Yup, you can have multiple VNC sessions connected to any given Linux or Unix box.
How? A VNC Server on Linux isn't an application which mirrors what your main X display/screen is doing, which is what is happening on VNC for Mac, Windows. Instead, it's creating a new X11 server, with a completely different set of running applications displaying to it, an X11 server you can incidentally connect to via VNC to control.
This has the draw back that you aren't connecting to what you saw on your screen when you left the house. To my knowledge there is no way of serving your current set of app running on your desktop out to the wide world using VNC, excepting going through the relative hassle of using an X proxy system like xmove, and moving all o your X clients between your PC's X server and the VNC X server depending on where you are.
Likewise, you can do this on Windows- but you are limited to running X11 apps. I know some companies make various products which export Windows apps via the X11 protocol- perhaps there is a way to have multiple Windows VNC sessions after all..
I also have to admit: eXceed kicks a few asses. I used it once on a job (but not since) to run various Linux and Unix app remotely on the Win2k machine they had for me. It was damn fast- hell, I even was running Enlightenment remotely with no problem at all! It was amazing.
Not sure what kind of old, retired computers you've been using, but the majority of them are warm and noisy, which is what the poster is trying to avoid.
You could buy an old laptop perhaps, or do plenty of research to find am older, yet cool and quiet PC or Mac desktop. One of those fan-less iMacs?
Yes, sure you can disassemble the machine code, produce some C code from that and then recompile for a new target CPU but it's not going to work for the vast majority of applications.
Decompiling to C must have changed quite a bit since I last tried it, around 10 years ago. If not, it seems like you'd run into nothing *but* problems with platform-specificity.
That is, the only C decompilers I've tried did in fact take a binary and output C- however, the C was just a bunch of inline assembly statements and the like. A cruel joke for a younger nerd wondering how the programs he used worked.:P I suppose you could still call functions out of it perhaps, but it wasn't that useful beyond that, not from the standpoint of understanding- at least no more than just looking at it through a disassembler.
I never said that reading would help me lose weight, nor did I say I stopped watching TV and/or began to read so that I would. I don't think I mentioned weight loss at all. I was relating a story, the value of which is evidentally not clear.
I guess should've have mentioned the fluorescents, it seems to have confused you (and probably other folks). The full-spectrum bulbs we have are not fluorescent.
I can't say that I have even heard about any supposed health benefits derived from full-spectrum lighting, or any other purported or proved claims.
However, we use full-spectrum bulbs a few places around the house, anywhere we don't have flourescent bulbs. Why? It just looks nicer! My SO and I can't stand the yellowness of regular bulbs, and we prever the whiter light of the full-spectrum guys, especially for reading and similar activities.
Let's hope that the next step in this research isn't adding a bed pan- you'd never have to leave this fat-a-tron. Eat, piss, shit and watch TV- all without having to move from your spot!
Perhaps the creators of this couch are just going to use it for massive data collection- think of the beautiful body of data one would have if you collected user, weight, channel/program, and food ordering preference data from all of these couches?
Jesus, just thinking about it makes my insides quiver in joy! I could have a data analyziation party, so many statistics, differential eq models, mm mmm good!
1. I watch almost no TV. Perhaps 1 hr/week, 2 hr/week if there is something special. 2. I read a lot. 3. I'm a fatty.
I kind of think as myself as having some funky form of OCD, some sort of slightly humorous and completely benign form. My obsessions are efficiency (but in my own backward way) and reading, kind of related.
I read all the time when I'm not engaged in activity with someone else. I read when I go take a dump. I read when I'm eating alone at the table. I read on the bus, and when I'm watiting for it. When I'm driving, I sometimes pick up my PDA at the stop light, only to read a half a sentence. I used to read when I was walking between classes, although I've stopped that for the most part. (I also usually beatbox when walking around, and I don't like getting spittle on my PDA screen!) Hell, I even read when I'm standing up going pee, although I often only get in.5-1 pages.
I do all this to a lesser extent when I'm reading a paper book or magazine, but I can take it quite far when I'm reading electronically stored books on my PDA. Reading on a PDA is great- I love not having to flip pages. I can set JustReader+ to do auto-scroll, and while I'm standing there doing something manual and repetitive (like cutting up vegetables for dinner), I can read. With the PDA, I don't have to worry about flipping pages when my hands are dirty, keping a bookmark, or similar things. I don't have to worry about what I'll read next when I'm done- I typically have a few books in waiting on my PDA for when I do finish.
Does anyone else do this, or am I that weird?:P
I am not sure the purpose of this message- I know that reading with a PDA instead of a book isn't responsible for my fat-ness, so do not misinterpret it that way.
Although yes, reading a book is a little less sedentary, if only because your brain is being engaged. Flipping pages isn't all that much more work than flipping channels, though. However, depending on your position, sometimes holding the reading material up in some place can be a titch more exercise. And, I swear, fighting with the damned news paper has gotta be something as well.:)
While I watch no TV now, I used to watch more. TV is like a drug, and so many people throughout the US, Canada and elsewhere are addicted. I do not mean this as convenient metaphor. I have felt the changes that come about in my brain when parking my ass somewhere comfortable and watching TV for hours.
I stopped watching TV for a number of reasons, a big one being that I don't like dealing with its schedule. My code, the book I'm reading, a nearby park- all things that don't require me to show up or pick up at a specific hour of the day. Having to remember to watch some certain channel at some certain time to see some show it way too much hassle. Not surprisingly, I also hate the drugged feeling of being a "couch potato."
I think that drugged feeling should be investigated more by science- I wouldn't be surprised at all if there was some connection between that, eating more, and the commercials or television content.
I wonder if most people notice this as well, or if they're simply too used to it to put a finger on it?
Above all, hibernate- and other OR maping layers- still put your objects into a relational database. Flat rows, dead objects. Not active. Again, this may not be important, but it depends on the design. Unless you change the database, not just the interface, that'll always be the case.
In a lot of ways, you are totally correct, but not quite.
I've done work with both a couple different kinds of OODBs as well as SQL-based RDBMS. Most of the OODBs I've used simple keep your data persistent. What do they do beyond this? All of those Database-Manager-Systems things. If I just had bubble memory, the current state of the changes I made to the objects would always be persistent and up-to-date. That may be fine for some things, but if you get into a multi-user or even just a bigger database. A system like Prevayler or other OODBMs like GemStone/S or Magma (my object database of choice) doesn't just save and load your objects to disk in a transparent fashion- they also have transactions, commits/aborts, logs, the ability to roll-back the database to what it was N commits ago.
Again, I can't say anything about Prevayler, not knowing anything about it, but Prevayler seems a bit more like simple bubble memory. That is, you have to keep your whole DB in RAM, which baffles me some. Why not write it to disk, or at least have that option? Anyway, most OODBs I've used are somewhere in between the simple persistence of Prevayler and a traditional relational database.
If I were writing an application in a non-OO language, I personally still think I'd prefer using some transparent persistent storage system like bubble memory, but a lot of procedural languages would need a library to make searching your data/structs a little better. A lot of OO language, especially Smalltalk, has a really good group of Collection classes built-in, and the language has the semantics such that searching a Dictionary (map) or an OrderedCollection (vector) of elements is just as efficient as writing an SQL statement.
In C, however, things are a lot dirtier, and you usually have to write a lot more code just to search your data. I suppose that's why SQL was born in the first place, but it's nothing that a well written library might not accomplish in languages that don't have a first-class collections system built-in.
I ran into the problem on a Dual 500 MHz G4- networking stopped working. The old ethernet driver restoration fixed the problem, and nothing else seems to have been affected. I do not think the machine has gigabit, just 10/100.
And like the parent pointed out, Linux can be just as costly, or even more so, to maintain than a Windows solution. Both a Windows and Linux solution will benefit greatly from a proper deployment, and in general, maintenence costs will be lower in either a Windows or Linux setup if your deployment was "proper."
The post said: I would love to find a way to make it work, but from the research I have done so far, it doesn't look like we are going to get any cost-savings (unless they miraculously decide to go with Linux).
Which sort of implies that the poster thinks that Linux will result in automatic cost savings. Nowhere does s/he mention that the savings of Linux is only found in deployment. Your post's parent addresses this common misconception.
No incompatibility per se, but it's a rough analogy. People often use an SQL RDBMS along with some layer in between it and their OO language, the layer "flattening" objects into rows in the database, and then dynamically reinstantiating the row into an object in that language.
This is all fine and dandy when you have simple data- a "Person" object filled with nothing but integers and strings flattens fine into an SQL row. But then again, you're kind of just using that object as something not much more than a C struct.
However, when you have more active objects- which generally arise when you are actually doing good OO design and programming- the interface falls apart some. What if I've got my data objects pointing to other complex objects, rather than just elemental/translatable types like strings, numbers, and dates? What if the state of object A depends directly on what is going on in object B?
In an OORDBMS translation system, the objects are essentially dead while in storage. Object A can point to Object B - another row in a different database which holds data from a different class- but it dead.
A good object oriented database, like GemStone (for Java or Smalltalk) allows the objects to remain "alive" while in storage. I have never used or read much about this Prevayler db, so I don't know where it lies. There are some database systems which claim to be an "OODB," but are little more than an RDBMS and an object translation layer built in.
Not all applications benefit from the OODB methodology, but there are plenty which do. For an OO system which saw some decent design, an OODB is often a good fit. If all of your data is relatively simple- for instance, a customer and parts database on an e-commerce site- an SQL database will probably fit well enough.
Drag-n-drop power is also something I miss when using Windows. I don't consider myself loyal to any platform, I'll use what works. On a PC, your drag-n-drop abilities are pretty severely limited to a handful of operations, and apps typically have to support it specifically. On Mac OS, a lot of areas support DnD without the developer having to write code for it especially. For instance, on the Mac, I can select some text- in an edit field, Word doc, or just on a webpage and drag it to my desktop. Or drag it to Emacs or some other editor.
This kind of functionality doesn't sound all that important. But it can really reduce the time it takes to grab some information, among other things. I can just select some text in my emacs-based IRC client and drag it to Safari, and it'll see that it's a URL and go there. Very handy.
The Adabas database application is not soemthing which can be replaced by BerekelyDB. They are very different things.
Adabas is a database application. It is like MS Access or Quatro Pro, or theKompany's Rekall app. It includes a database engine, which IIRC is called the same thing. (Adabas D or something) What is being discusse- and what is included with StarOffice- is a GUI-based db app like MS Access. You could replace Adabas in StarOffice with Bereley DB than you could replace Mozilla with wget.
However, it is possible that Sun could write a whole new database application using BDB as the backend; or, Sun could write a layer for storing word processing, spreadsheet and other kinds of documents in BDB, affording some cool features that we don't get with flat binary files (which suck).
Read the article. Just so you don't have to do all that work, I'll quote it-
"The database is incorporated in key components of the Sun Java Enterprise System, formerly known as Project Orion, and the Sun Java Enterprise Desktop System, formerly known as Project Mad Hatter, both launched on Tuesday."
No mention of StarOffice in that quote of products to use BDB, nor is it mentioned in the rest of the article.
Sun also uses Oracle, and there are articles which will confirm that. But that has nothing to do with StarOffice does it? (unless Adabas can access other database engines for backends, like how you can use Access as a front end to any ODBC SQL Db, etc etc)
Holy balls, man! I've asked this question a dozen times in a dozen different places- I never thought I'd find a possible answer!
It's been a long time, around 10 years, since I've seen this project. I didn't use it a ton when I did have it on DOS, and consequently don't have a really clear picture of it in my head. However, what you've described soudns like what I remember. Hell yeah!
I don't suppose you have a copy of the app/system/language aroudn anywhere, do you? I don't own any DOS or Windows machines anymore, but I"d be willing to install an x86 emulator just to play with this again, especially to see if it's what I remember. If you couldn't share the ZIP/ARJ/LZH itself, screnshots, some language snippets woiuld be fun too!
Jesus christ, please oh lord of lords (etc etc), let someone implement this on my Sharp Zaurus C760. I could really use it!
I've owned a lot of PDAs. But only this one takes like 5 minutes to boot. Literally. No joke. It may be 4 minutes, but I'm not just exaggerating. I've never seen a PDA that takes more than 15 seconds to boot on a reset, the other Zaurus model I've owned exempted (SL-5500), but even that seemed like a short wait compared to the SL-C760's boot time.
(and yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal if I didn't have to reboot often. But no matter how "robust" Linux is, I've had to reboot more often than one would think..."
Low chance anyone here will know what I was talking about, but in the case someone does...
Does anyone remember a programming language that was specifically for creating, training and using neural networks?
I've always been a big programming language addict. Back in the early 90s, being 12-14 years old and excited to finally have a modem, I was downloading every programming language for DOS I could find from all the BBSes I called.
I can't remember what it was called. I remember roughly what the IDE looked like, but very little else. It was a fun system- it had general-purpsose programming constructs, but was especially built for creating, training and using neural networks. I seem to recall the syntax having a semi-familiar pascal/algol/C-ish syntax; it wasn't just a library for Lisp or Scheme.
I've check the SimTel archives, and haven't been able to find it again. Oh, how awesome were BBSes... Stronger sense of community than the 'internet' seems to have. Anywho, thanks for any tips!
Who the hell thought that the 5 second rule was somehow proven scientifically before this? (The submitter/poster mentioned having his life shattered)
I mean, I will "use" the 5-sec rule. Plenty of folks do. But for most people, it's just a damned excuse to eat food that has fallen on the ground. I mean, why waste whatever it is as long as there isn't hair, sand, gravel, dust, toenail clippings or something else sick that happened to be where it landed? Did some of you schmucks really think this was something they "discovered" in the 50s or something, and just now disproved? C'mon! It's just an way to prevent waste.:P
Slashdot Mirror
Yup, you can have multiple VNC sessions connected to any given Linux or Unix box.
How? A VNC Server on Linux isn't an application which mirrors what your main X display/screen is doing, which is what is happening on VNC for Mac, Windows. Instead, it's creating a new X11 server, with a completely different set of running applications displaying to it, an X11 server you can incidentally connect to via VNC to control.
This has the draw back that you aren't connecting to what you saw on your screen when you left the house. To my knowledge there is no way of serving your current set of app running on your desktop out to the wide world using VNC, excepting going through the relative hassle of using an X proxy system like xmove, and moving all o your X clients between your PC's X server and the VNC X server depending on where you are.
Likewise, you can do this on Windows- but you are limited to running X11 apps. I know some companies make various products which export Windows apps via the X11 protocol- perhaps there is a way to have multiple Windows VNC sessions after all..
I also have to admit: eXceed kicks a few asses. I used it once on a job (but not since) to run various Linux and Unix app remotely on the Win2k machine they had for me. It was damn fast- hell, I even was running Enlightenment remotely with no problem at all! It was amazing.
Not sure what kind of old, retired computers you've been using, but the majority of them are warm and noisy, which is what the poster is trying to avoid.
You could buy an old laptop perhaps, or do plenty of research to find am older, yet cool and quiet PC or Mac desktop. One of those fan-less iMacs?
Yes, sure you can disassemble the machine code, produce some C code from that and then recompile for a new target CPU but it's not going to work for the vast majority of applications.
:P I suppose you could still call functions out of it perhaps, but it wasn't that useful beyond that, not from the standpoint of understanding- at least no more than just looking at it through a disassembler.
Decompiling to C must have changed quite a bit since I last tried it, around 10 years ago. If not, it seems like you'd run into nothing *but* problems with platform-specificity.
That is, the only C decompilers I've tried did in fact take a binary and output C- however, the C was just a bunch of inline assembly statements and the like. A cruel joke for a younger nerd wondering how the programs he used worked.
I never said that reading would help me lose weight, nor did I say I stopped watching TV and/or began to read so that I would. I don't think I mentioned weight loss at all. I was relating a story, the value of which is evidentally not clear.
But yeah, going to the gym is a good thing.
I guess should've have mentioned the fluorescents, it seems to have confused you (and probably other folks). The full-spectrum bulbs we have are not fluorescent.
I can't say that I have even heard about any supposed health benefits derived from full-spectrum lighting, or any other purported or proved claims.
However, we use full-spectrum bulbs a few places around the house, anywhere we don't have flourescent bulbs. Why? It just looks nicer! My SO and I can't stand the yellowness of regular bulbs, and we prever the whiter light of the full-spectrum guys, especially for reading and similar activities.
Let's hope that the next step in this research isn't adding a bed pan- you'd never have to leave this fat-a-tron. Eat, piss, shit and watch TV- all without having to move from your spot!
Welcome to the American Dream!
Perhaps so!
Perhaps the creators of this couch are just going to use it for massive data collection- think of the beautiful body of data one would have if you collected user, weight, channel/program, and food ordering preference data from all of these couches?
Jesus, just thinking about it makes my insides quiver in joy! I could have a data analyziation party, so many statistics, differential eq models, mm mmm good!
1. I watch almost no TV. Perhaps 1 hr/week, 2 hr/week if there is something special.
.5-1 pages.
:P
:)
2. I read a lot.
3. I'm a fatty.
I kind of think as myself as having some funky form of OCD, some sort of slightly humorous and completely benign form. My obsessions are efficiency (but in my own backward way) and reading, kind of related.
I read all the time when I'm not engaged in activity with someone else. I read when I go take a dump. I read when I'm eating alone at the table. I read on the bus, and when I'm watiting for it. When I'm driving, I sometimes pick up my PDA at the stop light, only to read a half a sentence. I used to read when I was walking between classes, although I've stopped that for the most part. (I also usually beatbox when walking around, and I don't like getting spittle on my PDA screen!) Hell, I even read when I'm standing up going pee, although I often only get in
I do all this to a lesser extent when I'm reading a paper book or magazine, but I can take it quite far when I'm reading electronically stored books on my PDA. Reading on a PDA is great- I love not having to flip pages. I can set JustReader+ to do auto-scroll, and while I'm standing there doing something manual and repetitive (like cutting up vegetables for dinner), I can read. With the PDA, I don't have to worry about flipping pages when my hands are dirty, keping a bookmark, or similar things. I don't have to worry about what I'll read next when I'm done- I typically have a few books in waiting on my PDA for when I do finish.
Does anyone else do this, or am I that weird?
I am not sure the purpose of this message- I know that reading with a PDA instead of a book isn't responsible for my fat-ness, so do not misinterpret it that way.
Although yes, reading a book is a little less sedentary, if only because your brain is being engaged. Flipping pages isn't all that much more work than flipping channels, though. However, depending on your position, sometimes holding the reading material up in some place can be a titch more exercise. And, I swear, fighting with the damned news paper has gotta be something as well.
While I watch no TV now, I used to watch more. TV is like a drug, and so many people throughout the US, Canada and elsewhere are addicted. I do not mean this as convenient metaphor. I have felt the changes that come about in my brain when parking my ass somewhere comfortable and watching TV for hours.
I stopped watching TV for a number of reasons, a big one being that I don't like dealing with its schedule. My code, the book I'm reading, a nearby park- all things that don't require me to show up or pick up at a specific hour of the day. Having to remember to watch some certain channel at some certain time to see some show it way too much hassle. Not surprisingly, I also hate the drugged feeling of being a "couch potato."
I think that drugged feeling should be investigated more by science- I wouldn't be surprised at all if there was some connection between that, eating more, and the commercials or television content.
I wonder if most people notice this as well, or if they're simply too used to it to put a finger on it?
Above all, hibernate- and other OR maping layers- still put your objects into a relational database. Flat rows, dead objects. Not active. Again, this may not be important, but it depends on the design. Unless you change the database, not just the interface, that'll always be the case.
In a lot of ways, you are totally correct, but not quite.
I've done work with both a couple different kinds of OODBs as well as SQL-based RDBMS. Most of the OODBs I've used simple keep your data persistent. What do they do beyond this? All of those Database-Manager-Systems things. If I just had bubble memory, the current state of the changes I made to the objects would always be persistent and up-to-date. That may be fine for some things, but if you get into a multi-user or even just a bigger database. A system like Prevayler or other OODBMs like GemStone/S or Magma (my object database of choice) doesn't just save and load your objects to disk in a transparent fashion- they also have transactions, commits/aborts, logs, the ability to roll-back the database to what it was N commits ago.
Again, I can't say anything about Prevayler, not knowing anything about it, but Prevayler seems a bit more like simple bubble memory. That is, you have to keep your whole DB in RAM, which baffles me some. Why not write it to disk, or at least have that option? Anyway, most OODBs I've used are somewhere in between the simple persistence of Prevayler and a traditional relational database.
If I were writing an application in a non-OO language, I personally still think I'd prefer using some transparent persistent storage system like bubble memory, but a lot of procedural languages would need a library to make searching your data/structs a little better. A lot of OO language, especially Smalltalk, has a really good group of Collection classes built-in, and the language has the semantics such that searching a Dictionary (map) or an OrderedCollection (vector) of elements is just as efficient as writing an SQL statement.
In C, however, things are a lot dirtier, and you usually have to write a lot more code just to search your data. I suppose that's why SQL was born in the first place, but it's nothing that a well written library might not accomplish in languages that don't have a first-class collections system built-in.
I ran into the problem on a Dual 500 MHz G4- networking stopped working. The old ethernet driver restoration fixed the problem, and nothing else seems to have been affected. I do not think the machine has gigabit, just 10/100.
And like the parent pointed out, Linux can be just as costly, or even more so, to maintain than a Windows solution. Both a Windows and Linux solution will benefit greatly from a proper deployment, and in general, maintenence costs will be lower in either a Windows or Linux setup if your deployment was "proper."
The post said:
I would love to find a way to make it work, but from the research I have done so far, it doesn't look like we are going to get any cost-savings (unless they miraculously decide to go with Linux).
Which sort of implies that the poster thinks that Linux will result in automatic cost savings. Nowhere does s/he mention that the savings of Linux is only found in deployment. Your post's parent addresses this common misconception.
No incompatibility per se, but it's a rough analogy. People often use an SQL RDBMS along with some layer in between it and their OO language, the layer "flattening" objects into rows in the database, and then dynamically reinstantiating the row into an object in that language.
This is all fine and dandy when you have simple data- a "Person" object filled with nothing but integers and strings flattens fine into an SQL row. But then again, you're kind of just using that object as something not much more than a C struct.
However, when you have more active objects- which generally arise when you are actually doing good OO design and programming- the interface falls apart some. What if I've got my data objects pointing to other complex objects, rather than just elemental/translatable types like strings, numbers, and dates? What if the state of object A depends directly on what is going on in object B?
In an OORDBMS translation system, the objects are essentially dead while in storage. Object A can point to Object B - another row in a different database which holds data from a different class- but it dead.
A good object oriented database, like GemStone (for Java or Smalltalk) allows the objects to remain "alive" while in storage. I have never used or read much about this Prevayler db, so I don't know where it lies. There are some database systems which claim to be an "OODB," but are little more than an RDBMS and an object translation layer built in.
Not all applications benefit from the OODB methodology, but there are plenty which do. For an OO system which saw some decent design, an OODB is often a good fit. If all of your data is relatively simple- for instance, a customer and parts database on an e-commerce site- an SQL database will probably fit well enough.
Drag-n-drop power is also something I miss when using Windows. I don't consider myself loyal to any platform, I'll use what works. On a PC, your drag-n-drop abilities are pretty severely limited to a handful of operations, and apps typically have to support it specifically. On Mac OS, a lot of areas support DnD without the developer having to write code for it especially. For instance, on the Mac, I can select some text- in an edit field, Word doc, or just on a webpage and drag it to my desktop. Or drag it to Emacs or some other editor.
This kind of functionality doesn't sound all that important. But it can really reduce the time it takes to grab some information, among other things. I can just select some text in my emacs-based IRC client and drag it to Safari, and it'll see that it's a URL and go there. Very handy.
The Adabas database application is not soemthing which can be replaced by BerekelyDB. They are very different things.
Adabas is a database application. It is like MS Access or Quatro Pro, or theKompany's Rekall app. It includes a database engine, which IIRC is called the same thing. (Adabas D or something) What is being discusse- and what is included with StarOffice- is a GUI-based db app like MS Access. You could replace Adabas in StarOffice with Bereley DB than you could replace Mozilla with wget.
However, it is possible that Sun could write a whole new database application using BDB as the backend; or, Sun could write a layer for storing word processing, spreadsheet and other kinds of documents in BDB, affording some cool features that we don't get with flat binary files (which suck).
Read the article. Just so you don't have to do all that work, I'll quote it-
"The database is incorporated in key components of the Sun Java Enterprise System, formerly known as Project Orion, and the Sun Java Enterprise Desktop System, formerly known as Project Mad Hatter, both launched on Tuesday."
No mention of StarOffice in that quote of products to use BDB, nor is it mentioned in the rest of the article.
Sun also uses Oracle, and there are articles which will confirm that. But that has nothing to do with StarOffice does it? (unless Adabas can access other database engines for backends, like how you can use Access as a front end to any ODBC SQL Db, etc etc)
Holy balls, man! I've asked this question a dozen times in a dozen different places- I never thought I'd find a possible answer!
:D Can't wait to hear back...
It's been a long time, around 10 years, since I've seen this project. I didn't use it a ton when I did have it on DOS, and consequently don't have a really clear picture of it in my head. However, what you've described soudns like what I remember. Hell yeah!
I don't suppose you have a copy of the app/system/language aroudn anywhere, do you? I don't own any DOS or Windows machines anymore, but I"d be willing to install an x86 emulator just to play with this again, especially to see if it's what I remember. If you couldn't share the ZIP/ARJ/LZH itself, screnshots, some language snippets woiuld be fun too!
Thanks a lot!
But they are extra protein! Same with hair, and skin. A little bacteria never hurt anyone; yet, all of that extra nutrition really is swell!
Jesus christ, please oh lord of lords (etc etc), let someone implement this on my Sharp Zaurus C760. I could really use it!
I've owned a lot of PDAs. But only this one takes like 5 minutes to boot. Literally. No joke. It may be 4 minutes, but I'm not just exaggerating. I've never seen a PDA that takes more than 15 seconds to boot on a reset, the other Zaurus model I've owned exempted (SL-5500), but even that seemed like a short wait compared to the SL-C760's boot time.
(and yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal if I didn't have to reboot often. But no matter how "robust" Linux is, I've had to reboot more often than one would think..."
Good thought, but that's not it. I've used CLIPS, although not extensively. But it isn't my lost NN software... thanks though!
Low chance anyone here will know what I was talking about, but in the case someone does ...
Does anyone remember a programming language that was specifically for creating, training and using neural networks?
I've always been a big programming language addict. Back in the early 90s, being 12-14 years old and excited to finally have a modem, I was downloading every programming language for DOS I could find from all the BBSes I called.
I can't remember what it was called. I remember roughly what the IDE looked like, but very little else. It was a fun system- it had general-purpsose programming constructs, but was especially built for creating, training and using neural networks. I seem to recall the syntax having a semi-familiar pascal/algol/C-ish syntax; it wasn't just a library for Lisp or Scheme.
I've check the SimTel archives, and haven't been able to find it again. Oh, how awesome were BBSes... Stronger sense of community than the 'internet' seems to have. Anywho, thanks for any tips!
Who the hell thought that the 5 second rule was somehow proven scientifically before this? (The submitter/poster mentioned having his life shattered)
:P
I mean, I will "use" the 5-sec rule. Plenty of folks do. But for most people, it's just a damned excuse to eat food that has fallen on the ground. I mean, why waste whatever it is as long as there isn't hair, sand, gravel, dust, toenail clippings or something else sick that happened to be where it landed? Did some of you schmucks really think this was something they "discovered" in the 50s or something, and just now disproved? C'mon! It's just an way to prevent waste.
yup- ANSI CL's metaprogramming facilities are so powerful that you can write your own syntax- retarded or otherwise.
There is no such thing as the Sharp Zaurus SL-5700.