Did you realize that the Berne Convention makes it nearly impossible to place something in the public domain intentionally? In the end the courts would probably rule that you still have copyright over your work, which means that you will be subject to warranty terms without an explicit disclaimer.
If you want to grant others those freedoms, try the BSD license. It's all the freedom and none of the liability.
Congratulations, Theo, on another great win for the OpenBSD project. I'm sure your fabulous communications skills and amazingly consistent habit of oralautopodiatry have once again served the OpenBSD project well. You've done 'em proud, Theo!
That's a lousy excuse. You can't just write crappy code, claim "it's still in beta", and then try to fix all the usability issues later. They have to be done right from the first part.
Here's some Monday morning fun for all you Safari v73 users. With tabs turned on but "always show tab bar" turned off, follow this procedure about five times:
Open a new window. Open a new tab. Close the entire window by clicking on the gumdrop.
Voila! Now your default window size is huge!
Apparently Apple was content to get professional UI design for only the first beta. Other things that should be present, such as drag-and-drop tab rearrangement, also aren't present. (From a UI perspective, there's no compelling argument for not allowing drag-and-drop rearrangement of tabs.)
If I were you, I'd buy the 15" now. In my experience, it's always better to have the last of a generation rather than the first. Even if the 15" AlBook is the best laptop in the world, it will have some wrinkles associated with it. I'd rather own the 1GHz 15" Ti, which is practically perfect (I own the 667/DVI Ti, which is identical in most respects - only exceptions being the processor, video card which was bumped to a Radeon Mobility 9000, and the SuperDrive). Believe me, it's impossible to regret buying a TiBook.
Then they called again to apologize for including a SuperDrive, a battery life worth talking about, FireWire 800, and forgetting the extra thickness.
Of course, you might have been talking about the Mac Portable.
Try switching to progressive. On an ordinary mix double-CD, you can get two 74-minute discs for about $20. Of course, the songs push 10 minutes sometimes, but still...
Of course, what we really should be measuring is $ / time, but that would make rock music look even worse, as the usual tendancy is to only fill a disc to 50 or so minutes and call it quits. In the land of electronic music that's called an EP Single, not an LP!
No, seriously. If you're buying an entire CD for just two songs, it's a travesty. Furthermore, if (all other things being equal) we measure how good an artist is by the average strength of their songs, than an artist producing only two good songs per CD sucks, quantitatively speaking.
Now, of course, those of us who buy mix CDs have an alternate problem - usually either the entire CD sucks, or the entire CD rocks. Thankfully, Amazon.com is there to save the day;-)
Why not? One pet idea of mine is to make a distributed proof-finder for Fermat's Last (yeah, I know it's proven, but I want the ``elegant'' proof). Simply combine a combanitoric proof-generator with a proof-checker, and you've got a program which finds proof simply by number-crunching. Of course, I could argue that all the human brain is doing is number-crunching anyways...
Of course, this isn't how the ZetaGrid people are doing it.
The purpose of Copyright is to at the same time secure rights for the work's author/owner and to allow for the rights of the user. Copyright's allowances are granted automatically to any copyrighted work and include freedoms like parody law and fair use.
The problem is that many rightholders wish to further restrict these rights, and to do so must present you with a license that you must accept. Without acceptance of the license, their restrictions fall to dust.
Should clickwrap be used in Open Source? The purpose of these licenses is to defend the freedoms that come with copyright and then to extend them to allow users to share their derivative works with others. Using clickwrap gives the impression that you no longer accept the allowances given by US and international copyright law, even if it is not the case. This is an impression that I believe we should avoid at any cost.
(Of course, if the intent is to restrict these rights, then the clickwrap is necessary - but why grant the name Open Source to something that does?)
The problem is that most of the canonical methods of generating One Time Pads are based on discrete log (in the form of the Diffie-Helman (sp?) key exchange), which can be solved by factoring.
Note that there's nothing out there that's proven to be mathematically difficult, so I'm not sure what else I should use. I'll stick with ECC for now.
For starters, what people are looking for is a O(n^k) solution, not a O(n), but one complication is that these problems may still take years to solve - your constant in front of n^k is just very very large. However, as time goes on (and Moore's law with it), they will get (comparatively) easier to solve, when compared to O(k^n) methods.
Secondly, there are very few encryption problems that are NP-complete. Now NP is a general class of problems that don't have a O(n^k) solution, but that's different than NP-complete. (I wouldn't want to use a NP-complete encryption anyway, given how much effort seems to be going into that area!) In fact, most encryption is based on the infeasibility of calculating discrete logs in Z mod n. However, this problem is very close to being solved itself. I haven't read up too much on what's going on there, but apparently they've been mapping Z/n to elliptic curves (don't ask me how).
Consequences of that? Well, for starters, if you can calculate a discrete log in Z/n, then it's relatively trivial to recover some multiple of the order of the order of the group - which makes primality testing easier (your order will be k*(n-1)). However, this means you should stick with elliptic curve-based encryption for now, as the NSA probably has discrete log cracked:-P
Linux/*NIX usability has a ways to go. I say this sitting in front of a TiBook running Mac OS X, a modern UNIX that's perfectly usable without resorting to a command line. What's the problem with Linux usability? Basically, it's the desktop environments. Both GNOME and KDE have a "not my problem" attitude wrt helping users configure basic aspects of their system (hardware, software installation) without using a command-line or distro-specific tool.
While programs such as gnorpm, kpackage, and the Ximian setup tools are available, these tools are mostly either not easy enough to use, not widespread enough, or not stable enough for most users.
Secondly, the menu layout in both KDE and Gnome is incredibly confusing. Gnome puts the main menu on the screen in two different places by default! KDE has at least two address books. And how is anybody supposed to remember that Konqueror is a web browser or that GIMP is an image manipulation program? The naming of Linux programs is very hard to understand, and while these names might work in the Windows world as "brand names", new users facing hundreds of unfamiliar programs deserve something more helpful. Also, there isn't a standard menu system for GNOME and KDE (even regular GNOME and Ximian GNOME use two different menu systems!), so users installing programs may find that it never shows up in their menu at all!
I hope the GNOME and KDE usability projects result in some feedback for those two desktops, because, up until now, these projects seem to have been focused on building a development environment first and a usable desktop second. These priorities really need to be changed.
I'm sorry I don't have a more specific source; the blurb was in PEI (http://www.peimag.com) and the brand mentioned was LaCie.
Re:a lot of info is available
on
Firewire and Linux?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
This is not always true. Many manufacturers are starting to introduce hard drives and other devices that are native firewire and not implemented via ATA bridges. This should bring better performance as well as reduce other problems and bugs like the one you described.
Be sure to check whether it's a native drive before you buy. (Of course, if you don't mind, you can buy the enclosure seperately and just assemble your own.)
Slashdot Mirror
Did you realize that the Berne Convention makes it nearly impossible to place something in the public domain intentionally? In the end the courts would probably rule that you still have copyright over your work, which means that you will be subject to warranty terms without an explicit disclaimer.
If you want to grant others those freedoms, try the BSD license. It's all the freedom and none of the liability.
Congratulations, Theo, on another great win for the OpenBSD project. I'm sure your fabulous communications skills and amazingly consistent habit of oralautopodiatry have once again served the OpenBSD project well. You've done 'em proud, Theo!
That's a lousy excuse. You can't just write crappy code, claim "it's still in beta", and then try to fix all the usability issues later. They have to be done right from the first part.
Here's some Monday morning fun for all you Safari v73 users. With tabs turned on but "always show tab bar" turned off, follow this procedure about five times:
Open a new window. Open a new tab. Close the entire window by clicking on the gumdrop.
Voila! Now your default window size is huge!
Apparently Apple was content to get professional UI design for only the first beta. Other things that should be present, such as drag-and-drop tab rearrangement, also aren't present. (From a UI perspective, there's no compelling argument for not allowing drag-and-drop rearrangement of tabs.)
Yeah, and last year they announced they were going to be charging $180 for a text editor.
Whoops. I mean...
Yes - I've seen several movies featuring strong AI. I've pursued this goal and *mmph GAAGH*
We have assumed control.
Yeah, I've got a question for him. Ask him why his Commerce Department stonewalled the relaxation of crypto export regulations for seven years.
If I were you, I'd buy the 15" now. In my experience, it's always better to have the last of a generation rather than the first. Even if the 15" AlBook is the best laptop in the world, it will have some wrinkles associated with it. I'd rather own the 1GHz 15" Ti, which is practically perfect (I own the 667/DVI Ti, which is identical in most respects - only exceptions being the processor, video card which was bumped to a Radeon Mobility 9000, and the SuperDrive). Believe me, it's impossible to regret buying a TiBook.
Ex Torsion?
Ex Tore Son?
Ex Torres Hun?
Then they called again to apologize for including a SuperDrive, a battery life worth talking about, FireWire 800, and forgetting the extra thickness. Of course, you might have been talking about the Mac Portable.
Try switching to progressive. On an ordinary mix double-CD, you can get two 74-minute discs for about $20. Of course, the songs push 10 minutes sometimes, but still...
Richie Hawtin - DE9: Closer to the Edit - 31 tracks, $18 -- ~58 cents/track ;-)
Of course, that's a very different kind of CD. So, let's take another example... (/me pulls a CD off the top of his stack)
Sander Kleinenberg - NuBreed 004. 24 tracks, $21 -- 88 cents/track
Of course, what we really should be measuring is $ / time, but that would make rock music look even worse, as the usual tendancy is to only fill a disc to 50 or so minutes and call it quits. In the land of electronic music that's called an EP Single, not an LP!
Perhaps you ought to listen to better music?
;-)
No, seriously. If you're buying an entire CD for just two songs, it's a travesty. Furthermore, if (all other things being equal) we measure how good an artist is by the average strength of their songs, than an artist producing only two good songs per CD sucks, quantitatively speaking.
Now, of course, those of us who buy mix CDs have an alternate problem - usually either the entire CD sucks, or the entire CD rocks. Thankfully, Amazon.com is there to save the day
No, but they are good judges of length, and usually shorter proofs are in some way considered more elegant, unless they rely on higher mathematics.
However, I have a good feeling that the shortest proof using the techniques available to Fermat would be an ``elegant'' proof in some respect.
Why not? One pet idea of mine is to make a distributed proof-finder for Fermat's Last (yeah, I know it's proven, but I want the ``elegant'' proof). Simply combine a combanitoric proof-generator with a proof-checker, and you've got a program which finds proof simply by number-crunching. Of course, I could argue that all the human brain is doing is number-crunching anyways...
Of course, this isn't how the ZetaGrid people are doing it.
I still get ocassional strange looks for saying "Need More Plebs".
Oh well.
The IP address that's returned from the site is the property of the US Department of Justice: http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.isone ws.com&submit=Examine
The purpose of Copyright is to at the same time secure rights for the work's author/owner and to allow for the rights of the user. Copyright's allowances are granted automatically to any copyrighted work and include freedoms like parody law and fair use.
The problem is that many rightholders wish to further restrict these rights, and to do so must present you with a license that you must accept. Without acceptance of the license, their restrictions fall to dust.
Should clickwrap be used in Open Source? The purpose of these licenses is to defend the freedoms that come with copyright and then to extend them to allow users to share their derivative works with others. Using clickwrap gives the impression that you no longer accept the allowances given by US and international copyright law, even if it is not the case. This is an impression that I believe we should avoid at any cost.
(Of course, if the intent is to restrict these rights, then the clickwrap is necessary - but why grant the name Open Source to something that does?)
Note that there's nothing out there that's proven to be mathematically difficult, so I'm not sure what else I should use. I'll stick with ECC for now.
Secondly, there are very few encryption problems that are NP-complete. Now NP is a general class of problems that don't have a O(n^k) solution, but that's different than NP-complete. (I wouldn't want to use a NP-complete encryption anyway, given how much effort seems to be going into that area!) In fact, most encryption is based on the infeasibility of calculating discrete logs in Z mod n. However, this problem is very close to being solved itself. I haven't read up too much on what's going on there, but apparently they've been mapping Z/n to elliptic curves (don't ask me how).
Consequences of that? Well, for starters, if you can calculate a discrete log in Z/n, then it's relatively trivial to recover some multiple of the order of the order of the group - which makes primality testing easier (your order will be k*(n-1)). However, this means you should stick with elliptic curve-based encryption for now, as the NSA probably has discrete log cracked :-P
While programs such as gnorpm, kpackage, and the Ximian setup tools are available, these tools are mostly either not easy enough to use, not widespread enough, or not stable enough for most users.
Secondly, the menu layout in both KDE and Gnome is incredibly confusing. Gnome puts the main menu on the screen in two different places by default! KDE has at least two address books. And how is anybody supposed to remember that Konqueror is a web browser or that GIMP is an image manipulation program? The naming of Linux programs is very hard to understand, and while these names might work in the Windows world as "brand names", new users facing hundreds of unfamiliar programs deserve something more helpful. Also, there isn't a standard menu system for GNOME and KDE (even regular GNOME and Ximian GNOME use two different menu systems!), so users installing programs may find that it never shows up in their menu at all!
I hope the GNOME and KDE usability projects result in some feedback for those two desktops, because, up until now, these projects seem to have been focused on building a development environment first and a usable desktop second. These priorities really need to be changed.
Actually, Aqua is (barely) accelerated in 10.1. It isn't very hard to make stuff like alpha composting accelerated with a good enough video card.
I'm sorry I don't have a more specific source; the blurb was in PEI (http://www.peimag.com) and the brand mentioned was LaCie.
Be sure to check whether it's a native drive before you buy. (Of course, if you don't mind, you can buy the enclosure seperately and just assemble your own.)
And just think... Harper College still uses an HP-UX system that's not much more powerful than a 4004 :-P