Slashdot Mirror

I don't know what it is you want, to announce themselves as the lawless ISP or the pirate ISP or anything like that would only be foolish in so many ways.

Why? For the record, the Swedish PirateISP seems to do just fine. Granted, they only offer services to one city currently, but that city has one of the largest Swedish universities, along with all of its student dorms. Honestly, I don't see why it'd be 'foolish' to have a pirate ISP, they are not responsible for their customers. If anything they're sure to get them, being the only company offering 1Gbps/1Gbps fiber connections to households (for $80/month).

I decided not to do comp sci after I hurt my wrists during my senior year in high school, and I'm now a graduate student in solid state physics. I found a project which involves a lot of fabrication, so I don't have to spend all day on the computer. I occasionally have to write code to interface with equipment, and do a decent bit of word processing. It's not too bad although I manage all my citations in zotero ( http://www.zotero.org/ ) which is an excellent program but unfortunately mouse-intensive. Mostly I just read papers, although I do also spend a lot of time working on scanning electron microscopes and similar systems (these almost universally have horrible input systems, see for example all the knobs on http://www.nano.lth.se/data/nanometer/files/image/sem.gif )

Excepting the case where the actual physical media has degraded, there is someone out there who can read and convert your data (the only challenge will be in the finding them, and maybe in the convincing them to do it).

For instance:

http://www.fairlight.to/docs/faq.html
http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/triad/ftp/C64_Tools/gnylfdox.txt

(The second link discusses a C64 program that reads several C64 formats and is able to write rtf; note that I'm not an expert, I just assumed this stuff would exist somewhere on the internets)

Your academic papers don't have such a licensce. They are cited because it's considered unethical not to do so. The same would apply to using your source code.

Yeah. Also, if someone uses the code to do calculations they're going to publish, then the publication is going to need to include enough information so that readers will be able to determine how the calculations worked. The easiest and most straightforward way for to accomplish that is simply to give a reference to the paper describing the code. As a concrete example, when I was a grad student and postdoc doing nuclear physics, I used this program to do a lot of my calculations. Every time I published a paper that included those calculations, I needed to give a reference to T. Bengtsson, Nucl. Phys. A496, 56 (1989), because that was the only way to supply the reader with enough information to be able to understand (and possibly reproduce) exactly what I'd done.

Science works because we trust other scientists to cite our work if they use it. If we kept our work secret unless other scientists signed agreements to do so nothing would get done.

Yep. And the flip side of the ethical necessity for giving proper citations is that it's totally unethical to try to force someone to cite your work via some kind of artificial legal mechanism. Getting your work cited is the gold coin of academia, just as getting votes is the gold coin of politics. Forcing someone to cite your paper against their best judgment is as unethical as forcing someone to vote for you against their best judgment.

have a better explanation of the generation of high harmonics

http://www.atto.fysik.lth.se/

If I ask you to design some futuristic looking armor for some soldiers, and you do so without much more input from me beyond `I like it!', then you'd own the copyright on that. If we both worked on it equally, we'd probably both own the copyright.

What's the over/under that this technology will be bought by ford / gm and killed in development?

• Research, publications at Lund University
• Research at Chalmers University of Technology
• Research at Stanford University
• Research, publications at University of Wisconsin, Madison
• Research at University of California, Berkeley

This presentation has more information. It was developed *with* DARPA and Raytheon sponsored work
http://www.it.lth.se/courses/DARK/novelarchitectur es/monarch-overview.pdf
"Leverage DARPA-sponsored DIVA Project results, Raytheon IRAD-sponsored HPPS and Mercury Stream Co-procesing Engine"

Some explainations of the concepts
http://www.mil-embedded.com/columns/industry_analy sis/2005/10/Dingee/

Just the core design has functions a stock CPU would lack. Also not that before it's even built they have to design in certain stock features that have nothing to do with how it works but are needed for any aerospace part then you get to design the guts to fit in with that. There would probably be a nuclear hardened version as well.

'leverage' is corprat speak for exploit, stupid PCism.

NT vs. Mach. Mach is older and better.

NT is not the same as Mach - it's an portable, pre-emptive OS, designed for SMP long before SMP was widely used.

Win32 API vs. Single Unix and X. Once again, older and better.

Better is a subjective term. Win32 is vast and original, that's my point. Whether your like it or not is not relevant to whether it's original. Nor really is whether X Windows came first, since X Windows is a very different thing to Win32.

ACPI ok. But the BIOS interface sucks, and hardware manufactures actually implement it, not Microsoft.

Well Microsoft have been heavily involved in all the innovations in PC hardware.

Back in the IBM days - PC's had 640K memory barriers, slow and primimitive graphics, ISA and a primitive interrupt DMA facilities. Now they're 64 bit, has no runtime Bios access (why ACPI was invented - they needed to move away from APM which required Bios access after boot), has ultra fast graphics, one interrupt per device, the whole works. It's 99% as a good as a clean design, binary compatibility has been preserved across the transition.

In fact, if you look at the 64 bit AMD stuff, there are loads of things that make it look as if the NT designers had a considerable input into the spec.

COM vs. Smalltalk, CLOS, Scheme, etc. One of these is not used today, and that's COM.

Umm, you what? COM is used in every Windows PC still. Big chunks of Windows are COM based - ActiveX, DirectX, the shell api, OLE and so on. It's also used the Xbox.

Oddly enough, a lot of cellphones use something called ECM, which is a subset of COM based too - not just Sony Ericsson as the link suggests, some of this code has been licensed to virtually everyone.

http://serg.telecom.lth.se/education/master_theses /docs/35_Rep.Lundberg.pdf

You can like this stuff of dislike it, and most of it is inelegant since it evolved while keeping binary compatibility, but saying that Microsoft have done no innovation is absurd.

And too their great credit, most of this stuff, like COM is well described and unpatented which is what allowed Sony Ericsson to borrow from COM. It also allowed them to make money licensing it to OEMs.

For one, the Commodore 64 uses PETSCII and not standard ASCII.

You can map PETSCII to Unicode without too much trouble.



he may have even used GEOS to store his data on floppy disks...
or stored all his information on a hard disk or CMD formatted floppy disk

You make the assumption that Austrian police can't obtain similar hardware. This doesn't involve some bizarre one-off homebrew computer; the C-64 counts as the single most popular pre-PC computer, with probably tens of thousands still in use and a still-active user group in most major cities.

Just to set the record straight, there already exists something like this for Linux (and, more specifically, KDE). In fact, there are two major branches in development for such widgets:

1. The fancy branch (since sometime in 2003):
SuperKaramba, which spawned from the plain Karamba.

2. The non-fancy minimalistic branch (since god knows when - probably early 2004):
Conky, which spawned from the even less fancy Torsmo.

- shazow

I have just had my final lecture in a course on Mobile Computer Graphics and there is a lot more to mobile 3d graphics than producing nice games. Especially there was one lecturer from TAT that makes user interfaces for mobile devices, and the possibilities for creating more userfriendly interfaces are endless with 3d graphics. I am not just speaking of eye candy, but useful animations that help the user navigate the menu tree.

Time to bust out the holy wars.

I like the 68000 because it has so many registers but I think all in all in the 80386 is the better CPU.

For reference, consider:

http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/reports_p resentations/MC680X0OPTAPP.txt

http://www.df.lth.se/~john_e/gems/gem0028.html

http://linux.cis.monroeccc.edu/~paulrsm/doc/trick6 8k.htm

http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~muchandr/m68k

Right off the wheel, we notice that the 68000 did not support 32 bit multiplecation at all. Doesn't sound too much like a 32 bit chip to me. Compare that to Intels quirky IMUL, which I believe puts the result into EAX, EDX to get a real 64 bit result.

Integer math was faster clock for clock on the 386. Compare things like 68K register addition to Intel register addition. There's no comparison.

Compare

http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article2 14.asp#ADC

to

http://www.df.lth.se/~john_e/gems/gem0028.html

Whenever you did any 32 bit pointer math on a 68k, you paid a huge, huge performance penalty. It was always more efficient to do things in 16 bit PC relative addressing.

The 68K had no concept of isolated memory or tasks. So systems like the Amiga and the Macintosh would run without any isolation between processes. I was an Amiga fan boy and I used to get that GURU meditation error so much that it was not even comical.

The tragedy of the 386 architecture was actually Microsoft and not Intel. DOS and Windows did not use even the 386 chip to its fullest capability for memory management. MS users would have to wait until Sept 1995, almost 10 years after the 386, for a true 32 bit operating system.

Time to bust out the holy wars.

I like the 68000 because it has so many registers but I think all in all in the 80386 is the better CPU.

For reference, consider:

http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/reports_p resentations/MC680X0OPTAPP.txt

http://www.df.lth.se/~john_e/gems/gem0028.html

http://linux.cis.monroeccc.edu/~paulrsm/doc/trick6 8k.htm

http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~muchandr/m68k

Right off the wheel, we notice that the 68000 did not support 32 bit multiplecation at all. Doesn't sound too much like a 32 bit chip to me. Compare that to Intels quirky IMUL, which I believe puts the result into EAX, EDX to get a real 64 bit result.

Integer math was faster clock for clock on the 386. Compare things like 68K register addition to Intel register addition. There's no comparison.

Compare

http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article2 14.asp#ADC

to

http://www.df.lth.se/~john_e/gems/gem0028.html

Whenever you did any 32 bit pointer math on a 68k, you paid a huge, huge performance penalty. It was always more efficient to do things in 16 bit PC relative addressing.

The 68K had no concept of isolated memory or tasks. So systems like the Amiga and the Macintosh would run without any isolation between processes. I was an Amiga fan boy and I used to get that GURU meditation error so much that it was not even comical.

The tragedy of the 386 architecture was actually Microsoft and not Intel. DOS and Windows did not use even the 386 chip to its fullest capability for memory management. MS users would have to wait until Sept 1995, almost 10 years after the 386, for a true 32 bit operating system.

We are also having a complete mirror @ ftp://ftp.df.lth.se/pub/StarWreck-InThePirkinning

have fun

Running the flash presentation reminded me of the song from The Firm called Star Trekkin

The chorus goes like so:
Star Trekking, across the universe,
On the Starship Enterprise, under Captain Kirk.
Star Trekking, across the universe,
Boldly going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.

The same thing has been tested elsewhere in pilot studies. One of the largest trials is the project "ISA - Intelligent Speed Adaptation", partly run by Lund University.
More info at http://www.tft.lth.se/research/ISA.htm
From the page:
"Research and development on the concept of Intelligent Speed Adaptation is going on both regarding speed limits and dynamically changing limits due to the prevailing conditions (e.g. adverse road-, or weather conditions). The system investigated is based on the Active accelerator pedal. "
The active accelerator pedal makes it possible to go over the speed limit, but you have to press harder on it, so that you dont speed by mistake. AFAIK the trials are a sucess, the problem is the cost of the equipment, and the cost to keep the devices updated with the correct speed limits.
Even more info at:http://www.isa.vv.se/index.en.htm

there are a ton of audio gems like that out there.

But seriously, misterhouse can use a voice synthesizer (along with speech recognition) to do some really cool stuff. If I could find an approximation of the star trek computer I'd be one happy geek.

You could try Linus Akesson's * Parallax for Piano (12MB MP3) version of Parallax (7KB SID) as a comparison. I doubt this 11-or-so-minute piece was ever intended to be heard coming from anything but a C64. It sounds very "un-pianolike" to my untrained ears, anyway.

* That's how he spells it, on his webpage anyway.

Well, here's a funny twist: I have a few Japanese video game books, and I wanted to know what they say. So what did I do? I could have paid out my ass and gone through the useless hassle of a language class, I could have read one of those "Teach Yourself Blah Blah Blah in 20 Days" books and still not gotten anywhere, or I could just decode it with an online dictionary and a program called JEDict for the Mac, which swiftly looks up Hiragana.

The best way of doing these things is to go straight to the point, which involves knowing what people are writing and saying, not setting in a classroom and shoveling out money.

One of the first broken V2s ever captured by, or, in effect given to the allies landed in southern Sweden in July 21st 1944. It was the result of a failed test flight, and it scared the living hell out of some relatives of mine.

Read more at Linus Walleij's site covering the topic. Interesting reading.

> Increment the pointer.
< Decrement the pointer.
+ Increment the byte at the pointer.
- Decrement the byte at the pointer.
. Output the byte at the pointer.
, Input a byte and store it in the byte at the pointer.
[ Jump forward past the matching ] if the byte at the pointer is zero.
] Jump backward to the matching [ unless the byte at the pointer is zero.

intresting, I went to check my selve, searched for azatoth at search.msn.com and my page was #1 (http://www.efd.lth.se/~d02cf).
Now I'm not #1 at google anymore, but for a month I was, perhaps msn is reading googles list once in a month?

Nope. V1 was a cruise missile. V2 was ballistic.

Well, it'll never be commercial, but... (and it works on the GBC too!)

Try this link: http://www.it.lth.se/it/msprojects/ita/past/playmo bile/

Actually I found the source compilation process to be pretty easy. I used the latest source (v0.17) and the only problem I had was not having lib-fam0-devel installed. Perhaps it might get to be a little problematic with an older system, with older libs. This here is a Mandrake 9.1 system with some stuff from Cooker.

There's a link to a quick howto by a Karamba user in the project page here which eases the (supposed) pain of installing this.

Its kind of funny, I'm reading a lot of comments like yours. Which is fine, of course. But there is a sort of big push right now for just this sort of thing on Linux desktops. Eye candy, it seems is underrated here?

As a user who has been using the Linux desktop for about 4 years now I'd have to say this is a very exciting project. You should take a look at kde-look to get an idea what types of eye candies are being kicked around. I've been using translucent aterms, Convectivea crystal icons and the Mosfet's KDE liquid module for quite a while now, I love it.

Btw, check out Karamba, its a new KDE extention that suports (fake) transparency, lots of fancy do-dads and themes. Beefs up the candy factor (and some functionality!). Might as well look good if your going to have to use it.

Last one! Check out Slicker. Its a collection of utilities which provide an alternative to KDE's kicker, and looks good. I don't know about you, but I got tired of looking at screen shots of OSX.

If you like this topic you may well appreciate this Assembly Language Gems Page

It's a little biased towards x86 assembly, but there are some neat tricks there, and some stunningly lovely code.

I've got the 10GB Nomad, and use it exclusively under Linux. I use the NJB Filesystem, but have also used
GNOMAD successfully.
I believe that njbfs works under *BSD as well.

xs4all has also taken heat for hosting some anti-scientology pages.
There's some interesting stuff about when they got raided by the CoS (church of scientology) here.

Excerpt: A corporation like CoS, having its' own security service with a capacity equal to that of a small country, would scare the shit out of any normal firm. XS4ALL, however, is NOT a normal middle-sized firm. It is an ex-foundation, an offshoot of the Dutch hacker-magazine "HackTic". The staff at XS4ALL are ALL cyberpunks, former long-haired anarchists happy to find themselves in charge of a company so fast growing, that it is considered important for the Dutch national economy. And as you can tell from its' name, this is a company which wants to give everyone access to information, worldwide.

• http://www.ecn.org/radikal/
• http://www.connix.com/~harry/radikal/
• http://www.df.lth.se/~micke/not_my_political_views / adikal/
• http://catalog.com/jamesd/radikal/
• http://rigel.cyberpass.net/radikal/
• http://radikal.autono.net/

Connect 2 Gameboys by GSM and Bluetooth: http://www.it.lth.se/it/msprojects/ita/past/playmo bile/
Taking color pictures with GB b&w camera http://www.ruleofthirds.com/gameboy/

Linus Åkerlund's Towers of Hanoi implementation for vim. can be found here. He has also written a cool Mandelbrot set generator in vim that can be found on the same page.

when i visited the lab there a guy explained it to me:

1: make a mockup cylinder with a glass viewport (!!!).
2: use a laser that emits pulses on a femtosecond time scale.
3: shine the laser on a spinning mirror.
4: shine the result (absorbtion image) on a very high speed digital camera.

the result is a crystal clear picture of the fluid dynamics of the combustion process at any given microsecond. they say that this technique gives much better resolution than finite element analysis because of the incredible computational power needed to analyze the fluid dynamics in even largish (~5mm) chunks.

it doesn't always pay to simulate what you can take pictures of...

Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition

http://www.me.berkeley.edu/~mctai/hcci.html
http://www.ca.sandia.gov/CRF/03_facilities/03_FacH CCI-SCCI.html
http://www.vok.lth.se/CE/research/hcci/i_HCCI_uk.h tml

Try this this. I guess it didn't like the target="_new" tag..

This is better... heh..

A friend of mine did this, among others the games tetris and pong.

They're described, along with pictures of them in action, on this page on his home page.

The company I was referring to in my last post was named Lion Rampant. A brief description about the history of the game (Ars Magica) can be found here.

Relive the magic: Temple of Asphai Trilogy. Just follow some of the directions here, and you should be on your way.

Serial to NTSC

PIC and PAL equals Tetris. This could be used in a serial->PAL thingy..

PIC->LCD pretty ok (BASIC STAMP),if you just need the display, has been hacked to accept ps/2 input (no links)

I just know this has been done before, maybe by the same guys but back then it wasn't a commercial site so I can't say really.

Without contesting Darwinism on the merits, I wonder why the digirati (sorry) feel the need to fit it into _every_ explanation. By shoehorning Darwin into every dialogue, they make him a parody.

Ptolemy's model could be made to explain every aspect of planetary movement, but it was wrong. The communists and creationists say all evidence --and this is important _all evidence_ - points to their worldviews also.

Natural laws have apparent contradictions which cannot be explained by current thinking, and tortured reasoning like Mr. Katz's does not help us understand.

Instead, we should focus on what we do know about information theory rather than trying to cram it into some kind of biological paradigm.