Teekid my trojan archive is pretty large, i would like to see your archive bigger , so please download all you can , my archives = http://ta.t33kid.com. hope you find some you like.:)
open a source code section on your site:) people love those.
I just purchased a Presario laptop at BestBuy. I wanted to have it checked for bad pixels, DOA hardware, etc., so the tech there opened the box and ran a few tests before releasing the machine to me.
So, a BestBuy representative did the initial clicking and agreeing and I have no need to ever open the enclosed shrink wrap agreements. Am I free of all of them? I think I might be!
Here is a link to my comments on a bug I found in the Palm County butterfly ballot tabulation. Looking closely at actual results can be revealing.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NotMyPresident/mes sa ge/95?source=1
From: "Bob Spence" Wed Jan 03 23:21:20 2001 Subject: A bug in the Palm County tabulation software
The undervotes in Florida are now being examined by the media. I believe there is strong evidence that the overvotes must also be examined to understand what happened in Palm County. There is evidence that the tabulating software used there was faulty.
An examination of the publicly available overpunch data reported by the Palm County election board the night of November 11 shows that there were some legal votes rejected by the computer tabulation. Two of the rejected votes, one with the combination of holes 2 + 3 and another with holes 2 + 4 punched, are worth special consideration. Hole 2 on the ballot was not assigned to any candidate. The voting machine did not allow the voter physical access to punch hole 2. Only holes 3 through 11 and hole 13 were exposed. How the voter managed to punch out hole 2 on the ballot might be a mystery, by having a hole there should have no legal significance. This hole was not assigned to anyone in any race, so should not have been considered in evaluating the ballot. These ballots must be counted as legal votes for Bush (hole 3) and Buchanan (hole 4). The fact that some ballots contain a selection in hole 2 is an indication of voter confusion, but it also exposes a bug in the tabulation software.
A complete count of overpunch combinations will reveal even more about what happened in Palm County.
A complete count of the overvotes reported by Palm County is at:
or
My web page analyzing the known overpunch data may be found at:
The only Florida law I can find in this area is Title IX Electors and Elections, Chapter 101, Voting Methods And Procedures, 101.011 Voting by paper ballot. "4) If the elector marks more names than there are persons to be elected to an office, or if it is impossible to determine the elector's choice, his or her ballot shall not be counted for the office; but this shall not vitiate the ballot as to those names which are properly marked, and nothing in this code shall be construed to prevent any elector, at any general election, from voting for any qualified candidate other than one whose name is printed on the ballot."
From the site linked at http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~darse/Papers/IJCAI03-ov.html
Manfred Dworschak (DER SPIEGEL) wrote: > > Darse, > > Thanks for your quick reply. I was just wondering if you could give me a > brief and simple introduction into how PsOpti works. (Perhaps there is a > written document available so you wouldn't have to bother explaining all > that stuff to me? I've read your paper on this subject, but that's too > technical for my purposes.) > > Ok. What I'd like to learn is this: > > - How does it work? > - What is it that makes it superior in comparison with its predecessors? >
Well, that is a difficult question to answer briefly, but I'll try to give a high-level overview.
Good strategy involves a fine balance of bluffing and betting for value. Excellent play must involve a certain amount of bluffing (including bluff raises), as well as check-raising and slowplaying (where strong hands are played as though they are weak, delaying the raises to trap the opponent). Deciding precisely how to do this is a hard problem.
Older versions of the program were designed to play the multi-player "ring game", typically with 10 players. Good strategy for that kind of game is very different from the 2-player game. When you have only one opponent, there is a lot more deception and trickery involved in good play. We shifted our focus to the 2-player game because the weaknesses of the earlier approaches were very evident in this game.
A game-theoretic solution produces a sophisticated strategy that is well-balanced in all respects. It is also safe and "robust", because it is guaranteed to obtain the theoretical value of the game against *any* other strategy. By "strategy", we basically mean a recipe for how often to raise, call, or fold in any particular situation (this may involve randomness, such as choosing to raise 80% of the time and call 20%).
The drawback is that this type of strategy is fixed -- it can't adapt to the style of a particular opponent. Although it will break even against any opponent, it might only win at a slow rate against a weak or predictable player. However, it would be an excellent default to use against a strong or unknown opponent, while making observations that will enable it to make the appropriate adjustments later.
Game theory has been around since the 1940s, and it is now used in a wide variety of applications. It is the foundation of modern economics, and has been used for a diverse range of topics, such as the inspection of nuclear facilities, models of biological evolution, the FCC auctions for radio and television bandwidth, and much more.
The limitation of game theory is that traditionally it could only be applied to very small problem sizes, or small models of a given problem. For example, you might be able to completely solve a poker variation having only eight cards in the deck and one betting round. What we did was show one way that a very large problem could be modeled with a set of much smaller problems, each of which is computationally tractable.
It is impossible to compute the complete game-theoretic solution for Texas Hold'em (the poker variant used to determine the World Champion), because the 2-player game has more than a quintillion states (ie. 10 to the 18th power, or a billion billion). We used abstraction techniques to create smaller games that have about 30 million states, but retain most of the key properties of the real game. The solutions to these smaller games produce an approximation of the game-theoretic optimal solution for the real game.
Since game theory is such an important area of mathematics, and since the techniques we used can be generalized to many other domains with imperfect information, the result may be significant. This may
Faster on integer single-processor tasks, which is what most people use most of the time.
It is true that people need integer operations most of the time, but they don't need this kind of processing power most of the time, reading html or doing spreadsheets. They need the extra cpu power to provide solutions to the hard computational problems needed by modern graphics and sound applications.
In the not so distant past integer algorithms were all we had to do the hard stuff. As machines have gotten more powerful we have moved away from integer algorithms to perform most compute bound work. Floating point provides higher quality results for most any difficult computational problem.
We were limited to integer solutions in the past, but modern image or sound processing problems use floating point solutions today. Thats where the benefits of this kind of processing power can be seen by most people.
There are two ways to get energy to restore orbital momentum to the sling system. One is mentioned in the MXER tether discussion at tethers.com. You can use solar power and the earth's magnetic field to move the system like an electric motor in space.
Another that doesn't seem to be mentioned is slinging things back to earth. You could toss the payload up and the expended payload vehicle down in separate tosses.
I visited Bhutan two years ago. It is a simple Buddhist monastic society with very little contact with the outside world. Tourism is very limited, with only a few thousand visitors allowed into the country each year. Druk Air, the only airline into the country, had only one small airplane. The other had been in England for over a year in repair.
The people are wonderful. Education is a top priority. It is a very peaceful society, but changing rapidly.
The temples do not allow photography inside for fear of providing outsiders of pictorial inventories of the priceless artifacts inside. In the previous year a group of Bhutanese bandits from the east looted a temple, killing the monks who did not escape. This would have been an unimaginable event only a few years ago. Desire for wealth obtainable by selling religious artifacts is overtaking the traditional values of the culture.
Opening a simple, stable, but closed society to western culture through the window of western media and commercial television is an unavoidable disaster. This simple Buddhist culture, with its sane attitude toward the human problem of desire, stands little chance of surviving the desire machine being unleashed there. Western media is the engine of materialism. I fear that western corporate monoculture will win over the minds of youth in a generation. An alternate form of human social existence will be lost.
I do know first hand from an Elite employee that there is more to this story than is revealed in the article. Apple's changed terms for a continued relationship were brutal. Apple's strong arm tactics made it apparent that it would be more profitable to win a lawsuit against them than compete with them in the marketplace.
I'm a long term Apple fan, but the monoculture of Apple stores is not healthy for the Macintosh community in the long run.
PostScript is not executed by the program creating the image. It is executed by the printer when a PostScript file is printed. A PostScript file may be created which can be printed many times on many different printers in many different contexts, all long after the creating program has quit.
Many years ago, I used PostScript procedures embedded within Macintosh PICT images to perform experiments on the printer before drawing the image to test for various known printer bugs. The image would be smart enough to render itself correctly in spite of these problems. This could only be done at print time by the image which might have been pasted into a Word document or Excel spreadsheet. Try that with a static image!
The Burroughs B5000, B6000 and B7000 series mainframe's operating systems were called Master Control Programs (MCPs.) I don't know if Lisberger knew this, but they were the most advanced operating systems of their time (or probably any time since!) A few links http://www.ajwm.net/amayer/papers/B5000.html or http://www.ardenstone.com/projects/cs63/summary.ph p
They were Algol machines with NO assembly language. Everything was high level languages. Algol mapped very directly to the low level machine op codes.
Memory was protected at the word level using additional 'tag' bits which defined the semantics of each 48 bit memory word. A hardware exception would occur if a data store was attempted into a program code word or a data pointer.
All pointer or array memory access was bounds checked thru data descriptors. It was physically impossible to index into the 18th byte of a 17 byte array. The data descriptor defined the base address of the array, the array size and the data object size (6-bit byte, 8 bit byte, word, or double.)
The machine was stack based. An ADD op code was a single byte, adding the top two values on the stack. If one of the items on the stack wasn't a data word (tag 0 or 2) then it was evaluated to resolve to a data value. A data descriptor (tag 5) on the stack would ned the next value on the stack to be evaluated to provide an index value into the data array descriptor. The index value would be compared to the bounds field of the descriptor to validate the indexing operation. If the index was legal the data item (6-bit, 8-bit word or double) would be fetched from memory. Or it might be yet another descriptor! The system knew because of the tag bits on the fetched word. Vectors could hold mixtures of data words and data descriptor words.
Memory was accessed via index registers. You NEVER addressed absolute memory addresses. All memory access was offset from lexigraphic relative addresses. Nothing was absolute, so virtual memory at the memory vector or array level was built into the system design. The absolute address of a memory segment could change by simply changing its descriptor's base address. Each descriptior had a presence bit, flaging the semantics of its base address. If the presence bit was off, the base address was the address on disk where the non present memory could be found. A presence bit interrupt occured when attempting to fetch a non present value. The OS would make space for the memory (using the size info in the descriptor), read in the memory from disk, and update the descriptor to point to the data now in memory and retry the fetch which triggered the presence bit interrupt.
And there was lots more cool stuff. Damn I miss an OS designed to run correctly. Burroughs lost out to leaner systems which ran faster, without the cost of all those transistors insuring integrity. It cost twice as much to insure validity than to run flat out blind. In any case, RISC would have probably beat out its very CISC design.
I visited Bhutan a little over a year ago. It really does resemble Shangri-La. It not only is the size of Switzerland, it looks like it. The houses remind me very much of Swiss chalets with their barn like attics open to the air.
The country is amazingly well maintained. Very tidy and neat for a country just coming out of the middle ages. There are white painted stones along the cliffside highways perfectly evenly placed. If a stone is knocked out of the way, someone walking down the road will simply put it back into place.
It is a Buddhist monastic society. Ancient historic monasteries everywhere with links to some of the most important Buddhist masters.
We were in Paro the day the first Internet café opened there. Paro is the town with the only airport, so is the first and sometimes only place visitors get to. Thimphu already had Internet access. It is the capitol and largest city.
The people are wonderful. And education is a top priority. It is a very peaceful society, but changing rapidly.
The temples do not allow photography inside for fear of providing outsiders of pictorial inventories of the priceless artifacts inside. In the previous year a group of Bhutanese bandits from the east looted a temple, killing the monks who did not escape. This would have been an imaginable event only a few years ago. Desire for wealth obtainable by selling religious artifacts is overtaking the traditional values of the culture.
A simple Buddhist culture, with its sane attitude toward the human problem of desire, stands little chance of surviving the desire machine being unleashed there. Western media is the engine of materialism. I fear that western corporate monoculture will win over the minds of youth there in just a couple of generations. An alternate form of human social existence will then be lost.
One of our dogs, the smart one, barked a couple of seconds before the quake. Then they both ran around a bit after it was over.
We are on landfill in San Leandro right on the bay. It lasted about 8 seconds and was a significantly mild one. Enough to really notice, but not move anything around.
http://forums.zdnet.com/group/zd.Anchordesk/anch or desk/anchordesktb.tpt/@thread@56169@forward@1@D-,D @ALL/@article@56169?EXP=ALL&VWM=hr&ROS=1
Jerry Pournelle is a writer for Byte Magazine (among other things), covering the annual Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC) going on this week.
Orinoco is a sponser of the conference, and installed a 802.11 network as a technology showcase for WiFi, and the "seamlessness" of Window's wireless connectivity. Pretty cool, right? Except that none of the PC guys could use it! Only people with PowerBooks!
This is the best part:
"I have tried to get an Orinoco Wireless WiFi (Allchin pronounced it 'Wiffy' at least seven times in his market department written presentation) and I can't get it to work with Windows 2000. Alex hasn't managed with Windows XP. No one else in the press section has connected to the Internet with their 802.11 cloud. Allchin couldn't connect to Wiffy. But Peter has connected to the Internet with the same card with his PowerBook... As Peter says, with Apple everything is either easy or impossible. Using the Orinoco card with his PowerBook was easy. With Windows 200o so far it has been impossible..."
How about that? A Window's Hardware Engineering Conference... and no Windows machines could connect! Only Macs.
To be fair, Jerry did get things to work later on. But there's another mention about his friend Peter that you'll want to read:
"I have managed to get on the Internet. The local network is "WINHWC2002". Yesterday it was "WinHEC2002". It is case sensitive. Except that Peter's Apple didn't have that problem. He got on yesterday and he's still on today, in a hall that no one else can get on because of very weak signals. Astonishing."
ZeoSync says they encode their targets so that they will 'substantially occupy a space of low Kolmogorov Complexity Construct' (see their 'Technical process' page). This might mean that if you encode the most 'meaningful' bit patterns with low encoding values falling within a target compression range which spans only 1% of the encoding space of all possible bit patterns, you will get the kind of results they are touting.
For example, there are many bit patterns which could be used as a jpg image, but most random bit patterns will simply look like noise. So, encode the ones with potential usefulness with small encoding values and encode the noisy images with the larger encoding values. They don't attempt to encode random bit messages losslessly, only the useful ones.
The trick is sorting out the symantics of a bit string. Which ones are noise, which ones have meaning and which ones are p0rn.
Most copyrights of any value are probably not owned by the authors. Wouldn't it be nice if copyright renewal was nontransferable. If only the original author could renew, the Sonys et all would need to renegotiate with the original creators if they wanted to keep control. It might inhibit culture, but at least creators of works of value would be rewarded again and again and again.
Slashdot Mirror
Here is his web page:
c J: t33kid.com/+teekid&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
:)
:) people love those.
http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:FEZleHDR3m
And here is another good link:
http://www.trojanforge.net/showthread/t-36.html
Teekid
my trojan archive is pretty large, i would like to see your archive bigger , so please download all you can , my archives = http://ta.t33kid.com. hope you find some you like.
open a source code section on your site
I just purchased a Presario laptop at BestBuy. I wanted to have it checked for bad pixels, DOA hardware, etc., so the tech there opened the box and ran a few tests before releasing the machine to me.
So, a BestBuy representative did the initial clicking and agreeing and I have no need to ever open the enclosed shrink wrap agreements. Am I free of all of them? I think I might be!
Here is a link to my comments on a bug I found in the Palm County butterfly ballot tabulation.
s sa ge/95?source=1
Looking closely at actual results can be revealing.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NotMyPresident/me
From: "Bob Spence"
Wed Jan 03 23:21:20 2001
Subject: A bug in the Palm County tabulation software
The undervotes in Florida are now being examined by the media. I
believe there is strong evidence that the overvotes must also be
examined to understand what happened in Palm County. There is
evidence that the tabulating software used there was faulty.
An examination of the publicly available overpunch data reported by
the Palm County election board the night of November 11 shows that
there were some legal votes rejected by the computer tabulation. Two
of the rejected votes, one with the combination of holes 2 + 3 and
another with holes 2 + 4 punched, are worth special consideration.
Hole 2 on the ballot was not assigned to any candidate. The voting
machine did not allow the voter physical access to punch hole 2. Only
holes 3 through 11 and hole 13 were exposed. How the voter managed to
punch out hole 2 on the ballot might be a mystery, by having a hole
there should have no legal significance. This hole was not assigned to
anyone in any race, so should not have been considered in evaluating
the ballot. These ballots must be counted as legal votes for Bush
(hole 3) and Buchanan (hole 4). The fact that some ballots contain a
selection in hole 2 is an indication of voter confusion, but it also
exposes a bug in the tabulation software.
A complete count of overpunch combinations will reveal even more about
what happened in Palm County.
A complete count of the overvotes reported by Palm County is at:
or
My web page analyzing the known overpunch data may be found at:
The only Florida law I can find in this area is Title IX Electors and
Elections, Chapter 101, Voting Methods And Procedures, 101.011 Voting
by paper ballot.
"4) If the elector marks more names than there are persons to be
elected to an office, or if it is impossible to determine the
elector's choice, his or her ballot shall not be counted for the
office; but this shall not vitiate the ballot as to those names which
are properly marked, and nothing in this code shall be construed to
prevent any elector, at any general election, from voting for any
qualified candidate other than one whose name is printed on the
ballot."
Bob Spence
From the site linked at http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~darse/Papers/IJCAI03-ov .html
Manfred Dworschak (DER SPIEGEL) wrote:
>
> Darse,
>
> Thanks for your quick reply. I was just wondering if you could give me a
> brief and simple introduction into how PsOpti works. (Perhaps there is a
> written document available so you wouldn't have to bother explaining all
> that stuff to me? I've read your paper on this subject, but that's too
> technical for my purposes.)
>
> Ok. What I'd like to learn is this:
>
> - How does it work?
> - What is it that makes it superior in comparison with its predecessors?
>
Well, that is a difficult question to answer briefly, but I'll try to
give a high-level overview.
Good strategy involves a fine balance of bluffing and betting for value.
Excellent play must involve a certain amount of bluffing (including
bluff raises), as well as check-raising and slowplaying (where strong
hands are played as though they are weak, delaying the raises to trap
the opponent). Deciding precisely how to do this is a hard problem.
Older versions of the program were designed to play the multi-player
"ring game", typically with 10 players. Good strategy for that kind
of game is very different from the 2-player game. When you have only
one opponent, there is a lot more deception and trickery involved in
good play. We shifted our focus to the 2-player game because the
weaknesses of the earlier approaches were very evident in this game.
A game-theoretic solution produces a sophisticated strategy that is
well-balanced in all respects. It is also safe and "robust", because
it is guaranteed to obtain the theoretical value of the game against
*any* other strategy. By "strategy", we basically mean a recipe for
how often to raise, call, or fold in any particular situation (this
may involve randomness, such as choosing to raise 80% of the time and
call 20%).
The drawback is that this type of strategy is fixed -- it can't adapt
to the style of a particular opponent. Although it will break even
against any opponent, it might only win at a slow rate against a weak
or predictable player. However, it would be an excellent default to
use against a strong or unknown opponent, while making observations
that will enable it to make the appropriate adjustments later.
Game theory has been around since the 1940s, and it is now used in a
wide variety of applications. It is the foundation of modern economics,
and has been used for a diverse range of topics, such as the inspection
of nuclear facilities, models of biological evolution, the FCC auctions
for radio and television bandwidth, and much more.
The limitation of game theory is that traditionally it could only be
applied to very small problem sizes, or small models of a given problem.
For example, you might be able to completely solve a poker variation
having only eight cards in the deck and one betting round. What we did
was show one way that a very large problem could be modeled with a set
of much smaller problems, each of which is computationally tractable.
It is impossible to compute the complete game-theoretic solution for
Texas Hold'em (the poker variant used to determine the World Champion),
because the 2-player game has more than a quintillion states (ie. 10 to
the 18th power, or a billion billion). We used abstraction techniques
to create smaller games that have about 30 million states, but retain
most of the key properties of the real game. The solutions to these
smaller games produce an approximation of the game-theoretic optimal
solution for the real game.
Since game theory is such an important area of mathematics, and since
the techniques we used can be generalized to many other domains with
imperfect information, the result may be significant. This may
I strongly disagree with his statement:
Faster on integer single-processor tasks, which is what most people use most of the time.
It is true that people need integer operations most of the time, but they don't need this kind of processing power most of the time, reading html or doing spreadsheets. They need the extra cpu power to provide solutions to the hard computational problems needed by modern graphics and sound applications.
In the not so distant past integer algorithms were all we had to do the hard stuff. As machines have gotten more powerful we have moved away from integer algorithms to perform most compute bound work. Floating point provides higher quality results for most any difficult computational problem.
We were limited to integer solutions in the past, but modern image or sound processing problems use floating point solutions today. Thats where the benefits of this kind of processing power can be seen by most people.
There are two ways to get energy to restore orbital momentum to the sling system. One is mentioned in the MXER tether discussion at tethers.com. You can use solar power and the earth's magnetic field to move the system like an electric motor in space.
Another that doesn't seem to be mentioned is slinging things back to earth. You could toss the payload up and the expended payload vehicle down in separate tosses.
I visited Bhutan two years ago. It is a simple Buddhist monastic society with very little contact with the outside world. Tourism is very limited, with only a few thousand visitors allowed into the country each year. Druk Air, the only airline into the country, had only one small airplane. The other had been in England for over a year in repair.
The people are wonderful. Education is a top priority. It is a very peaceful society, but changing rapidly.
The temples do not allow photography inside for fear of providing outsiders of pictorial inventories of the priceless artifacts inside. In the previous year a group of Bhutanese bandits from the east looted a temple, killing the monks who did not escape. This would have been an unimaginable event only a few years ago. Desire for wealth obtainable by selling religious artifacts is overtaking the traditional values of the culture.
Opening a simple, stable, but closed society to western culture through the window of western media and commercial television is an unavoidable disaster. This simple Buddhist culture, with its sane attitude toward the human problem of desire, stands little chance of surviving the desire machine being unleashed there. Western media is the engine of materialism. I fear that western corporate monoculture will win over the minds of youth in a generation. An alternate form of human social existence will be lost.
I do know first hand from an Elite employee that there is more to this story than is revealed in the article. Apple's changed terms for a continued relationship were brutal. Apple's strong arm tactics made it apparent that it would be more profitable to win a lawsuit against them than compete with them in the marketplace.
I'm a long term Apple fan, but the monoculture of Apple stores is not healthy for the Macintosh community in the long run.
The Crain's Crest watermark in the paper might be a bit of a problem.
PostScript is not executed by the program creating the image. It is executed by the printer when a PostScript file is printed. A PostScript file may be created which can be printed many times on many different printers in many different contexts, all long after the creating program has quit.
Many years ago, I used PostScript procedures embedded within Macintosh PICT images to perform experiments on the printer before drawing the image to test for various known printer bugs. The image would be smart enough to render itself correctly in spite of these problems. This could only be done at print time by the image which might have been pasted into a Word document or Excel spreadsheet. Try that with a static image!
Correction:
'?? exact matches for host'
should be
'?? exact OS matches for host'
and drop the '[br]'s
The Bay Model in Sausalio is a huge water based analog computer. Check it out at the army page or this VR view.
The Burroughs B5000, B6000 and B7000 series mainframe's operating systems were called Master Control Programs (MCPs.) I don't know if Lisberger knew this, but they were the most advanced operating systems of their time (or probably any time since!) A few links http://www.ajwm.net/amayer/papers/B5000.html or http://www.ardenstone.com/projects/cs63/summary.ph p
They were Algol machines with NO assembly language. Everything was high level languages. Algol mapped very directly to the low level machine op codes.
Memory was protected at the word level using additional 'tag' bits which defined the semantics of each 48 bit memory word. A hardware exception would occur if a data store was attempted into a program code word or a data pointer.
All pointer or array memory access was bounds checked thru data descriptors. It was physically impossible to index into the 18th byte of a 17 byte array. The data descriptor defined the base address of the array, the array size and the data object size (6-bit byte, 8 bit byte, word, or double.)
The machine was stack based. An ADD op code was a single byte, adding the top two values on the stack. If one of the items on the stack wasn't a data word (tag 0 or 2) then it was evaluated to resolve to a data value. A data descriptor (tag 5) on the stack would ned the next value on the stack to be evaluated to provide an index value into the data array descriptor. The index value would be compared to the bounds field of the descriptor to validate the indexing operation. If the index was legal the data item (6-bit, 8-bit word or double) would be fetched from memory. Or it might be yet another descriptor! The system knew because of the tag bits on the fetched word. Vectors could hold mixtures of data words and data descriptor words.
Memory was accessed via index registers. You NEVER addressed absolute memory addresses. All memory access was offset from lexigraphic relative addresses. Nothing was absolute, so virtual memory at the memory vector or array level was built into the system design. The absolute address of a memory segment could change by simply changing its descriptor's base address. Each descriptior had a presence bit, flaging the semantics of its base address. If the presence bit was off, the base address was the address on disk where the non present memory could be found. A presence bit interrupt occured when attempting to fetch a non present value. The OS would make space for the memory (using the size info in the descriptor), read in the memory from disk, and update the descriptor to point to the data now in memory and retry the fetch which triggered the presence bit interrupt.
And there was lots more cool stuff. Damn I miss an OS designed to run correctly. Burroughs lost out to leaner systems which ran faster, without the cost of all those transistors insuring integrity. It cost twice as much to insure validity than to run flat out blind. In any case, RISC would have probably beat out its very CISC design.
I visited Bhutan a little over a year ago. It really does resemble Shangri-La. It not only is the size of Switzerland, it looks like it. The houses remind me very much of Swiss chalets with their barn like attics open to the air.
The country is amazingly well maintained. Very tidy and neat for a country just coming out of the middle ages. There are white painted stones along the cliffside highways perfectly evenly placed. If a stone is knocked out of the way, someone walking down the road will simply put it back into place.
It is a Buddhist monastic society. Ancient historic monasteries everywhere with links to some of the most important Buddhist masters.
We were in Paro the day the first Internet café opened there. Paro is the town with the only airport, so is the first and sometimes only place visitors get to. Thimphu already had Internet access. It is the capitol and largest city.
The people are wonderful. And education is a top priority. It is a very peaceful society, but changing rapidly.
The temples do not allow photography inside for fear of providing outsiders of pictorial inventories of the priceless artifacts inside. In the previous year a group of Bhutanese bandits from the east looted a temple, killing the monks who did not escape. This would have been an imaginable event only a few years ago. Desire for wealth obtainable by selling religious artifacts is overtaking the traditional values of the culture.
A simple Buddhist culture, with its sane attitude toward the human problem of desire, stands little chance of surviving the desire machine being unleashed there. Western media is the engine of materialism. I fear that western corporate monoculture will win over the minds of youth there in just a couple of generations. An alternate form of human social existence will then be lost.
One of our dogs, the smart one, barked a couple of seconds before the quake. Then they both ran around a bit after it was over.
We are on landfill in San Leandro right on the bay. It lasted about 8 seconds and was a significantly mild one. Enough to really notice, but not move anything around.
Here's another mention at CNet:
h or desk/anchordesktb.tpt/@thread@56169@forward@1@D-,D @ALL/@article@56169?EXP=ALL&VWM=hr&ROS=1
http://forums.zdnet.com/group/zd.Anchordesk/anc
Jerry Pournelle is a writer for Byte Magazine (among other things), covering the annual Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC) going on this week.
Orinoco is a sponser of the conference, and installed a 802.11 network as a technology showcase for WiFi, and the "seamlessness" of Window's wireless connectivity. Pretty cool, right? Except that none of the PC guys could use it! Only people with PowerBooks!
This is the best part:
"I have tried to get an Orinoco Wireless WiFi (Allchin pronounced it 'Wiffy' at least seven times in his market department written presentation) and I can't get it to work with Windows 2000. Alex hasn't managed with Windows XP. No one else in the press section has connected to the Internet with their 802.11 cloud. Allchin couldn't connect to Wiffy. But Peter has connected to the Internet with the same card with his PowerBook... As Peter says, with Apple everything is either easy or impossible. Using the Orinoco card with his PowerBook was easy. With Windows 200o so far it has been impossible..."
How about that? A Window's Hardware Engineering Conference... and no Windows machines could connect! Only Macs.
To be fair, Jerry did get things to work later on. But there's another mention about his friend Peter that you'll want to read:
"I have managed to get on the Internet. The local network is "WINHWC2002". Yesterday it was "WinHEC2002". It is case sensitive. Except that Peter's Apple didn't have that problem. He got on yesterday and he's still on today, in a hall that no one else can get on because of very weak signals. Astonishing."
Maybe If Linux had a distribution with a free (as in beer) 3 button mouse I'd have the option to try it on my Mac.
ZeoSync says they encode their targets so that they will 'substantially occupy a space of low Kolmogorov Complexity Construct' (see their 'Technical process' page). This might mean that if you encode the most 'meaningful' bit patterns with low encoding values falling within a target compression range which spans only 1% of the encoding space of all possible bit patterns, you will get the kind of results they are touting.
For example, there are many bit patterns which could be used as a jpg image, but most random bit patterns will simply look like noise. So, encode the ones with potential usefulness with small encoding values and encode the noisy images with the larger encoding values. They don't attempt to encode random bit messages losslessly, only the useful ones.
The trick is sorting out the symantics of a bit string. Which ones are noise, which ones have meaning and which ones are p0rn.
Most copyrights of any value are probably not owned by the authors. Wouldn't it be nice if copyright renewal was nontransferable. If only the original author could renew, the Sonys et all would need to renegotiate with the original creators if they wanted to keep control. It might inhibit culture, but at least creators of works of value would be rewarded again and again and again.
Al Gore may not have invented the internet, but he is the father of computer science. Thats why code procedures are called "Al Gore'isms"