Russia seems to have been very strong in mathematics and theoretical computer science. Impressive stuff. Of course, nowadays, most good Eastern European researchers are in Europe and the United States...
I think that the reason is that US laboratories tend to have huge means. DARPA $500k research contracts for relatively small things seem to be relatively commonplace in the US. In Europe, it seems that governments are more reluctant to dole out money.
> Europe is less under the grip of the Corporate > State, yes (and more under the grip of the > Police State)
Having worked in the US and in Western Europe, I don't quite see what you are alluding to. Several people, having witnessed US and european cops in their tasks, told me that US cops tended to be ruder and to resort to force more often.
My personal feeling is that the US federal state is quite an oppressive bureaucracy. The mere idea of allowing tax agents to build armed operations seems outlandish in Europe.
It is a well-known fact that people that don't have reasonable arguments and haven't researched what they talk about, as Mr Fergeus, inevitably end up making vague and grandiloquious attacks on people. Another rule of that kind of nasty play is that history and politics are dragged into cases they don't belong.
In extreme-leftist publications, it is customary to call people the publication disapproves of "fascists". In extreme-rightist publications, words like "faggots" or "socialist" are used. In rightist publications, "communist".
Of course, nothing of this changes the FACTS or the FACTUAL REPORT. This isn't a coincidence that there's little fact in Mr Fergeus' column.
In a nutshell: I've seen often Communist leaflets or newspapers, and Mr Fergeus' column really reminds me of them...:-)
Also, please note the style: lots of sentences containing obscure allusions, lots of babble...
I hope for the reputation of the university that granted Mr Fergeus' degree that he didn't write his dissertation like this.
As a PhD student, I can tell you that you can get a PhD without really knowing how to write in your mother tongue. Furthermore, he can have a PhD in economics or social sciences, which doesn't even means he can use a word processor.
I myself think that the use of titles like "PhD" in contexts where they don't belong is awfully pretentious...
I'd like to know what really puzzles so many people about the 2.2.1 kernel on RedHat / Mandrake 5.2. I myself upgraded the kernel and have had no particular problem to do this.
(Sigh) 1. Once again, I am forced to say... PLEASE VERIFY WHAT YOU SAY BEFORE POSTING IT. Excerpt from the XFree86 3.3.3.1 documentation, available from the XFREE86 site:
This driver supports good acceleration for both the NV1/STG2000 as well as the Riva128. It is known to work on PCI and AGP versions of the Riva128. The Riva TNT was added to this driver and is not yet as well accelerated as it could be. Still, the server is very usable.
Now, perhaps RedHat's install program doesn't recognize the card. That's another problem. 2. I am a XFree86 developper and am sick and tired of people saying "XFree86 is a piece of shit since it doesn't support XXX while Windows does.". To support a card, XFree needs either: - authoritative documentation, a machine to test things on, and somebody willing to write the driver; - a driver written by the card's maker or some other party that has had the necessary documentation and hardware. If a card vendor refuses to give the proper documentation (has Matrox did for a long time) and doesn't give any driver, then the card is not supported, period. XFree also has a chronic problem of shortage of competent people with the proper hardware to test and fix bugs.
> I take it the Euro-Parliament isn't part of the > EU then?
The European parliament is the elected legislative body of the EU. It doesn't have much power, which is due to the rather peculiar process by which "European legislation" is taken.
The United Kingdom is indeed a member of the EU, albeit it has managed to get exemption for lots of issues. Also, the Conservative governments that have ruled the UK during the 80 and 90's and a significant part of the UK press have been playing a lot with nationalistic feelings against the EU.
* Some people have remarked here that it's already easy to support people by donating money or equipment. I don't quite agree:
- There is a world outside of the United States, and international money orders are expensive (something like $10 for a $50 real transfert of money). An organization... is better organized (can make bulkier transferts, which are much less expensive).
- It's not easy sometimes seeing who you are dealing with. An organization is better equipped to track what they are doing.
* To the wise-asses who comment on communism: there's a so-called Goodwin's law that says that in Usenet discussions the probability that somebody will make a reference to Nazi Germany goes to one when the discussion time goes up. It seems that this law has to be adapted to also include stalinian communism.
* The problem with such an organization is that, as in all organizations, it would get plagued by politics and design-by-committee.
- For politics: see the FSF and all the rabid discussions on RMS' thoughts.
- For design-by-committee: the problem here is that waiting for nearly-unanimous approval kills project. Everybody wants his/her pet feature in it; see the Linux kernel and how Linus Torvalds has to say "this is really freeze time". It's no easy task running efficiently an organization of volunteers (much harder task than running employees: you can tell employees they're paid to do their jobs; you can't vex volunteers).
Sending data by a trusted courier carrying a tamper-proof suitcase is useless if you leave the keys to your office on the door. Nothing new to this.
It is high time that people begin to understand that security on the Net is often more likely to be breached on the host (with trojans, viruses...) than by intercepting some communication.
Sadly, nearly all efforts for end-user products seem to have been directed to security of the communication link (pgp, SSL) but have neglected securing the hosts. That leaves users with a false impression of security.
both Ghostscript and X (with recent patches) support both Type 1 and TrueType fonts. Sadly, there are two problems:
1. conversion tables between X and Ghostscript fonts;
2. font installation (installing a font means updating two configuration files, each with its own syntax, using information that has to be extracted from the font).
I think 1. can be addressed by storing some properties into the X server (that doesn't need any fix to the X server; the xinit system could simply load some data into the X server).
For 2., I think a neat idea would be to make simple command line utilities that would take a TrueType or Type 1 font file and (des)install it, and a simple wrapper.
Yes, as a foreign visitor, it seemed to me completely insane that so many private companies (banks, telcos...) were requiring SSNs all the time. What a *** bureaucracy! And when English is a foreign language, you LOVE those IRS forms talking about lots of stuff you don't know anything about.
Don't want to sound chauvinistic, but last time I had to get a phone line opened in France, I phoned the telco (toll-free) from a public payphone, told them my address, and they got it opened the next working day. And they do the paperwork AFTERWARDS (basically sending you a bill).
When I was in the US, I wanted to open an account and was very much surprised that they required a "social security number". What a lot of fuss and red tape just for a checking account. Then they told me I could go without a SSN if I filled an IRS form. I had to fill a something like 6-page IRS form written in obscure fiscal and financial legalese.
So it seems that the SSN thing comes from IRS regulations.
You might be interesting to know that until very recently, the French fiscal authorities were prevented by law from using the social security number, and that changing this made such a fuss that I actually wonder whether it will actually get voted.
In the 70's, when computer-aided big brother-kind of behaviour from governments was feared, France passed a law requiring computerized files containing personal information to be declared to an independent authority and requiring government agencies and companies filing such information to offer filed people a right to correct wrong information. Filing of religious, political or racial information was banned.
It seems that the law was a good idea, albeit nowadays we less have to fear "big government" than "big business".
You managed to put several pieces of desinformation in this little sentence. If this wasn't your intention, then I suggest you to change your sources of information. May I point to you that the US press, in general, is a very bad source for foreign news?
France didn't sue anybody. Some private association denounced an alleged infringement of the law. The whole thing didn't even get judged because that association didn't even file their complaint properly.
The alleged fact that this association received government subsidies is irrelevant. First, the government by itself can ask for penal inquiries without needing some private association to file a complaint. Second, dozens of associations get some subsidies; these are usually targeted at funding some precise project led by those associations and do not mean a general endorsement of their policies by the government.
Second: the accusation was not publishing a WWW site in English, but publishing ADVERTISEMENT in English only. The laws on wrongful advertisement in France are strict, and it was thought some years ago that it might be prudent to request at least subtitles on foreign language advertisements.
Whether or not the Georgia Tech Lorraine site contained advertisements targeted at the general French public was not judiciarily investigated.
Ah, also. The French government and its agencies publish WWW sites in multiple languages. I've yet to see US government official sites in French.
Last year, top government officials were contacted by Microsoft, which basically said that France was "behind" in information technology and Microsoft would help it improved its education system on advanced technologies. Bill Gates even met Chirac on this.
Of course, lots of people (engineers, academics...) didn't like this. The problem was that Microsoft did its marketing right: the POLITICIANS are indeed very backward when it comes to technology, and they can get misled by clever marketdroids. If I were even more cynical, I'd say that politicians think of themselves as so bright and intelligent that if they are nonknowledgeable in a particular area, then it must be that the whole country is as ignorant as them.
So AFUL was founded notably by people from INRIA. AFUL is mainly a lobbying group for Linux and free software.
Our American friends may not be aware of this, but the bugs in Windows and Linux advocacy have been discussed on prime-time nation-wide radios; not to mention the mainstream magazines and journals talking about Linux.
I begin to think that after all academics can make good lobbyists.
Slashdot Mirror
Russia seems to have been very strong in mathematics and theoretical computer science. Impressive stuff. Of course, nowadays, most good Eastern European researchers are in Europe and the United States...
I think that the reason is that US laboratories tend to have huge means. DARPA $500k research contracts for relatively small things seem to be relatively commonplace in the US. In Europe, it seems that governments are more reluctant to dole out money.
> Europe is less under the grip of the Corporate
> State, yes (and more under the grip of the
> Police State)
Having worked in the US and in Western Europe, I don't quite see what you are alluding to. Several people, having witnessed US and european cops in their tasks, told me that US cops tended to be ruder and to resort to force more often.
My personal feeling is that the US federal state is quite an oppressive bureaucracy. The mere idea of allowing tax agents to build armed operations seems outlandish in Europe.
It is a well-known fact that people that don't have reasonable arguments and haven't researched what they talk about, as Mr Fergeus, inevitably end up making vague and grandiloquious attacks on people. Another rule of that kind of nasty play is that history and politics are dragged into cases they don't belong.
:-)
In extreme-leftist publications, it is customary to call people the publication disapproves of "fascists". In extreme-rightist publications, words like "faggots" or "socialist" are used. In rightist publications, "communist".
Of course, nothing of this changes the FACTS or the FACTUAL REPORT. This isn't a coincidence that there's little fact in Mr Fergeus' column.
In a nutshell: I've seen often Communist leaflets or newspapers, and Mr Fergeus' column really reminds me of them...
Also, please note the style: lots of sentences containing obscure allusions, lots of babble...
I hope for the reputation of the university that granted Mr Fergeus' degree that he didn't write his dissertation like this.
As a PhD student, I can tell you that you can get a PhD without really knowing how to write in your mother tongue. Furthermore, he can have a PhD in economics or social sciences, which doesn't even means he can use a word processor.
I myself think that the use of titles like "PhD" in contexts where they don't belong is awfully pretentious...
I'd like to know what really puzzles so many people about the 2.2.1 kernel on RedHat / Mandrake 5.2. I myself upgraded the kernel and have had no particular problem to do this.
> I take it the Euro-Parliament isn't part of the
> EU then?
The European parliament is the elected legislative body of the EU. It doesn't have much power, which is due to the rather peculiar process by which "European legislation" is taken.
The United Kingdom is indeed a member of the EU, albeit it has managed to get exemption for lots of issues. Also, the Conservative governments that have ruled the UK during the 80 and 90's and a significant part of the UK press have been playing a lot with nationalistic feelings against the EU.
The idea sounds interesting. A few comments:
* Some people have remarked here that it's already easy to support people by donating money or equipment. I don't quite agree:
- There is a world outside of the United States, and international money orders are expensive (something like $10 for a $50 real transfert of money). An organization... is better organized (can make bulkier transferts, which are much less expensive).
- It's not easy sometimes seeing who you are dealing with. An organization is better equipped to track what they are doing.
* To the wise-asses who comment on communism: there's a so-called Goodwin's law that says that in Usenet discussions the probability that somebody will make a reference to Nazi Germany goes to one when the discussion time goes up. It seems that this law has to be adapted to also include stalinian communism.
* The problem with such an organization is that, as in all organizations, it would get plagued by politics and design-by-committee.
- For politics: see the FSF and all the rabid discussions on RMS' thoughts.
- For design-by-committee: the problem here is that waiting for nearly-unanimous approval kills project. Everybody wants his/her pet feature in it; see the Linux kernel and how Linus Torvalds has to say "this is really freeze time". It's no easy task running efficiently an organization of volunteers (much harder task than running employees: you can tell employees they're paid to do their jobs; you can't vex volunteers).
Sending data by a trusted courier carrying a tamper-proof suitcase is useless if you leave the keys to your office on the door. Nothing new to this.
It is high time that people begin to understand that security on the Net is often more likely to be breached on the host (with trojans, viruses...) than by intercepting some communication.
Sadly, nearly all efforts for end-user products seem to have been directed to security of the communication link (pgp, SSL) but have neglected securing the hosts. That leaves users with a false impression of security.
Hi all,
both Ghostscript and X (with recent patches) support both Type 1 and TrueType fonts. Sadly, there are two problems:
1. conversion tables between X and Ghostscript fonts;
2. font installation (installing a font means updating two configuration files, each with its own syntax, using information that has to be extracted from the font).
I think 1. can be addressed by storing some properties into the X server (that doesn't need any fix to the X server; the xinit system could simply load some data into the X server).
For 2., I think a neat idea would be to make simple command line utilities that would take a TrueType or Type 1 font file and (des)install it, and a simple wrapper.
What do you think of that?
Yes, as a foreign visitor, it seemed to me completely insane that so many private companies (banks, telcos...) were requiring SSNs all the time. What a *** bureaucracy! And when English is a foreign language, you LOVE those IRS forms talking about lots of stuff you don't know anything about.
Don't want to sound chauvinistic, but last time I had to get a phone line opened in France, I phoned the telco (toll-free) from a public payphone, told them my address, and they got it opened the next working day. And they do the paperwork AFTERWARDS (basically sending you a bill).
When I was in the US, I wanted to open an account and was very much surprised that they required a "social security number". What a lot of fuss and red tape just for a checking account. Then they told me I could go without a SSN if I filled an IRS form. I had to fill a something like 6-page IRS form written in obscure fiscal and financial legalese.
So it seems that the SSN thing comes from IRS regulations.
You might be interesting to know that until very recently, the French fiscal authorities were prevented by law from using the social security number, and that changing this made such a fuss that I actually wonder whether it will actually get voted.
In the 70's, when computer-aided big brother-kind of behaviour from governments was feared, France passed a law requiring computerized files containing personal information to be declared to an independent authority and requiring government agencies and companies filing such information to offer filed people a right to correct wrong information. Filing of religious, political or racial information was banned.
It seems that the law was a good idea, albeit nowadays we less have to fear "big government" than "big business".
You managed to put several pieces of desinformation in this little sentence. If this wasn't your intention, then I suggest you to change your sources of information. May I point to you that the US press, in general, is a very bad source for foreign news?
France didn't sue anybody. Some private association denounced an alleged infringement of the law. The whole thing didn't even get judged because that association didn't even file their complaint properly.
The alleged fact that this association received government subsidies is irrelevant. First, the government by itself can ask for penal inquiries without needing some private association to file a complaint. Second, dozens of associations get some subsidies; these are usually targeted at funding some precise project led by those associations and do not mean a general endorsement of their policies by the government.
Second: the accusation was not publishing a WWW site in English, but publishing ADVERTISEMENT in English only. The laws on wrongful advertisement in France are strict, and it was thought some years ago that it might be prudent to request at least subtitles on foreign language advertisements.
Whether or not the Georgia Tech Lorraine site contained advertisements targeted at the general French public was not judiciarily investigated.
Ah, also. The French government and its agencies publish WWW sites in multiple languages. I've yet to see US government official sites in French.
For the "small history":
Last year, top government officials were contacted by Microsoft, which basically said that France was "behind" in information technology and Microsoft would help it improved its education system on advanced technologies. Bill Gates even met Chirac on this.
Of course, lots of people (engineers, academics...) didn't like this. The problem was that Microsoft did its marketing right: the POLITICIANS are indeed very backward when it comes to technology, and they can get misled by clever marketdroids. If I were even more cynical, I'd say that politicians think of themselves as so bright and intelligent that if they are nonknowledgeable in a particular area, then it must be that the whole country is as ignorant as them.
So AFUL was founded notably by people from INRIA. AFUL is mainly a lobbying group for Linux and free software.
Our American friends may not be aware of this, but the bugs in Windows and Linux advocacy have been discussed on prime-time nation-wide radios; not to mention the mainstream magazines and journals talking about Linux.
I begin to think that after all academics can make good lobbyists.
There's such a thing called "reality". It's the thing you should check your beliefs and prejudices against BEFORE posting. Think of it.