Speaking as Chief Scientist of Project Xanadu, I would like to point out that:
(a) Yes, I believe some former Xanadu staff are libertarians. However as with any organisation there are a range of political beliefs and it is certainly not correct to characterise "the people behind Xanadu" as "fanatical libertarian theorists". Certainly Ted Nelson, the founder and philosopher behind Xanadu is not a libertarian to the best of my knowledge, nor am I.
(b) To refer to Xanadu as a "pay-per-view" network is to perpetuate one of the classic misunderstandings of people who have heard about Xanadu without really looking into it. While the Xanadu designs have always sought to include micropayment and encourage online publishing by creators who do not wish to make their work available for free, it has always been designed to support content available for free - and with the expectation that this would (especially initially) probably make up the majority of the content published.
Hope that helps,
Andrew Pam Project Xanadu http://www.xanadu.com.au/ http://www.xana du.net/
Yes, and the pitch is too high; in addition to the overlapping echoes, it sounds like it's being played back at the wrong speed as well. Something is really wrong with the audio coding - it's quite unlistenable. (I'm using the Macromedia Flash plugin for Linux "Shockwave Flash 5.0 r47" for playback.)
Are the.pro registry going to provide a warranty that all users of the.pro domain space are registered doctors, lawyers and accountants? If so, can I sue them if I am misled by an impostor? If not, where's the value in the domain?
It was indeed; those are the versions that were released as Open Source in 1999 under the names "Udanax Green" (formerly "Xanadu 88.1") and "Udanax Gold" (formerly "Xanadu 92.1") as I mentioned in my first post. Those are just the back ends (servers); there is also a Python front-end (client) "Pyxi" released in 1999.
I think "wacky" is inappropriately pejorative. A better word might be "radical". The Xanadu designs are ab initio, intentionally discarding much of modern computing that are historical relics such as directories, files and applications with their own file formats. There are better ways to do things, but asking people to give up what they have so painstakingly learned and start again is a very big ask - also a reason why many people are reluctant to switch to Linux!
The recent Xanadu work (since 1994) has focussed on breaking the problem down into individual features that can be implemented in existing systems including the web, which when put together amount to a full Xanadu system. Like Duke Nukem Forever or the Linux kernel, there is intentionally no release date, so you can't really call Xanadu vaporware either. For more information on the recent work see: www.xanadu.com.au
It's not exactly vaporware, though, since Xanadu has always been a concept, not a product; there have been numerous implementations, some of which did reach running code (the ALGOL implementation of the 1970s!) and some of which have been released (the open-source release of the code for the 1980s and 1990s versions, now called Udanax).
Like most Slashdot posters, you obviously didn't read the documentation before posting. On an 8-processor machine, this patch will give you 8 processors for each virtual server; it does/not/ implement CPU partitioning and explains the difference in the documentation.
Also the main server can see all the files in the virtual servers since it isn't chrooted.
This whole post is a blatantly offensive troll, but this paragraph is particularly stupid:
We should force japan to adopt the same values as civilised countries like the USA - we do not desire to spread our values everywhere and forge an Empire, so why should they be allowed to?
Oh REALLY. Ever asked anyone outside the US? I think you'll find a lot of people who think the US does indeed desire to spread their values everywhere (Capitalism) and forge an "Intellectual Property" Empire!
And why are moderators wasting moderation points marking replies complaining about this post as "Offtopic" without moderating the parent post down first?
What, 65536 networks isn't enough for you, you need to subnet as well?:)
One of the reasons to have 2^64 host addresses is so that you can use globally unique EUI64 host addresses (for example, for Ethernet, based on the hardware MAC address) to allow immediate auto-configuration on any network anywhere in the world without any chance of an IP address conflict or having to do manual assignments. (Manual assignments are also supported, though.)
There's more than one kind of efficiency; part of the idea of IPv6 is to make routing simpler to gain speed and avoid abominations like NAT. Anyway, only 15% of the address space has even been defined so far; 85% is still reserved for future uses! I wish people would bother to learn about things before commenting.
But that's exactly how IPv6 is intended to be used. The existing IPv6 address space is being allocated with the first 64 bits being the network address and the last 64 bits being the host address. Furthermore, the current specifications for Aggregatable Global Unicast Addresses (see RFC2373) define the first 48 bits as being assigned by the backbone provider and ISP and the next 16 bits by the site (you!) This means you get to have up 65536 networks of up to 2^64 hosts.
I work with Ted on Project Xanadu. The first edition of "Literary Machines" was published in 1981. The correct citation for his coining of the words "hypertext" and "hypermedia" is his 1965 article "A File Structure for the Complex, the Changing and the Indeterminate" published in the Communications of the ACM.
What if you want to pass the call to someone else to say a few words? You have to stick your finger in their ear! Not likely to be popular with either party, I suspect.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a system Project Xanadu developed to support microversioning (including an implementation for emacs):
http://www.xanadu.com.au/ted/OSMIC/
Share and enjoy,
*** Xanni ***
You asked for relevant websites, so here's my Geek Travel Guide.
Share and enjoy,
*** Xanni ***
Speaking as Chief Scientist of Project Xanadu, I would like to point out that:
a du.net/
(a) Yes, I believe some former Xanadu staff are libertarians. However as with any organisation there are a range of political beliefs and it is certainly not correct to characterise "the people behind Xanadu" as "fanatical libertarian theorists". Certainly Ted Nelson, the founder and philosopher behind Xanadu is not a libertarian to the best of my knowledge, nor am I.
(b) To refer to Xanadu as a "pay-per-view" network is to perpetuate one of the classic misunderstandings of people who have heard about Xanadu without really looking into it. While the Xanadu designs have always sought to include micropayment and encourage online publishing by creators who do not wish to make their work available for free, it has always been designed to support content available for free - and with the expectation that this would (especially initially) probably make up the majority of the content published.
Hope that helps,
Andrew Pam
Project Xanadu
http://www.xanadu.com.au/
http://www.xan
Yes, and the pitch is too high; in addition to the overlapping echoes, it sounds like it's being played back at the wrong speed as well. Something is really wrong with the audio coding - it's quite unlistenable. (I'm using the Macromedia Flash plugin for Linux "Shockwave Flash 5.0 r47" for playback.)
I accidentally moderated this message up when I meant to moderate the rebuttal. Posting to cancel out my incorrect moderation.
Are the .pro registry going to provide a warranty that all users of the .pro domain space are registered doctors, lawyers and accountants? If so, can I sue them if I am misled by an impostor? If not, where's the value in the domain?
See also my Australian mirror at: http://www.glasswings.com.au/cr.yp.to/papers.html# nfscircuit
Share and enjoy,
*** Xanni ***
It was indeed; those are the versions that were released as Open Source in 1999 under the names "Udanax Green" (formerly "Xanadu 88.1") and "Udanax Gold" (formerly "Xanadu 92.1") as I mentioned in my first post. Those are just the back ends (servers); there is also a Python front-end (client) "Pyxi" released in 1999.
I think "wacky" is inappropriately pejorative. A better word might be "radical". The Xanadu designs are ab initio, intentionally discarding much of modern computing that are historical relics such as directories, files and applications with their own file formats. There are better ways to do things, but asking people to give up what they have so painstakingly learned and start again is a very big ask - also a reason why many people are reluctant to switch to Linux!
The recent Xanadu work (since 1994) has focussed on breaking the problem down into individual features that can be implemented in existing systems including the web, which when put together amount to a full Xanadu system. Like Duke Nukem Forever or the Linux kernel, there is intentionally no release date, so you can't really call Xanadu vaporware either. For more information on the recent work see: www.xanadu.com.au
Share and enjoy,
*** Xanni ***
It's not exactly vaporware, though, since Xanadu has always been a concept, not a product; there have been numerous implementations, some of which did reach running code (the ALGOL implementation of the 1970s!) and some of which have been released (the open-source release of the code for the 1980s and 1990s versions, now called Udanax).
For working code, including a working front-end, see: www.udanax.com and www.sunless-sea.net
Share and enjoy,
*** Xanni ***
Like most Slashdot posters, you obviously didn't read the documentation before posting. On an 8-processor machine, this patch will give you 8 processors for each virtual server; it does /not/ implement CPU partitioning and explains the difference in the documentation.
Also the main server can see all the files in the virtual servers since it isn't chrooted.
We should force japan to adopt the same values as civilised countries like the USA - we do not desire to spread our values everywhere and forge an Empire, so why should they be allowed to?
Oh REALLY. Ever asked anyone outside the US? I think you'll find a lot of people who think the US does indeed desire to spread their values everywhere (Capitalism) and forge an "Intellectual Property" Empire!
And why are moderators wasting moderation points marking replies complaining about this post as "Offtopic" without moderating the parent post down first?
What, 65536 networks isn't enough for you, you need to subnet as well? :)
One of the reasons to have 2^64 host addresses is so that you can use globally unique EUI64 host addresses (for example, for Ethernet, based on the hardware MAC address) to allow immediate auto-configuration on any network anywhere in the world without any chance of an IP address conflict or having to do manual assignments. (Manual assignments are also supported, though.)
There's more than one kind of efficiency; part of the idea of IPv6 is to make routing simpler to gain speed and avoid abominations like NAT. Anyway, only 15% of the address space has even been defined so far; 85% is still reserved for future uses! I wish people would bother to learn about things before commenting.
But that's exactly how IPv6 is intended to be used. The existing IPv6 address space is being allocated with the first 64 bits being the network address and the last 64 bits being the host address. Furthermore, the current specifications for Aggregatable Global Unicast Addresses (see RFC2373) define the first 48 bits as being assigned by the backbone provider and ISP and the next 16 bits by the site (you!) This means you get to have up 65536 networks of up to 2^64 hosts.
I work with Ted on Project Xanadu. The first edition of "Literary Machines" was published in 1981. The correct citation for his coining of the words "hypertext" and "hypermedia" is his 1965 article "A File Structure for the Complex, the Changing and the Indeterminate" published in the Communications of the ACM.
What if you want to pass the call to someone else to say a few words? You have to stick your finger in their ear! Not likely to be popular with either party, I suspect. :)