The Wolfram's 2,3 Turing Machine proof of universality was found to be flawed. This does *not mean* the 2,3 Turing Machine isn't universal. It just means it has not been proven to be universal. That would require another proof. Subtle distinction, I know; but in any case, the title of this article is fallacious.
A number of academics in domains like ethics, speech act theory, and philosophy of mind (among others) have been contributing to journals and having conferences related to computing and philosophy for a good while. I imagine that the interesting discussions on issues like free-will as well as models like functionalism will probably gradually enter the wider computer science curriculum.
If we were to imagine each programming language as performing a distinct role in a society of computation, then Visual Basic is quite possibly this society's Crack Whore. To push the metaphor too far: (unlike Prof. Scheme, Mathematician Haskell, or even Delivery Boy Java) Visual Basic has always been willing (perhaps too willing) to do a little something special for its customers. Webpage logic? Sure honey, VB will do whatever you want, as long as you don't mind the disease-like programming practices you might catch.
Reading this is making me nostalgic for LISP machines and interpreter environments that let programmers really play with the machine instead of abstracting it away. What I'd really like to see is someone who takes all the potential for reconfiguration and parallelism and doesn't hide it away but makes it available.
But this birds-eye view thing is really interesting. Being able to rotate the viewpoint and see satalite images from different perspectives is excellent.
I couldn't help but think that this is just the newest assult as part of a press-release war between Intel and AMD. Recently, it seems AMD has been taunting Intel about the performance of its dual core technology. So it appears Intel's reponse is to say "your manufacturing process couldn't lithograph its way out of a paper bag."
This capability quite interesting in that it might be a more standards-compliant way of doing something like SphereSite (which is Windows-only for the moment).
While the whole sphere thing is over the top, maybe a "loop" style browser interface like deskloops would do the trick.
One interesting method for cross-platform code I've been tinkering with is using GNUStep libraries to cross-compile apps between OS X, Windows, and Linux.
Seems to work reasonably well as long as you stick with Foundation Kit or Application Kit. However some weirdness is enoucntered when trying to do fancy things like use.LIB libraries on Windows.
I'm curious about how the SMF boot parallelization code stacks up against the InitNG project, which does the same for Linux. Anyone had experience with both?
With Linus using a Powermac for his development, you can't help but wonder if he secretly uses OS X now and then... you know to run Photoshop and stuff. Now that jwz and all the cool kids are making the switch, it could only be a matter of time...
One of my favorite uses for My by Microsoft was the "Steelhead" routing technology released for Windows 2000. Once you installed it, instead of having a friendly text file or a control panel or two, you instead got "My Internet Router."
I was hoping, really, that they'd continue the trend with "My Disassembler" or "My Kernel."
I think the thing more than anything else that would help ease getting Windows to work with laptops is simply publishing a good hardware spec sheet.
In installing gentoo on my IBM T22 I relied on the spec sheet more than anything else. If vendors could just get into the habit of releasing information like the the ethernet chip, audio chip, etc., then we wouldn't have to resort to guesstimating from lspci.
YES, I suppose Microsoft could buy Redhat. But wouldn't that be an odd move, sort of like saying "Yeah, our entire business model is outmoded and rather broken. We concede the point..."
But really, Microsoft already had their fun with UNIX. Back in the day they marketed a *NIX for PCs called Xenix. This was before they decided it didn't have a future and sold it off to SCO.
MATLAB started as a Fortran library it seems. As handy as it is, MATLAB has some dire limitations: its performance and syntax. While certain vectorized operations can be speedy, many folks I know end up recoding in C because MATLAB just crawls for everything else. On top of this the language itself is just plain ugly. It's reminicent of BASIC with random bits of bash scripting and other oddities thrown in to make a patois that is decidedly disgusting.
I myself have switched over to using R for statistical computing mainly because it's nicer to look at than matlab and has some really great statistical facilities built right in. For more analytical stuff, Mathematica or its open source cousin Maxima are definitely a better choice.
What excites me about Fortress is that it's both cleaner looking than MATLAB and has some neat features like traits. I'll be curious to see how it pans out.
"If only VB were a F/OSS project"... it perhaps wouldn't cause intense feelings of nausea at the possibility of implementing primitive structures like linked-lists or trying to guess which bizzare keyword isnot going to be patented. Honestly, a the OSS world might be better off with Python or at least Python Conversion.
Slashdot Mirror
The Wolfram's 2,3 Turing Machine proof of universality was found to be flawed. This does *not mean* the 2,3 Turing Machine isn't universal. It just means it has not been proven to be universal. That would require another proof. Subtle distinction, I know; but in any case, the title of this article is fallacious.
A number of academics in domains like ethics, speech act theory, and philosophy of mind (among others) have been contributing to journals and having conferences related to computing and philosophy for a good while. I imagine that the interesting discussions on issues like free-will as well as models like functionalism will probably gradually enter the wider computer science curriculum.
I think this video pretty much summarizes the browser wars. Well, at least from the perspective of this flame-baiting post. Wheeee!
If we were to imagine each programming language as performing a distinct role in a society of computation, then Visual Basic is quite possibly this society's Crack Whore. To push the metaphor too far: (unlike Prof. Scheme, Mathematician Haskell, or even Delivery Boy Java) Visual Basic has always been willing (perhaps too willing) to do a little something special for its customers. Webpage logic? Sure honey, VB will do whatever you want, as long as you don't mind the disease-like programming practices you might catch.
Reading this is making me nostalgic for LISP machines and interpreter environments that let programmers really play with the machine instead of abstracting it away. What I'd really like to see is someone who takes all the potential for reconfiguration and parallelism and doesn't hide it away but makes it available.
As long as we're waving "number of cores" about as if it were the number of inches a piece of spam is promising:
g le+chip/2100-1006_3-5399128.html
http://news.com.com/Designer+puts+96+cores+on+sin
In short, Clearspeed's CSX600 has 96 cores, but is designed to be an accelerator board.
Civ IV looks great and all, but with all the time Civ II is still consuming I think I won't dare buy it.
2 .htm
Civ II can be downloaded from abandonia here:
http://www.abandonia.com/games/en/99/Civilization
Fire up your favorite windows emulator. Clear your calendar.
In addition:
windows live
-safari doesn't work
But this birds-eye view thing is really interesting. Being able to rotate the viewpoint and see satalite images from different perspectives is excellent.
I couldn't help but think that this is just the newest assult as part of a press-release war between Intel and AMD. Recently, it seems AMD has been taunting Intel about the performance of its dual core technology. So it appears Intel's reponse is to say "your manufacturing process couldn't lithograph its way out of a paper bag."
Please post your purchases from the MAKE gift guide under my christmas tree.
This capability quite interesting in that it might be a more standards-compliant way of doing something like SphereSite (which is Windows-only for the moment).
While the whole sphere thing is over the top, maybe a "loop" style browser interface like deskloops would do the trick.
"Avoid the advice of the sucessful, they do not want you in their company."
One interesting method for cross-platform code I've been tinkering with is using GNUStep libraries to cross-compile apps between OS X, Windows, and Linux.
.LIB libraries on Windows.
Seems to work reasonably well as long as you stick with Foundation Kit or Application Kit. However some weirdness is enoucntered when trying to do fancy things like use
Your post suggests another variation
1) Write VBS virus that installs peanut linux
2) Make amazingly large zombie server farm
3) ???
4) Profit
Probably not as easy as Depenguinator http://www.daemonology.net/depenguinator/, but still entertaining.
I'm curious about how the SMF boot parallelization code stacks up against the InitNG project, which does the same for Linux. Anyone had experience with both?
With Linus using a Powermac for his development, you can't help but wonder if he secretly uses OS X now and then ... you know to run Photoshop and stuff. Now that jwz and all the cool kids are making the switch, it could only be a matter of time...
One of my favorite uses for My by Microsoft was the "Steelhead" routing technology released for Windows 2000. Once you installed it, instead of having a friendly text file or a control panel or two, you instead got "My Internet Router."
I was hoping, really, that they'd continue the trend with "My Disassembler" or "My Kernel."
Um, right. I shouldn't post before I'm fully awake. I meant LINUX not Windows.
I think the thing more than anything else that would help ease getting Windows to work with laptops is simply publishing a good hardware spec sheet.
In installing gentoo on my IBM T22 I relied on the spec sheet more than anything else. If vendors could just get into the habit of releasing information like the the ethernet chip, audio chip, etc., then we wouldn't have to resort to guesstimating from lspci.
YES, I suppose Microsoft could buy Redhat. But wouldn't that be an odd move, sort of like saying "Yeah, our entire business model is outmoded and rather broken. We concede the point..."
But really, Microsoft already had their fun with UNIX. Back in the day they marketed a *NIX for PCs called Xenix. This was before they decided it didn't have a future and sold it off to SCO.
MATLAB started as a Fortran library it seems. As handy as it is, MATLAB has some dire limitations: its performance and syntax. While certain vectorized operations can be speedy, many folks I know end up recoding in C because MATLAB just crawls for everything else. On top of this the language itself is just plain ugly. It's reminicent of BASIC with random bits of bash scripting and other oddities thrown in to make a patois that is decidedly disgusting.
I myself have switched over to using R for statistical computing mainly because it's nicer to look at than matlab and has some really great statistical facilities built right in. For more analytical stuff, Mathematica or its open source cousin Maxima are definitely a better choice.
What excites me about Fortress is that it's both cleaner looking than MATLAB and has some neat features like traits. I'll be curious to see how it pans out.
"If only VB were a F/OSS project" ... it perhaps wouldn't cause intense feelings of nausea at the possibility of implementing primitive structures like linked-lists or trying to guess which bizzare keyword isnot going to be patented. Honestly, a the OSS world might be better off with Python or at least Python Conversion.
My question is: where's Kuark or gInDesign?
I've gotten used to using Docbook, but a nice InDesign clone of the same quality of SodiPodi would make many people overjoyed.
(/me quitely mulls over how long it would take to program)
Suprised no one has caught this:
"...by research Marc..."
Shouldn't that be:
"...by researcher Marc..."
Ah, grammar and its many uses.