want secure products then they should stop buying insecure products or they should communicate to the vendors that security is of importance to them. As long as consumers (both individuals and corporate entities) continue to accept the status quo then no change will be made but I don't believe that lawsuits will solve anything except make some lawyers rich and significantly increase the cost of software as the effects of the lawsuits are passed on to consumers.

I thought about this after my digital design class. I'd built a "single board" computer before with a whopping 2K of RAM and another 2K of EEPROM, so I wanted to make an expanded version with real I/O. Character LCD displays are really cheap, as in $7-$15 for small ones. Graphics displays might cost you $50-$100 for a small monochrome one. Check out Marlin P Jones for okay deals on surplus stuff.

For my own project, I decided that the display portion alone was difficult enough to merit an A in my lab, so I built a PIC microcontroller-based NTSC video game (Breakout -- check out the links at the bottom of the page for PIC Tetris!). Looking at Altera's UP1 FPGA evaluation board, displaying VGA at 640x480x60Hz with 16 colors isn't even very difficult (Altera UP1 at GA Tech). Try using a standard method of output like this, and you'll have a lot more fun and be able to do a lot more than with a $7 20x2 LCD module.

Input is pretty much the same. Sure, you could use a custom keypad, but why bother when you can interface with a PS/2 mouse or keyboard? Specs are widely available, and this will impress people much more than a row of DIP switches. This can be done on a relatively small FPGA (~20K gates) which Altera's university program sells on full development boards for $150.

For even more fun, try interfacing with compact flash for storage (Circuit Cellar Article). Then realize that you've just implemented a basic IDE interface, and expand it to do hard drives. Design a character generator for your NTSC or VGA output, write a simple filesystem, and have a whole computer with standard parts that you built yourself!

If that's still too intimidating, just look at company Application notes for ideas. You can find some strange ideas and take them all the way.

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

I wrote a paper about it. Although it's true I am a pointy-headed academic, I do occasionally hack a few lines of code, and I when I've solved a problem over in the research world whose solution would be useful to hackers, I try very hard to write papers that are readable by your generic hacker.

If you go here http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~shivers/citations.html you'll see a list of papers I've written. These are the ones that people in the perl/scripting/lightweight-languages community might find interesting:

1. A universal scripting framework
2. The SRE regular-expression notation
3. Atomic heap transactions and fine-grain interrupts
4. Automatic management of operating-system resources
5. Continuations and threads: Expressing machine concurrency directly in advanced languages
6. Supporting dynamic languages on the Java virtual machine
7. A Scheme shell
8. Scsh reference manual

#2 has an opening flame about a problem in the open-source community I call "the 80% solution" problem. The regex notation it describes is now standard with scsh.

#4 & #6 will be of interest to VM designers.

#8 is, ahh, somewhat more well known for its non-technical content. But I'm on a new set of meds now, and doing a lot better, really.

-Olin

Get it here

PS: Mirrors encouraged, so if you manage to grab it and can host it at a site with beefier bandwidth, go ahead.

Yesterday I read a news artical about a US doctor that tried to row from cape cod to Europe.

On the 30th of september he went missing (story) and yesterday they found this boat of the coast of Ireland (story). He had all the electronic equipment that the participants of this race have .. but that did not help him ....

You can see his progress on the Ocean Rowing Society web page until the 30rd of september. On their web site you can also find more information about his journey.

His younger brother has created a web site with even more information

So those who say that the electronic equipment makes it easier ... should think again

At Georgia Tech, we use Scheme as the language of choice for our intro to CS class, CS 1321. Since the courses after this one transition into Java and then C and *then* branch off into other languages, I'm still not sure why Scheme is taught first, but hey... I'm not a CS major.

If you're wondering what the heck a preemptive kernel entails, then here's some background.

Also, if you don't like Robert Love's implementation, then Andrew Morton maintains a patch with a similar low-latency goal.

However, ftp://ftp-linux.cc.gatech.edu/pub/linux/X11/gnome has mirror of the Gnome stuff, as well as some of the other bits that twoguys.org was mirroring. Please be gentle. :)

Unfortunately, they wouldn't be much help in the WTC situation, where everything is buried under tons of rubble, but there are some really amazing things being done in the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International International Aerial Robotics Competition. My school has had a team for a few years, and they kick ass. The goal: Autonomous flying robots with vision, image recognition, hazard avoidance, and more. This stuff is frickin cool.