Slashdot Mirror

Packet switching is a wonderful idea first discovered by Leonard Kleinrock, and then independently by Paul Baran and Donald Davies. This independent development, within just a few years, suggests that packet switching is a fundamental idea that wanted to be discovered.

My understanding is that Linux is preemptively-multitasked, so that one process cannot monopolize the processor. This, to my mind, does not lend itself well to a problem where you want the CPU spending all of it's time calculating the answer to some question (e.g. global climate change), rather than listening to the network, etc.

One advantage of the AppleSeed project running on MacOS 9.x is that with cooperative multitasking, the program can monopolize the CPU if it wants to.

Doesn't this make MacOS9 better than linux for this type of clustered-CPU-supercomputer? (Of course, differences in hardware may compensate for the differences in multitasking models)

"One of my teachers is working on protein folding, and has about 45% accuracy using nueral networks and genetic algorithms."

By whose standards? His own I would guess. That's the problem with protein folders as a group: no objectivity. Every year for the past 35 or so one or more of them claims to have a solution. That's why competitions like CASP 4 arose to address this dilemma. No one at that meeting ever makes claims like 45% accuracy at protein folding, but some do issue the occasional nutso press release wherein they claim their method is better than the competition or others improperly exploit their position to force a wacky article into print about a technique of questionable value for solving protein folding which failed to pan out.

"is there any ever protein folding news?"

Well, protein folding is tough, really tough. You may think cracking 512-bit encryption is tough but that's just peanuts compared to protein folding, the inverse attack on the problem first proposed by K. Eric Drexler has turned out to be much more effective, and entire careers have been wasted chasing this dream (which is not to say it isn't WORTH chasing, but just to put things into perspective).

Locus had a particularly clean API for this.

• open Regular UNIX open, except that if you open for writing, you're creating a new file that starts by sharing the file blocks of the original file and has copy-on-write semantics. Only processes sharing the same file descriptor see the new file at this time.
• close Regular UNIX close, except that if you're closing a file open for writing, the new file now replaces the old file for subsequent opens. Thus, close commits changes.
• revert Closes and discards a file open for writing. The file remains in its original state.
• commit Commits the current state of a file currently being written; essentially equivalent to closing and reopening the file.

If a program terminates abnormally (via kill or abort, a system crashes, or communications with a remote file system are lost, the file reverts to its last committed version.

These are nice file semantics to put under UNIX programs. Unmodified programs that work on files as units work fine, and if they crash, files are not corrupted. This covers most UNIX applications. Advanced applications can use commit and revert to manage clean updates to files being actively updated. It's efficient, too, because the new and old versions share unmodified disk blocks. Opening a file, appending some data, and closing the file is both cheap and atomic.

This is a successful, proven concept, but one that hasn't been seen yet in the open source world. Somebody should pick up on this concept.

The lead developer on Locus, Popek, tried a startup, Locus Computing Corporation, in the 1980s, to market the whole Locus system, but it had too much stuff in it that the UNIX community didn't think they needed back then, like heterogeneous clustering, and also had its own networking protocols. Good idea, but about 10-15 years too early.

I'd just like to put out a warning to any enterprising college students who are reading about all these neat MIT and Caltech pranks and are thinking of trying something similar at their own schools. If your school is not prank-friendly and/or you get caught, you can find yourself in a whole boatload of trouble. What happened to me was that I tried a certain prank at my dumb school that was similar to an old one at MIT. Basically I sent a little email to several.. erm.. hundred.. freshman, letting them know that they had been reassigned to live in the University Library or the basement of Hedrick Hall due to overcrowding in the university. People believed it and called the Housing Office in droves. Some even showed up at the library to have a look at their new beds. Needless to say, the university was not amused. So they kicked me out of the dorms (with 4 weeks to go in the school year left and finals rapidly approaching!) and gave me 60 hours of community service. Sure, I probably shouldn't have sent the email in the first place, or I should have made it ultra-obvious that it was a joke (I thought I had done that..), but the university's reaction was way overkill. So the moral of this story: Don't pull a prank if you're at all worried about possible punishment. :)

So, for instance:

Observationally, what we see is that all the distant galaxies seem to be running away from us. And the simplest and most straightforward explanation is that long ago there was this Big Bang explosion and that that is what drives the cosmic expansion. (In the Big Bang models, this explosion stands without explanation.)

In this Steady State model, on the other hand, the energy which drives the cosmic expansion is simply the energy of the radiation which is lost in the expansion.

As the galaxies and stars condense, their gravitational energy is transformed to radiation and radiated away into the expanding spaces of the Universe.

If the energy of the radiation is lost in the expansion, then it must drive the expansion.

In this Steady State model it is the conditions at the border of the observable Universe imposed by the expansion that are the source of both the background radiation and the "new hydrogen".

As seen by us, the radiation from matter seen to be approaching the border is red-shifted approaching zero energy. But if the radiation energy approaches zero, so does the particle energy and the particle mass.

Then, since radiation going through a field of low-mass particles

would be thermalized to 3 Kelvin, it would appear to us as the background radiation.

The amount of 3 Kelvin radiation predicted by this model matches what we measure.

The amount predicted by the Big Bang model is at least one order of magnitude too high.

"New Hydrogen" Also, near the border, where the mass approaches zero, the momentum of the particles must also approach zero, and with it, our uncertainty in that momentum. (You can't have a big uncertainty about a very small momentum.) Then, by Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, if our uncertainty in the momentum approaches zero, our uncertainty in where the particles are must approach infinity. The hydrogen simply "tunnels" back in.

For the Big Bang models, the observed helium abundance is far too low unless most of the matter of the Universe involved in the fireball explosion was of such a nature that it could not be made into helium. It has therefore been suggested by some proponents of the Big Bang model that some 90% to 99% of the matter in the Universe is of such a nature that it responds only to gravity,

and not to any of the other forces such as electricity and magnetism which might allow us to detect it.

This "dark matter", as it is called, is thought to surround the visible galaxies, but not to reside within them.

And the problem is, that if it responds only to gravity, why doesn't it all fall in?

For a Steady State model, there is no problem about the dark matter being ordinary matter,

because the visible galaxies could be expected to be surrounded by what I call "hovering layers" of ordinary matter blown out by the stellar winds.

When a cluster of stars condenses from a cloud of gas, some 90% to 99% of the material in the cloud could be expected to be blown away by the stellar winds of the cluster.

Since the diameters of these hovering layers may be five to ten times the diameters of the associated galaxies, their densities might be well below one percent of the densities of the associated galaxies.

The detection of this material might be rendered problematical simply by its low density.

I think I'll stop here. Let me just add a few things about his "Origin of Life" discussion.

But for a Steady State model, in which the Universe is without beginning, perhaps life itself could be without beginning.

However, the question then arises: how could it spread from solar system to solar system or from galaxy to galaxy?

What could pull non-living matter across the border into life?

Anyway, try taking things with a few grains of salt. I have no idea how this stuff can make "total sense to you" because the guy hasn't even proposed a real theory!

So, for instance:

Observationally, what we see is that all the distant galaxies seem to be running away from us. And the simplest and most straightforward explanation is that long ago there was this Big Bang explosion and that that is what drives the cosmic expansion. (In the Big Bang models, this explosion stands without explanation.)

In this Steady State model, on the other hand, the energy which drives the cosmic expansion is simply the energy of the radiation which is lost in the expansion.

As the galaxies and stars condense, their gravitational energy is transformed to radiation and radiated away into the expanding spaces of the Universe.

If the energy of the radiation is lost in the expansion, then it must drive the expansion.

In this Steady State model it is the conditions at the border of the observable Universe imposed by the expansion that are the source of both the background radiation and the "new hydrogen".

As seen by us, the radiation from matter seen to be approaching the border is red-shifted approaching zero energy. But if the radiation energy approaches zero, so does the particle energy and the particle mass.

Then, since radiation going through a field of low-mass particles

would be thermalized to 3 Kelvin, it would appear to us as the background radiation.

The amount of 3 Kelvin radiation predicted by this model matches what we measure.

The amount predicted by the Big Bang model is at least one order of magnitude too high.

"New Hydrogen" Also, near the border, where the mass approaches zero, the momentum of the particles must also approach zero, and with it, our uncertainty in that momentum. (You can't have a big uncertainty about a very small momentum.) Then, by Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, if our uncertainty in the momentum approaches zero, our uncertainty in where the particles are must approach infinity. The hydrogen simply "tunnels" back in.

For the Big Bang models, the observed helium abundance is far too low unless most of the matter of the Universe involved in the fireball explosion was of such a nature that it could not be made into helium. It has therefore been suggested by some proponents of the Big Bang model that some 90% to 99% of the matter in the Universe is of such a nature that it responds only to gravity,

and not to any of the other forces such as electricity and magnetism which might allow us to detect it.

This "dark matter", as it is called, is thought to surround the visible galaxies, but not to reside within them.

And the problem is, that if it responds only to gravity, why doesn't it all fall in?

For a Steady State model, there is no problem about the dark matter being ordinary matter,

because the visible galaxies could be expected to be surrounded by what I call "hovering layers" of ordinary matter blown out by the stellar winds.

When a cluster of stars condenses from a cloud of gas, some 90% to 99% of the material in the cloud could be expected to be blown away by the stellar winds of the cluster.

Since the diameters of these hovering layers may be five to ten times the diameters of the associated galaxies, their densities might be well below one percent of the densities of the associated galaxies.

The detection of this material might be rendered problematical simply by its low density.

I think I'll stop here. Let me just add a few things about his "Origin of Life" discussion.

But for a Steady State model, in which the Universe is without beginning, perhaps life itself could be without beginning.

However, the question then arises: how could it spread from solar system to solar system or from galaxy to galaxy?

What could pull non-living matter across the border into life?

Anyway, try taking things with a few grains of salt. I have no idea how this stuff can make "total sense to you" because the guy hasn't even proposed a real theory!

I'd advise Slashdot readers to look at the Cosmology and Relativity FAQs, since they probably answer a lot of questions people are tempted to ask.

We're still using 68030 macs on up to new G4's here at my school. The largest Mac labs are all 6100 w/G3 upgrades. These machines came out in '94. As long as the machines hold out, they won't give me any more money to upgrade. In a way, it kinda' sucks. We get about 100 new pc's a year but less than 20 new Macs. It's used Macs the rest of the time. They just came out with upgrade cards for LC's (33MHz '040's). Might get some of those and the Project Appleseed clustering software to build a small cluster of pizza boxes. G

I use CFS - Cryptographic Filesystem, personally.

Admittedly, this still leaves you vulnerable to the script kiddie that gets in and can get at /crypt; that is probably still nearly as protectable as kernel-based approaches...

Of course, that's another reason why it sucks so bad. Not only does it make it illegal to fairly use the media you buy, it incorporates new rules on digital media. That's why they put in the Digital Millenium Copyright act, so they could set up special copyrights for digital media. What you fear, you try to destroy.

It's about control (because control gets you $$$), Lobbying is an investment.

Here's a good link that outlines some its special provisions, (sarcasm) note how many of them are there to protect consumers (/s>
--

Appleseed! A parallel mac cluster for numerically intensive computing.
it's a start!

A great place to look for information about the interaction between society and technology is Phil Agre's Red Rock Eater List. Phil is a professor at UCLA, specializing in the study of the social effects of technology. RRE allows him to share some of the information he comes across -- postings include book lists and excerpts; preprint papers; white papers on technological issues (there's been lots of valuable information on UCITA and ICANN); notes on what he's been reading and thinking about, as well as pointers to cheap pens; conference announcements; and more.

Phil has lots of papers on his personal page, many of which would satisfy your request. There's also a bibliography of books on the social aspects of computing, and some excellent resources (highly recommended: Networking on the Network, How to Help Someone Use a Computer, and Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School.

The RRE Web site (notes above) includes some links to book excerpts, including the following:

• Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (November 1999).
• The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (February 2000).
• Society on the Line: Information Politics in the Digital Age by William H. Dutton (January 1999).
• Database Nation by Simson Garfinkel (January 2000).
• Telecommunications and the City: Parallel Transformations by Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (October 1996).
• Net Loss: Government, Technology and the Political Economy of Community in the Age of the Internet by Nathan Newman (July 1999).
• Ben Franklin's Web Site: Privacy and Curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet by Robert Ellis Smith (March 2000).

You'll also find links to David Noble's ``Digital Diploma Mills'' series (on the rise of ``distance learning''), and lots more.

Speaking of David Noble, he also specializes in the study of the social impacts of technology, and one or more of his books might be appropriate for your class (although he's not particularly focused on computing). I first encountered his work as an undergrad in a class called ``Science, Technology, and Society'', which included Noble's America by Design (Knopf, 1977) (about the professionalization of engineering in America). Your best bet would probably be Progress Without People (Between the Lines, 1995).

Donald Norman, although mostly focused on user-centered design of computers and software, also has lots of insights into the ways in which people work with computers. The Design of Everyday Things (Doubleday, 1988; called The Psychology of Everyday Things in hardcover) is a classic; you may be especially interested in Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine (Addison-Wesley, 1993) and The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution (MIT Press, 1998).

Finally, take a look at Peter G. Neumann's Computer-Related Risks (based on the RISKS Digest) (ACM Press (Addison-Wesley), 1995) and Thomas K. Landauer's The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity (MIT Press, 1995).

A great place to look for information about the interaction between society and technology is Phil Agre's Red Rock Eater List. Phil is a professor at UCLA, specializing in the study of the social effects of technology. RRE allows him to share some of the information he comes across -- postings include book lists and excerpts; preprint papers; white papers on technological issues (there's been lots of valuable information on UCITA and ICANN); notes on what he's been reading and thinking about, as well as pointers to cheap pens; conference announcements; and more.

Phil has lots of papers on his personal page, many of which would satisfy your request. There's also a bibliography of books on the social aspects of computing, and some excellent resources (highly recommended: Networking on the Network, How to Help Someone Use a Computer, and Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School.

The RRE Web site (notes above) includes some links to book excerpts, including the following:

• Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (November 1999).
• The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (February 2000).
• Society on the Line: Information Politics in the Digital Age by William H. Dutton (January 1999).
• Database Nation by Simson Garfinkel (January 2000).
• Telecommunications and the City: Parallel Transformations by Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (October 1996).
• Net Loss: Government, Technology and the Political Economy of Community in the Age of the Internet by Nathan Newman (July 1999).
• Ben Franklin's Web Site: Privacy and Curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet by Robert Ellis Smith (March 2000).

You'll also find links to David Noble's ``Digital Diploma Mills'' series (on the rise of ``distance learning''), and lots more.

Speaking of David Noble, he also specializes in the study of the social impacts of technology, and one or more of his books might be appropriate for your class (although he's not particularly focused on computing). I first encountered his work as an undergrad in a class called ``Science, Technology, and Society'', which included Noble's America by Design (Knopf, 1977) (about the professionalization of engineering in America). Your best bet would probably be Progress Without People (Between the Lines, 1995).

Donald Norman, although mostly focused on user-centered design of computers and software, also has lots of insights into the ways in which people work with computers. The Design of Everyday Things (Doubleday, 1988; called The Psychology of Everyday Things in hardcover) is a classic; you may be especially interested in Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine (Addison-Wesley, 1993) and The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution (MIT Press, 1998).

Finally, take a look at Peter G. Neumann's Computer-Related Risks (based on the RISKS Digest) (ACM Press (Addison-Wesley), 1995) and Thomas K. Landauer's The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity (MIT Press, 1995).

A great place to look for information about the interaction between society and technology is Phil Agre's Red Rock Eater List. Phil is a professor at UCLA, specializing in the study of the social effects of technology. RRE allows him to share some of the information he comes across -- postings include book lists and excerpts; preprint papers; white papers on technological issues (there's been lots of valuable information on UCITA and ICANN); notes on what he's been reading and thinking about, as well as pointers to cheap pens; conference announcements; and more.

Phil has lots of papers on his personal page, many of which would satisfy your request. There's also a bibliography of books on the social aspects of computing, and some excellent resources (highly recommended: Networking on the Network, How to Help Someone Use a Computer, and Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School.

The RRE Web site (notes above) includes some links to book excerpts, including the following:

• Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (November 1999).
• The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (February 2000).
• Society on the Line: Information Politics in the Digital Age by William H. Dutton (January 1999).
• Database Nation by Simson Garfinkel (January 2000).
• Telecommunications and the City: Parallel Transformations by Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (October 1996).
• Net Loss: Government, Technology and the Political Economy of Community in the Age of the Internet by Nathan Newman (July 1999).
• Ben Franklin's Web Site: Privacy and Curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet by Robert Ellis Smith (March 2000).

You'll also find links to David Noble's ``Digital Diploma Mills'' series (on the rise of ``distance learning''), and lots more.

Speaking of David Noble, he also specializes in the study of the social impacts of technology, and one or more of his books might be appropriate for your class (although he's not particularly focused on computing). I first encountered his work as an undergrad in a class called ``Science, Technology, and Society'', which included Noble's America by Design (Knopf, 1977) (about the professionalization of engineering in America). Your best bet would probably be Progress Without People (Between the Lines, 1995).

Donald Norman, although mostly focused on user-centered design of computers and software, also has lots of insights into the ways in which people work with computers. The Design of Everyday Things (Doubleday, 1988; called The Psychology of Everyday Things in hardcover) is a classic; you may be especially interested in Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine (Addison-Wesley, 1993) and The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution (MIT Press, 1998).

Finally, take a look at Peter G. Neumann's Computer-Related Risks (based on the RISKS Digest) (ACM Press (Addison-Wesley), 1995) and Thomas K. Landauer's The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity (MIT Press, 1995).

A great place to look for information about the interaction between society and technology is Phil Agre's Red Rock Eater List. Phil is a professor at UCLA, specializing in the study of the social effects of technology. RRE allows him to share some of the information he comes across -- postings include book lists and excerpts; preprint papers; white papers on technological issues (there's been lots of valuable information on UCITA and ICANN); notes on what he's been reading and thinking about, as well as pointers to cheap pens; conference announcements; and more.

Phil has lots of papers on his personal page, many of which would satisfy your request. There's also a bibliography of books on the social aspects of computing, and some excellent resources (highly recommended: Networking on the Network, How to Help Someone Use a Computer, and Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School.

The RRE Web site (notes above) includes some links to book excerpts, including the following:

• Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (November 1999).
• The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (February 2000).
• Society on the Line: Information Politics in the Digital Age by William H. Dutton (January 1999).
• Database Nation by Simson Garfinkel (January 2000).
• Telecommunications and the City: Parallel Transformations by Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (October 1996).
• Net Loss: Government, Technology and the Political Economy of Community in the Age of the Internet by Nathan Newman (July 1999).
• Ben Franklin's Web Site: Privacy and Curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet by Robert Ellis Smith (March 2000).

You'll also find links to David Noble's ``Digital Diploma Mills'' series (on the rise of ``distance learning''), and lots more.

Speaking of David Noble, he also specializes in the study of the social impacts of technology, and one or more of his books might be appropriate for your class (although he's not particularly focused on computing). I first encountered his work as an undergrad in a class called ``Science, Technology, and Society'', which included Noble's America by Design (Knopf, 1977) (about the professionalization of engineering in America). Your best bet would probably be Progress Without People (Between the Lines, 1995).

Donald Norman, although mostly focused on user-centered design of computers and software, also has lots of insights into the ways in which people work with computers. The Design of Everyday Things (Doubleday, 1988; called The Psychology of Everyday Things in hardcover) is a classic; you may be especially interested in Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine (Addison-Wesley, 1993) and The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution (MIT Press, 1998).

Finally, take a look at Peter G. Neumann's Computer-Related Risks (based on the RISKS Digest) (ACM Press (Addison-Wesley), 1995) and Thomas K. Landauer's The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity (MIT Press, 1995).

A great place to look for information about the interaction between society and technology is Phil Agre's Red Rock Eater List. Phil is a professor at UCLA, specializing in the study of the social effects of technology. RRE allows him to share some of the information he comes across -- postings include book lists and excerpts; preprint papers; white papers on technological issues (there's been lots of valuable information on UCITA and ICANN); notes on what he's been reading and thinking about, as well as pointers to cheap pens; conference announcements; and more.

Phil has lots of papers on his personal page, many of which would satisfy your request. There's also a bibliography of books on the social aspects of computing, and some excellent resources (highly recommended: Networking on the Network, How to Help Someone Use a Computer, and Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School.

The RRE Web site (notes above) includes some links to book excerpts, including the following:

• Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (November 1999).
• The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (February 2000).
• Society on the Line: Information Politics in the Digital Age by William H. Dutton (January 1999).
• Database Nation by Simson Garfinkel (January 2000).
• Telecommunications and the City: Parallel Transformations by Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (October 1996).
• Net Loss: Government, Technology and the Political Economy of Community in the Age of the Internet by Nathan Newman (July 1999).
• Ben Franklin's Web Site: Privacy and Curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet by Robert Ellis Smith (March 2000).

You'll also find links to David Noble's ``Digital Diploma Mills'' series (on the rise of ``distance learning''), and lots more.

Speaking of David Noble, he also specializes in the study of the social impacts of technology, and one or more of his books might be appropriate for your class (although he's not particularly focused on computing). I first encountered his work as an undergrad in a class called ``Science, Technology, and Society'', which included Noble's America by Design (Knopf, 1977) (about the professionalization of engineering in America). Your best bet would probably be Progress Without People (Between the Lines, 1995).

Donald Norman, although mostly focused on user-centered design of computers and software, also has lots of insights into the ways in which people work with computers. The Design of Everyday Things (Doubleday, 1988; called The Psychology of Everyday Things in hardcover) is a classic; you may be especially interested in Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine (Addison-Wesley, 1993) and The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution (MIT Press, 1998).

Finally, take a look at Peter G. Neumann's Computer-Related Risks (based on the RISKS Digest) (ACM Press (Addison-Wesley), 1995) and Thomas K. Landauer's The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity (MIT Press, 1995).

A great place to look for information about the interaction between society and technology is Phil Agre's Red Rock Eater List. Phil is a professor at UCLA, specializing in the study of the social effects of technology. RRE allows him to share some of the information he comes across -- postings include book lists and excerpts; preprint papers; white papers on technological issues (there's been lots of valuable information on UCITA and ICANN); notes on what he's been reading and thinking about, as well as pointers to cheap pens; conference announcements; and more.

Phil has lots of papers on his personal page, many of which would satisfy your request. There's also a bibliography of books on the social aspects of computing, and some excellent resources (highly recommended: Networking on the Network, How to Help Someone Use a Computer, and Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School.

The RRE Web site (notes above) includes some links to book excerpts, including the following:

• Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (November 1999).
• The Social Life of Information by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (February 2000).
• Society on the Line: Information Politics in the Digital Age by William H. Dutton (January 1999).
• Database Nation by Simson Garfinkel (January 2000).
• Telecommunications and the City: Parallel Transformations by Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (October 1996).
• Net Loss: Government, Technology and the Political Economy of Community in the Age of the Internet by Nathan Newman (July 1999).
• Ben Franklin's Web Site: Privacy and Curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet by Robert Ellis Smith (March 2000).

You'll also find links to David Noble's ``Digital Diploma Mills'' series (on the rise of ``distance learning''), and lots more.

Speaking of David Noble, he also specializes in the study of the social impacts of technology, and one or more of his books might be appropriate for your class (although he's not particularly focused on computing). I first encountered his work as an undergrad in a class called ``Science, Technology, and Society'', which included Noble's America by Design (Knopf, 1977) (about the professionalization of engineering in America). Your best bet would probably be Progress Without People (Between the Lines, 1995).

Donald Norman, although mostly focused on user-centered design of computers and software, also has lots of insights into the ways in which people work with computers. The Design of Everyday Things (Doubleday, 1988; called The Psychology of Everyday Things in hardcover) is a classic; you may be especially interested in Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine (Addison-Wesley, 1993) and The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution (MIT Press, 1998).

Finally, take a look at Peter G. Neumann's Computer-Related Risks (based on the RISKS Digest) (ACM Press (Addison-Wesley), 1995) and Thomas K. Landauer's The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity (MIT Press, 1995).

Here at UCLA, they've just switched the CS operating systems class from hacking Minix to hacking Linux. Windows users who don't know Unix suddenly have to learn bash in two weeks and then begin hacking their own kernel syscalls when they're done with that. It makes for some interesting tech support for us at the UCLA LUG.

Here at UCLA, they've just switched the CS operating systems class from hacking Minix to hacking Linux. Windows users who don't know Unix suddenly have to learn bash in two weeks and then begin hacking their own kernel syscalls when they're done with that. It makes for some interesting tech support for us at the UCLA LUG.

please see The Second Amendment as Teaching Tool in Constitutional Law Classes for the correct meaning of well-regulated militia. From http://www.law.ucla.edu/faculty/volokh/2amteach.ht m#32 Militia" in the 1790s quite clearly referred to pretty much the entire adult male white citizenry (age 18 to 45). See United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). This is still the definition under the Militia Act of 1956, 10 U.S.C. 311, though of course extended beyond whites (and probably extended to women by the Court's recent equal protection cases); and it's one of the definitions given in the dictionary, see, e.g., Random House Dictionary 1220 defn. 3 (2d ed. unabridged 1987). Of course, most students first interpret the word in the more common modern meaning of a National Guard-like body.

This is the most distant quasar, but not by any means the most distant object we've seen so far. Astronomers have found a galaxy which is probably at redshift 6.68 (although this is based on a single emission line), and other galaxies definitely at redshifts larger than this new quasar. There are also hints that some of the galaxies visible in the Hubble Deep Field are at much greater redshift, perhaps z > 10, but that needs to be confirmed with spectroscopic observations.

For more details on some of the other, distant celestial objects, see
Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial.

He died exactly 2 weeks ago. Spooky! Search for "Peter Tripp" in here. It includes a link to his recent obituary. He had an ongoing career after the 200 hour experiment, so he probably wasn't a vegetable as one poster suggests. Here's another nice article which refers to a couple of long sleep deprivation experiments including Peter Tripp's. Apparently there were no long term side effects, but the short term effects were quite severe. One night's sleep is all it takes to recover. From my own experience, I've found that sleeping too much definitely causes loss of mental ability. I don't get much coding done until late at night after being awake most of the day, when I'm already feeling tired. It's annoying as I want to rest but that's when I get stuff done. On the other hand, communication with co-workers is often more effective earlier in the day. I've found my dark areas under the eyes tend to disappear when I get up early, not late. That really surprised me. I take that as one indicator of physical health, so now I'm not afraid to get up and feel tired when it seems like a good idea: tired does not necessarily mean I need rest. But I'm lazy so I tend to lie in anyway. :-) After a very long session of staying awake, one night is not quite enough to back to "normal". About 4 nights does the trick. But, "normal" is not my most alert, effective or communicative. enjoy,
-- Jamie

The UCLA linux users group has had their own distro out for a while now. Members of the UCLA LUG have also pushed the physics and chemistry lab classes to accept student work in the StarOffice format, previously they only accepted word and excel documents. The UCLA distro is preconfigured to connect to the campus LANs and from home on UCLA's dialups. They throw regular install fests and have a mailing list to boot.

The UCLA linux users group has had their own distro out for a while now. Members of the UCLA LUG have also pushed the physics and chemistry lab classes to accept student work in the StarOffice format, previously they only accepted word and excel documents. The UCLA distro is preconfigured to connect to the campus LANs and from home on UCLA's dialups. They throw regular install fests and have a mailing list to boot.

UCLALUG (http://www.linux.ucla.edu/) created their own distro, also. It's called Bruin Linux (for obvious reasons), and is basically Redhat + bug fixes, security advisories, and some development tools. It's also got UCLA networking stuff pre-configured. I think this is a great idea for users of big organizations where pre-configuring network stuff or custom apps is really helpful. UCLALUG also uses the distro for their install-fests - they've had a lot of sucess in that, and having everything in one easy ISO makes the install-fest a lot easier. I applaud their efforts, as they should be congratulated for what they've done. (You can find Bruin Linux here)

UCLALUG (http://www.linux.ucla.edu/) created their own distro, also. It's called Bruin Linux (for obvious reasons), and is basically Redhat + bug fixes, security advisories, and some development tools. It's also got UCLA networking stuff pre-configured. I think this is a great idea for users of big organizations where pre-configuring network stuff or custom apps is really helpful. UCLALUG also uses the distro for their install-fests - they've had a lot of sucess in that, and having everything in one easy ISO makes the install-fest a lot easier. I applaud their efforts, as they should be congratulated for what they've done. (You can find Bruin Linux here)

I attended ucla as a physics major while this project was still under way, and took a more basic, introduction to computer modelling of plasma systems. The professor doing a lot of the work in this field is John Dawson. Along with him, and IIRC, more in charge of the computer systems, is Victor Decyk.
Decyck taught half of the class, although he was technically a TA. He explained the progression away from high $$ "super computers", such as Crays, and the usefulness of clusters.

I also had the honor of working at JPL, where Decyk was a part-time scientist in the computing/analysis department for the Experimental Measurment Devices group.
If you look up something like "computer plasma modelling" on the 'net, you'll very likely find papers by these two...very interesting high-powered stuff - the mind boggles at just how much the computer is crunching when you realize that a large number of the plasma particles are interrelated spatially.

There's a somewhat humorous portion to the instructions, although I'm not sure it was intended. Check them out:

http://exodus.physics .ucla.edu/appleseed/appleseedrecipe.html

Setting this up is as easy as 1, 2, 3 apparently (despite, well, paying for everything). After a 3 step process, they put a little note at the bottom:

"Note: To build a Beowulf, a Linux-based cluster, we think the following 230-page book is an excellent introduction: T. L. Sterling, J. Salmon, D. J. Becker, and D. F. Savarese, How to Build a Beowulf, [MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999]."

A 230 page introduction? :>

- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)

Check out Project Appleseed for an example of a MacOS cluster supercomputer.

Yes, it's getting a bit old now (G3/266 beige towers.) Imagine what they could do now.

There are also no vectorizing compilers for the PPC 7400; the Metrowerks compiler will do inline AltaVec assembler, but it doesn't recognize vectoizable loops autmoatically and it doesn't support the linga franca of scientific computing (i.e. Fortran).

Some of what you are saying is greek to me, but here's a link from the Project Appleseed site seems to answer the need for a Mac OS Fortran compiler: Absoft Fortran 77 compiler.

Rather just read the text-intensive abstract on the system? Appleseed Report

--

Check out Project Appleseed for an example of a MacOS cluster supercomputer.

Yes, it's getting a bit old now (G3/266 beige towers.) Imagine what they could do now.

There are also no vectorizing compilers for the PPC 7400; the Metrowerks compiler will do inline AltaVec assembler, but it doesn't recognize vectoizable loops autmoatically and it doesn't support the linga franca of scientific computing (i.e. Fortran).

Some of what you are saying is greek to me, but here's a link from the Project Appleseed site seems to answer the need for a Mac OS Fortran compiler: Absoft Fortran 77 compiler.

Rather just read the text-intensive abstract on the system? Appleseed Report

--

I am not sure if these have already been mentioned, but those of you are having trouble with the site can find mirrors here:

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/mozilla/
http://www.dotnetat.net/mozilla/

I chatted with the creator of the Netscape Time Capsule, Chuck Lau, and setup a mirror for him on my employer's servers:

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/mozilla

Click here to go directly to the project abstract (more details, less graphics.)

--

Click here to go directly to the project abstract (more details, less graphics.)

--

WSU's Information Technology department has on many occasions stiffled the speech of students... untill they make a noise. My freshman year here there was a "Holocaust Revisionist" site that recieved complaints. From chatting with a few people about it I heard that they were "temporarily restrained", as is in the power of IT officials, from further "harassing" anyone. After they caused a stink they got their website back and produced an official statement from IT.

Following a flamewar on alt.religion.universal-life in which I posted a link to a domain name's administrative contact information (through nsi.com's whois) the targeted party recieved numerous calls that resulted not from that post, but an anonymous post under false pretenses to another newsgroup containing that phone number.

I was found guilty of harassment for providing information on how to access that publicly accessable document. So I assumed the "administrative position" (duck and grab ankles) and gave up my @wsu.edu email for the summer.

My account reactivation was delayed for two weeks because one of the officials (cough**cough**cBoIuGgGhOT!**cough) tought that it was inappropriate use of my unix account to host this student group's site. There was no complaint ever associated with the page. Yet the administration felt that they had the right to restrict my speech in order to "protect" me from "inducing a liability" on to myself (i.e. I would be liable for anything that appeared on that page, any complaints on that page would be complaints against me).

I ran headlong at this one, contacting the Ombudsman and attending a moderated meeting with upper administration. They rolled over and gave me a verbal appology (no official statement). Part of the run-arround was that upper administration acted on "policy" that IT officials had no jurisdiction to invent. IT in fact had no said policy and I have yet to meet with said IT official's boss to discuss the event.

Once again the stink caused the administration to draft some more "policy". Now students are supposed to link to a copyright and a disclaimer off of their home pages. Want to bet noone's done that yet? The new "policy" also is rendered practically useless. It says "WSU does not restrict the contents of electronic mail of staff, faculty, and students or the contents of faculty, staff, and student individual World Wide Web (Web) pages linked to the official WSU Web pages beyond the restrictions inherent in complying with the law."

Interestingly it is a state law that no student of WSU may harass another individual in any way. Harassment, anything that is "anoying, disturbing or perturbing," is definedly quite broad! Here is a good site covering the legal theory surrounding such issues. Basically it supports restricting one-to-one speech to prevent harassment, but determines that one-to-many speech should be protected as free speech.

An importaint distinction should be made that I'm not sure the author covers. Newsgroup postings are a one-to-many medium, but the comments may be directed to (or at) an individual. In this way should criticizing an individual be considered harassment? What about warning others that you think this individual is bad news? "Harassment" says the WSU administration, and a violation of "student conduct."

So... don't like the postings of a WSU student? Complain to abuse@wsu.edu and they're screwed!

Too bad WSU's policy isn't like WWU's or UW's; even CWU's policy is more lenient! Looks like EWU is in the same boat that WSU is in.

It's really (well, more accurately, that is) 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375 10

check out here as one of several pi repositories.

I think we probably agree that an effective program of making mass surveillance much more difficult is a good idea, and that the "hacktivists" behind "jam Echelon day" aren't accomplishing that. It wouldn't be very hard to cobble together dictionaries dealing with sensitive topics and use markov techniques to generate texts (say, a CGI-enabled web page running on SSL) that would give context analysis tools a run for their money. But something like that would even follow the principles of an effective online action instead of STOP THE MODEM-TAX!!!!-style of half-baked announcements, which the "hacktivists" seem to prefer.

So, is playing core wars now illegal? Sometimes writing malignant programs attempting evolution on one's computer (or network!) is a great way to learn about logic, memory protection, and security. If one cannot experiment in their own room on their computer legally, there will be either secrecy or a bunch of mouse pushers come next decade.

I worked on a project at UCLA that was microsoft sponsored, so I have a unique view into microsoft's world of academic sponsorship.

I'm a CS student at UCLA, now on leave to work fulltime, but during the last year and a half or so, I was working with one of the professors in the CS department and some other CS students to build a departmental infrastructure using ASP and SQL Server... We ended up getting sponsored by microsoft (they donated a few machines and more software than we could shake a stick at.)

While trying to get sponsored by microsoft, I got to talk a few times with their VP in charge of academic development (he works for microsoft research, the quasi-independant research side of MS). All of their academic programs are run through there, presumably to give them the stamp of independance. According to him, Microsoft's starting to get big in the university sponsorship area. Their plan is to have five "premiere" university partnerships (UCLA being one of them). I have no idea what the others are, but it sounds like indiana university is another one. Once they've created the premiere partner relationship, they start funding university projects, bringing down MS speakers to give talks (the talks usually revolve around presenting the latest microsoft products, surprisingly), and working their way into the system. I'm not sure what pressures UCLA faces to convert over to NT, but I know a *lot* of their systems use it. Microsoft also has a campus representative, a student who gets paid to run around promoting microsoft, coordinating presentations on site, and being the student side of the public face for microsoft.

On the plus side, the LUG at ucla is pretty darn active, www.linux.ucla.edu although they can always use more help. Aspiring college students, if you want a challenge, head on over to UCLA...

Yes, I'm replying to my own message. From the timeline on UCLA's site it looks like Sept 2 was the first ping within a node, but on Octo 20 they actually sent a message to another host, at the Stanford Research Institute. Personally, I'd side with the second as the real birthday.

UCLA built a cluster of Macs. Check it out here .

... one of the researchers has a homepage with some seriously detailed background information on the technology involved. Drill down to the research index. An interview with one of the HP scientists is here. Anybody else notice all these people are from Rice?

The website for Nexx Online does not show their contract. But from the FAQ, Nexx is not an ISP and only provides web hosting. There is no mention of spamming, probably because it's not easy to spam with the tools which they provide.

I think the spammer was spamming from ISPs, not from Nexx, and although spamming was not mentioned in the Nexx contract they cut off the spammer's response addresses.

So the significance of the ruling is actually that the Netiquette common sense was added to the contract. I think it is right, and wonder if "The Tragedy of the Commons" (game theory analysis, electronic commons) has been recognized by English law.

Old, but interesting. Check it out.

I got tired of replacing these cheap CPU fans that keep dying on me (Do they *all* suck?). They don't seem to last very long and they don't blow a lot of air onto the heat sink. So I mounted a squirrel-cage type blower above my CPU. 10X the airflow of a regular fan; no condensation problems (unlike peltier or liquid [pick your favorite gas] CPU cooling); and still quiet. I'm not trying to overclock, but even stock stuff gets hot in my non-airconditioned room here in Las Vegas where ambient room temp reaches 100+ sometimes. Check it out here.

They don't "overlook" it; it's simply not a problem. See the FAQ. The universe isn't a black hole, either; see the other FAQ.

Here's some links to check out:

sci.astro Cosmology FAQ
Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial

The above question is discussed, among other things.

Double the image size and apply a logarithmic contrast adjustment on that image. The logo is then very easily seen.

*sigh* I told Steve it was a bad idea to build an Appleseed cluster out of all those unsold PowerBook 5300s!