> Not to excuse the incompetent greedy fucks at Diebold, > but they're only a symptom of the larger problem. The real > problem is that the government types who are making > decisions about going to evoting know fuck-all about > how computers work
Workers were against the union and management was against the union and the store was unionized? Does not sound like a healthy union that was representing workers.
Postgres is a descendant of Ingres and thus stepchild to Sybase, SQL Server, Oracle, Informix and Oracle. From a history of RDBMSes:
Ingres technology diffused into the commercial sector through three major channels: code, people, and publications. Unlike the technical details of the IBM project, Ingres source code was publicly available, and about 1,000 copies were distributed around the world so that computer scientists and programmers could experiment with the system and adjust it to their own needs. Michael Stonebraker founded Ingres Corporation (purchased by Computer Associates in 1994) to commercialize the Berkeley code directly. Robert Epstein, the chief programmer at Ingres in the 1970s, went on to co-found Britton-Lee Incorporated and then Sybase. Both Britton-Lee and Sybase used ideas and experience from the original Ingres, and government agencies were early customers of both companies. Computer Associates released a commercial version of the Ingres code in the 1980s.
Continued movement of Ingres researchers throughout the database community spread the technology even farther. Jerry Held and Carol Youseffi moved from UC-Berkeley to Tandem Computers Incorporated, where they built a relational system, the predecessor to NonStop SQL. Until joining Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers in 1998, Held was senior vice-president of engineering at Oracle, where he headed that company's database efforts. Paula Hawthorn moved from Ingres to Britton-Lee (as did Michael Ubell) and eventually became a co-founder of Illustra Information Technologies Incorporated, now part of Informix. Stonebraker himself worked with Ingres Corporation, Illustra, and Informix. Other Ingres alumni went to AT&T, Hewlett-Packard Company (HP), IBM, and Oracle, bringing with them the lessons learned from Ingres. As Robert Epstein observed, "What came from Ingres was the experience of having built a prototype . . . to say what parts need to be done differently."
By quiting the development of something potentialy good, you just agree to let it turn evil. (if no one good work on it to guid it toward the light, it will eternaly lurk in darkness to serve evil only).
Well said.
The best case is that it will serve both good and evil.
Use a quiet, low-power, diskless PC as a X terminal, booting from a live linux CD or the network via PXE. VNC will connect to your Windows boxes. X takes you to your Unix boxes. Gigabit ethernet for the network. DVD and sound can be attached to the terminal machine. KDE has a networked audio server.
It may be possible to have multiple video cards, monitors, mice and X servers running on a single diskless "terminal".
The human sensory system is extremely sensitive to latency. Keep your bio-silicon interfaces as local as possible.
Does that impact disclosure requirements, labor laws or other costs? Presumably it will improve performance management. I wonder if IBM picked up any competitors as outsourcing clients.
An MIT/Caltech study of voting technology found that paper ballots are the most accurate.
The 2004 Democratic primary had a turnout pattern of primary-specific apathy (lower than expected votes) and caucus-specific inspiration (high and record high votes). Why did the New York primary record a 20-year low turnout on the same day that the Minnesota caucus recorded a 33-year high turnout?
We could start with the 16-year old exchange student from Thailand (who cares about 18-year minimum age U.S. citizens) or a Feb 22 blueprint for process tampering ("... DFL is essentially conducting a primary at the caucuses. and through ineptness or design they've opened the door to more voting fraud than the Florida Republicans could ever imagine..."). DFL will not provide official results until Mar 29th, nearly 4 weeks after the MN caucus.
South Carolina's state Dem party fought pressure from the national Dems to institute a loyalty oath for voters, which would have torpedoed Edwards. State officials chose to hand count paper ballots for security, even though machines were available. South Carolina was one of the few 2004 primaries to report record turnout and the only state where Edwards won.
Hand counted paper ballots are the gold standard of voting. Cheaper and faster are neither necessary nor desirable properties of biennial elections. The elimination of counting as a fraud source allows more resources to be deployed for voter authentication and registration (age, citizenship and proof of precinct residency).
Vulnerable processes are easily attacked by malicious precinct captains who plausibly deny competence. Don't let humans hide behind distracting machines. Securely log poll officials and reduce the cost of distributed auditing.
An MIT/Caltech study of voting technology found that paper ballots are the most accurate.
The 2004 Democratic primary had a turnout pattern of primary-specific apathy (lower than expected votes) and caucus-specific inspiration (high and record high votes). Why did the New York primary record a 20-year low turnout on the same day that the Minnesota caucus recorded a 33-year high turnout?
South Carolina's state Dem party fought pressure from the national Dems to institute a loyalty oath for voters, which would have torpedoed Edwards. State officials chose to hand count paper ballots for security, even though machines were available. South Carolina was one of the few 2004 primaries to report record turnout and the only state where Edwards won.
Hand counted paper ballots are the gold standard of voting. Cheaper and faster are neither necessary nor desirable properties of biennial elections.
Three more data points - one worrying, one inspiring, one hopeful (in a recursive way).
This one will make you feel worse, it reviews how the DNC compromised on a deal with Michigan, resulting in a 2004 commision that will try to remove the grassroots firewall of IA and NH. If that happens, just give the media the power to nominate the presidential candidates and be done with it.
The inspiring data point -- the existence proof that is John Edwards. The link goes to his 5 minute withdrawal speech in RealVideo format. See also the clip on lobbyists. A discussion of Caucusgate has raised the possibility that voters were neither apathetic or deluded, that they may in fact have voted for Edwards and that he should be the nominee right now.
Which leads to the hopeful data point -- in the 19th century. We have been here before, link:
"
The Political Intention of the Primary System
When the direct primary was introduced late in the 19th century, the vast majority of elective offices for Congress, state legislatures, city councils, county supervisors, sheriffs, and so forth were not competitive. Electoral manipulation (gerrymandering, for example) and group traditions (the urban Irish were Democrats while Midwestern Germans were Republicans) had created party bastions almost everywhere, and voters, then as now, loyally supported the candidates of their party.
Nomination assured election, and, in most cases, party leaders and political notables used personal loyalties and patronage to control the caucus and convention delegates who did the nominating. The result of such control was office-holders who were more responsive to the party leaders - who could deny them renomination - than they were to an electorate which would rarely defeat them in the general election.
The reinforcing elements of this system of party government were pierced by the direct nominating primary because it eliminated the support party leaders received from the electorate's partisanship. The nominating primary never asked voters to cross party lines. It allowed them to select preferred candidates within their party; and then support them again in the general election. It promised to weaken party leaders by increasing the chance of selecting candidates who were not beholden to party leaders for the nomination.
The hoped-for effects of the primary were not immediate. Slating, endorsements, control over money and other electoral resources, and the commitment and cohesiveness of party cadres gave party leaders continued influence over nominations. In time, however, the influence of traditional party leaders and notables was significantly reduced.
A Problem with Primaries
The grandest vision of the reformers went unrealized because primaries developed their own nominating elite: the few who bothered to vote in them. In the typical contemporary primary, turnout rarely exceeds 30 percent of the eligible electorate. In very low salience, off-year primaries such as 1998 participation may not exceed 20 percent of the potential electorate. The problem with such low participation is the unrepresentativeness of those who take part..."
Depressing? Not quite. We have almost 100 years of data for this next round of reform. We have live data that defies conventional explanation (caucus-specific inspiration and primary-specific apathy?!). These are necessary conditions for reform. We are still eight months from the General Election and five months from the conventions.
From a 2000 speech by William Mayer of Northeastern University, link [emphasis added]:
"... in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the basic rules of the presidential nomination process were almost entirely rewritten... In response to the very bitter and chaotic Democratic national convention of 1968, the Democrats created a special commission to re-examine their party's rules: the Commission on Party Structure and Delegate Selection, more commonly known as the McGovern-Fraser Commission, after the two men who served as its chairmen.... In just four years, the McGovern-Fraser Commission managed to put together a comprehensive set of recommendations that entirely recast the rules for selecting delegates, and then compelled fifty different state parties to abide by their provisions. The result has been described by one political scientist as "the greatest systematic change in presidential nomination procedures in all of American history."
... the work of the McGovern-Fraser Commission also had an important effect on the operations of the Republican Party. This came about partly because the Democratic party reformers helped promulgate new standards of openness and participation that the Republicans felt compelled to emulate, partly because when Democratic state legislatures changed their laws to correspond to the Democrats' new national rules, they usually applied the new provisions to the Republicans as well. Whatever the precise reasons, the Republican nomination process also changed quite dramatically during these years. As the number of presidential primaries increased, for example, it rose just as fast in the Republican party as in the Democratic.
... the nomination process was rocked by a second major set of changes. In 1974, in response to the Watergate scandals, Congress passed a law -- technically, a set of amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 -- that completely restructured the ways that candidates could raise and spend money while running for president. This law, with only a few modifications, is still in effect. It has lots of critics; but no one I know of denies that it is an important landmark in American electoral history.
The first election cycle to which both sets of rules applied was, of course, 1976. And though both parties had contested nomination races that year, it was the Democratic race that received most of the attention afterward and that did most to shape the view of the new nomination process that came to be held by practitioners, journalists, and scholars alike.
... the 1976 Carter campaign strategy became the prototype... Almost every candidate since 1976 has felt compelled to emulate the four major premises of the Carter campaign: announce early, target Iowa and New Hampshire, do a lot of personal campaigning in those states, and then try to ride a wave of momentum to the nomination. As one Democratic strategist would comment in 1986, "Now there is only one strategy. It doesn't matter whether you are a Walter Mondale with deep ties to the party or whether you are a newcomer -- you both do the same things."
... the 1976 campaign had an enormous impact on the way that political commentators and political scientists viewed the presidential selection process. In the first place, it was the 1976 race that first established "momentum" as the great buzzword, the crucial concept, in understanding and interpreting a presidential nomination race. No election since then has run its course without a host of articles and reports speculating about which candidate has the momentum and how that may change in response to the most recent set o
Along with CPU power consumption, review hdparm configuration of ATA power management and spindown of the hard drive, e.g. IBM/Hitachi drives.
A shorter drive duty cycle reduces power consumption of both drive and cooling fan. With bios support, boot from ATA compact flash into a tmpfs filesystem for shortest OS-attributed duty cycle of mechanical parts. Or shrink the mechanics, circa IBM Microdrive or iPod-scale 1.8" drive.
External deep-cycle batteries must be power regulated, fused, sealed AGM or safely boxed and externally vented to remove discharged hydrogen.
> Put the horse back in the barn, twisting my words > around oh so slightly
Your post was quoted verbatim before my interpretation, to remove the value of any alleged twisting, which should not be possible in the clear light of your original words.
> and adding some kind of quasi-religious remark, > involving an obsolete theory,
Hmm... the "guilt" comment? Well, your reference to parent-kid inheritance plays upon an ancient button that was liberally pushed by the Church, supported by Lamarck. I brought up Darwin as an improved basis for discussion of parental virtue, to avoid characterizing your reference as obsolete.
> doesn't really suit someone claiming to want help > those with ADD, "or another learning disability", > learn.
To bring this back on topic, look at the second or third result of that Google search. I didn't write that nor do I agree with all of it, but there are many good points.
As for ADD, I have made some resources available, but since each person's learning style is unique to their genetic and cultural brain wiring, only they can improve their learning. Hopefully, I will one day complete the software that was the original vision for Addapt. But the work on neurometric privacy was a good base for device and personal privacy.
> It's more like cheap parlour tricks of the > hey-we're-so-intellectuals, or those who've read > 'The Complete Idiots Guide To Rethorics'.
My University of Toronto education was in Eng. Sci. / Elec. Eng (3 years) and Comp. Sci (1 year). I didn't graduate. I was going to say that I didn't have any courses in rhetoric, but I now recall a 2nd year philosophy course called "Rhetoric & Reasoning", taking during my 4th year. Ten years later, I don't consciously remember any of it, but it would be a shame if that course disqualifies me from this thread.
> Or maybe I'm just not capable of discussing these > things at your level (feel free to pick the explanation > which you, dear reader, prefer), in either case I > don't think that people on/. are any more > interested than me in this discussion... Feel free > to contact me by e-mail, if you want to, though.
When the subject is "data transparency", I prefer transparent discussion. Maybe one of those mythical kids will dig it up one day.
> We make the world we're living in, and if no one > bothers to take a step in the right direction no one will...
Alleged apathy is an illusion, rocks excepted. All are invested in directions of their choosing, though observers may interpret those investments as apathetic in relation to observer locality.
> 30 years from now we might be living in a world > that looks like some kind of sci-fi nightmare
30 years of expectancy is unnecessary, today's nightmare is comparable to the imaginations of ancestral writers, science-fiction and otherwise.
> and the we-told-you-so-people will be too busy > saying "we told you so" to realize that if they'd > actually done something, instead of just > prophesizing about that inevitable future > nightmare, our kids would be living in a much > more free world.
More alleged apathy and a dose of Lamarckian guilt. Quality analysis of alternative futures is strategy, not prophecy. Those who execute or purchase strategic analysis do so to inform future action, not apathy. As Darwin would point out, sufficiently incompetent parents don't have kids, free or otherwise. Let's focus on the present.
> Now we're just talking about a silly "I want a > better price"-thing,
Convivial informality is insufficient camouflage for materially hostile assertions presented to a technical audience, as you must know. Shiny colored hostile assertions are no more benevolent for being shiny or colored.
As you will recall from the history of economics, the traditional role of price is to disseminate information among disconnected transactors. The very existence of "price" is predicated on the absence of global transparency. It thus insults the audience to sell "a better price" as a reductionist carrot for global transparency.
> but don't get into the habit of just saying that > something won't work,
I didn't say that. In fact, I've spent the last 5 years building infrastructure for securely automating profile disclosure among risk peers. Query 'addapt persaud' in your favorite search engine. The key word there is peer and a careful reader will observe that neither they nor their phone are peers of their cellular provider.
> instead come with positive comments like "I know > how we can improve that..."; or at least say > something like "for that to work, it must follow > these rules/avoid these problems"
Per paragraph 1, "all are invested in directions of their choosing", hence some may choose not to provide free training data to improve the public relations algorithms of non-peers.
As a developer of device control logic, few entities reassure me of benevolent device intentions like arbitrary Slashdot IDs convinced of their own benevolence.
A trust assessment matrix, for devices, humans or context-dependent IDs:
C | O | M | P | E | Competent | Competent T | Adversary | Ally E | N | Incompetent | Incompetent C | A d versary | Ally E | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . B E N E V O L E N C E
The question raised is whether you can add
restricions so that each user can read/write files
as their user on the server, not as www, or root,
or whoever is running httpd.
You're mixing authentication (identity) with authorization (privilege). Read up on Apache::Authen vs Apache::Authz . You can intercede arbitrary access control modules (via the C or Perl APIs), before any content handling module (incl. DAV).
Not a psychologist... but you could read up on the Stroop Effect.
You can use a filtering web proxy (one of many) to mod pages and navigation for your cognitive taste. I'm writing a couple of OSS, cross-browser JS widgets for user-oriented mods. An early, IE-only prototype of no-click navigation (works, but ugly JS) is here.
cluster users who want spam into a small number of ISPs
help opted-out ISPs file lawsuits
reduce risk to individual privacy
Server admins are much more irritated by spam than are end-users.
Speaking of which, would mail admins please ensure their outbound HELO is valid and matches reverse DNS on the outbound IP? This is a quick, decentralized improvement.
At a US Dept. of Energy 08/02 workshop on High Performance Network Planning, Bill St. Arnaud gave a presentation on CA*Net4, the Canadian optical research network where "... Universities and researchers own and control their own lightpath
wavelengths and _associated cross connects on each switch_."
Topology:
a network of point-to-point "condominium" wavelengths
condo owners can recursively partition their wavelengths
wavelength owners determine topology and routing of their light paths
massive edge peering, "star bursts" vs. "ring of rings"
not "distributed network objects", but "distributed object networks"
Have you tried MS Intellipoint? Ships with their mouse/trackball products, but it works with any mouse (or at least it used to). It has a feature called ClickLock: if you hold the mouse button down longer than an adjustable period, it 'locks' the button down. Move the object, then click once to release the drag. Also good for scrolling a long document. I can't work without it, even use it on a laptop.
Slashdot Mirror
> Not to excuse the incompetent greedy fucks at Diebold,
> but they're only a symptom of the larger problem. The real
> problem is that the government types who are making
> decisions about going to evoting know fuck-all about
> how computers work
Sufficiently Competent Malice == Incompetent Benevolence.
Workers were against the union and management was against the union and the store was unionized? Does not sound like a healthy union that was representing workers.
Well said.
The best case is that it will serve both good and evil.
The worst case is that it will serve only evil.
- Plucene
Port funded by Kasei, released Feb 2004.Use a quiet, low-power, diskless PC as a X terminal, booting from a live linux CD or the network via PXE. VNC will connect to your Windows boxes. X takes you to your Unix boxes. Gigabit ethernet for the network. DVD and sound can be attached to the terminal machine. KDE has a networked audio server.
It may be possible to have multiple video cards, monitors, mice and X servers running on a single diskless "terminal".
The human sensory system is extremely sensitive to latency. Keep your bio-silicon interfaces as local as possible.
Does that impact disclosure requirements, labor laws or other costs? Presumably it will improve performance management. I wonder if IBM picked up any competitors as outsourcing clients.
Unless virtual is prelude to physical.
[edited repost from yesterday]
..."). DFL will not provide official results until Mar 29th, nearly 4 weeks after the MN caucus.
An MIT/Caltech study of voting technology found that paper ballots are the most accurate.
The 2004 Democratic primary had a turnout pattern of primary-specific apathy (lower than expected votes) and caucus-specific inspiration (high and record high votes). Why did the New York primary record a 20-year low turnout on the same day that the Minnesota caucus recorded a 33-year high turnout?
We could start with the 16-year old exchange student from Thailand (who cares about 18-year minimum age U.S. citizens) or a Feb 22 blueprint for process tampering ("... DFL is essentially conducting a primary at the caucuses. and through ineptness or design they've opened the door to more voting fraud than the Florida Republicans could ever imagine
South Carolina's state Dem party fought pressure from the national Dems to institute a loyalty oath for voters, which would have torpedoed Edwards. State officials chose to hand count paper ballots for security, even though machines were available. South Carolina was one of the few 2004 primaries to report record turnout and the only state where Edwards won.
Hand counted paper ballots are the gold standard of voting. Cheaper and faster are neither necessary nor desirable properties of biennial elections. The elimination of counting as a fraud source allows more resources to be deployed for voter authentication and registration (age, citizenship and proof of precinct residency).
Vulnerable processes are easily attacked by malicious precinct captains who plausibly deny competence. Don't let humans hide behind distracting machines. Securely log poll officials and reduce the cost of distributed auditing.
An MIT/Caltech study of voting technology found that paper ballots are the most accurate.
The 2004 Democratic primary had a turnout pattern of primary-specific apathy (lower than expected votes) and caucus-specific inspiration (high and record high votes). Why did the New York primary record a 20-year low turnout on the same day that the Minnesota caucus recorded a 33-year high turnout?
South Carolina's state Dem party fought pressure from the national Dems to institute a loyalty oath for voters, which would have torpedoed Edwards. State officials chose to hand count paper ballots for security, even though machines were available. South Carolina was one of the few 2004 primaries to report record turnout and the only state where Edwards won.
Hand counted paper ballots are the gold standard of voting. Cheaper and faster are neither necessary nor desirable properties of biennial elections.
Three more data points - one worrying, one inspiring, one hopeful (in a recursive way).
This one will make you feel worse, it reviews how the DNC compromised on a deal with Michigan, resulting in a 2004 commision that will try to remove the grassroots firewall of IA and NH. If that happens, just give the media the power to nominate the presidential candidates and be done with it.
The inspiring data point -- the existence proof that is John Edwards. The link goes to his 5 minute withdrawal speech in RealVideo format. See also the clip on lobbyists. A discussion of Caucusgate has raised the possibility that voters were neither apathetic or deluded, that they may in fact have voted for Edwards and that he should be the nominee right now.
Which leads to the hopeful data point -- in the 19th century. We have been here before, link:
Depressing? Not quite. We have almost 100 years of data for this next round of reform. We have live data that defies conventional explanation (caucus-specific inspiration and primary-specific apathy?!). These are necessary conditions for reform. We are still eight months from the General Election and five months from the conventions.
From a 2000 speech by William Mayer of Northeastern University, link [emphasis added]:
Along with CPU power consumption, review hdparm configuration of ATA power management and spindown of the hard drive, e.g. IBM/Hitachi drives.
A shorter drive duty cycle reduces power consumption of both drive and cooling fan. With bios support, boot from ATA compact flash into a tmpfs filesystem for shortest OS-attributed duty cycle of mechanical parts. Or shrink the mechanics, circa IBM Microdrive or iPod-scale 1.8" drive.
External deep-cycle batteries must be power regulated, fused, sealed AGM or safely boxed and externally vented to remove discharged hydrogen.
.--
Rich Persaud | weblog > ?eople
> Put the horse back in the barn, twisting my words
... the "guilt" comment? Well, your reference to parent-kid inheritance plays upon an ancient button that was liberally pushed by the Church, supported by Lamarck. I brought up Darwin as an improved basis for discussion of parental virtue, to avoid characterizing your reference as obsolete.
/. are any more
> around oh so slightly
Your post was quoted verbatim before my interpretation, to remove the value of any alleged twisting, which should not be possible in the clear light of your original words.
> and adding some kind of quasi-religious remark,
> involving an obsolete theory,
Hmm
> doesn't really suit someone claiming to want help
> those with ADD, "or another learning disability",
> learn.
To bring this back on topic, look at the second or third result of that Google search. I didn't write that nor do I agree with all of it, but there are many good points.
As for ADD, I have made some resources available, but since each person's learning style is unique to their genetic and cultural brain wiring, only they can improve their learning. Hopefully, I will one day complete the software that was the original vision for Addapt. But the work on neurometric privacy was a good base for device and personal privacy.
> It's more like cheap parlour tricks of the
> hey-we're-so-intellectuals, or those who've read
> 'The Complete Idiots Guide To Rethorics'.
My University of Toronto education was in Eng. Sci. / Elec. Eng (3 years) and Comp. Sci (1 year). I didn't graduate. I was going to say that I didn't have any courses in rhetoric, but I now recall a 2nd year philosophy course called "Rhetoric & Reasoning", taking during my 4th year. Ten years later, I don't consciously remember any of it, but it would be a shame if that course disqualifies me from this thread.
> Or maybe I'm just not capable of discussing these
> things at your level (feel free to pick the explanation
> which you, dear reader, prefer), in either case I
> don't think that people on
> interested than me in this discussion... Feel free
> to contact me by e-mail, if you want to, though.
When the subject is "data transparency", I prefer transparent discussion. Maybe one of those mythical kids will dig it up one day.
--
Rich Persaud | weblog > ?eople
> We make the world we're living in, and if no one
> bothers to take a step in the right direction no one will...
Alleged apathy is an illusion, rocks excepted. All are invested in directions of their choosing, though observers may interpret those investments as apathetic in relation to observer locality.
> 30 years from now we might be living in a world
> that looks like some kind of sci-fi nightmare
30 years of expectancy is unnecessary, today's nightmare is comparable to the imaginations of ancestral writers, science-fiction and otherwise.
> and the we-told-you-so-people will be too busy
> saying "we told you so" to realize that if they'd
> actually done something, instead of just
> prophesizing about that inevitable future
> nightmare, our kids would be living in a much
> more free world.
More alleged apathy and a dose of Lamarckian guilt. Quality analysis of alternative futures is strategy, not prophecy. Those who execute or purchase strategic analysis do so to inform future action, not apathy. As Darwin would point out, sufficiently incompetent parents don't have kids, free or otherwise. Let's focus on the present.
> Now we're just talking about a silly "I want a
> better price"-thing,
Convivial informality is insufficient camouflage for materially hostile assertions presented to a technical audience, as you must know. Shiny colored hostile assertions are no more benevolent for being shiny or colored.
As you will recall from the history of economics, the traditional role of price is to disseminate information among disconnected transactors. The very existence of "price" is predicated on the absence of global transparency. It thus insults the audience to sell "a better price" as a reductionist carrot for global transparency.
> but don't get into the habit of just saying that
> something won't work,
I didn't say that. In fact, I've spent the last 5 years building infrastructure for securely automating profile disclosure among risk peers. Query 'addapt persaud' in your favorite search engine. The key word there is peer and a careful reader will observe that neither they nor their phone are peers of their cellular provider.
> instead come with positive comments like "I know
> how we can improve that..."; or at least say
> something like "for that to work, it must follow
> these rules/avoid these problems"
Per paragraph 1, "all are invested in directions of their choosing", hence some may choose not to provide free training data to improve the public relations algorithms of non-peers.
--
Rich Persaud | weblog > dotpeople.com
As a developer of device control logic, few entities reassure me of benevolent device intentions like arbitrary Slashdot IDs convinced of their own benevolence.
A trust assessment matrix, for devices, humans or context-dependent IDs:
Rich Persaud | weblog > ?eople
You're mixing authentication (identity) with authorization (privilege). Read up on Apache::Authen vs Apache::Authz . You can intercede arbitrary access control modules (via the C or Perl APIs), before any content handling module (incl. DAV).
Brown has documented an elaborate system.
Your thoughts on clickless navigation ?
Still in early dev, the JS event-handling framework is to be BSD-licensed.
It's part of a commercial derivative of Apache2, but you could plug the JS framework into any filtering proxy.
How about hyperlinking, page up/down, going forward and backward without clicking (IE/Moz) ?
Not a psychologist ... but you could read up on the Stroop Effect.
You can use a filtering web proxy (one of many) to mod pages and navigation for your cognitive taste. I'm writing a couple of OSS, cross-browser JS widgets for user-oriented mods. An early, IE-only prototype of no-click navigation (works, but ugly JS) is here.
This will:
- make opt-out lists smaller and manageable
- cluster users who want spam into a small number of ISPs
- help opted-out ISPs file lawsuits
- reduce risk to individual privacy
Server admins are much more irritated by spam than are end-users.Speaking of which, would mail admins please ensure their outbound HELO is valid and matches reverse DNS on the outbound IP? This is a quick, decentralized improvement.
Rich
Topology:
- a network of point-to-point "condominium" wavelengths
- condo owners can recursively partition their wavelengths
- wavelength owners determine topology and routing of their light paths
- massive edge peering, "star bursts" vs. "ring of rings"
- not "distributed network objects", but "distributed object networks"
Customer oriented end-to-end model:- customer owns infrastructure, carrier provides network management
- asset-based telecom allows customers to fund and control the network
- customer controls the bandwidth
Details:Have you tried MS Intellipoint? Ships with their mouse/trackball products, but it works with any mouse (or at least it used to). It has a feature called ClickLock: if you hold the mouse button down longer than an adjustable period, it 'locks' the button down. Move the object, then click once to release the drag. Also good for scrolling a long document. I can't work without it, even use it on a laptop.
This is a bit like mouse gestures for web browsing, without the clicking.