You get partial credit.:) I learned about it before, but the story a few days ago reminded me of it. It seemed applicable.
Is there some grace period between concept description and usage I should know about so I don't sound like a loser in the future? All I really want in life is people I'll never meet to think that I am smart and knowledgable.
Just as a clarification, the antipathy to GIFs is for patent reasons, not because they are pictures. We don't like Unisys yanking us around with random threats over a format that was perceived to be free. I don't think I've seen anyone gripe about PNGs on the other hand.
As for us "giving up our chance," I don't think its creators were going for fame and glory, so to speak. The Internet turned out the way it did because the original primary users wanted it that way. When you want raw information in a hurry, boring pages work quite well. I don't need dramatic or interactive API documentation. If the "common man" wants that, he can pay someone to do it. Just so long as the Internet doesn't become one huge, interlinked Flash animation, it won't bother me.
The Internet isn't a zero-sum game. There's plenty of room for everyone.
I like the XML idea. Transparent conversion from structures (in the C sense) to XML would be a must for the Hive API.
Are there any scripting languages that could be easily modified to serve as the basis for such a system? Candidates should be:
Securable - Memory management, package access, and resource access (disk and network) should be strictly controllable.
Fast - On-the-fly compilation that may cause a performance hit at the start of processing, but in the long term performance approaches that of compiled code.
Extensible - Ability to link to native C/assembly/whatever libraries that implement the API.
Nice to program - Syntax is functional and/or nice to use.
Modifiable - Can be modified to add any of the above features which are missing.
I'm leaning toward Python simply because Guile will scare away potential users and Perl would be too hard to lock down and/or modify. Does anyone know about how Python scores on the above criteria?
You can also grab used copies of the hardback edition of this book at Half.com for around the same price ($8-$12.50). Three copies currently available.
Disclaimer: No, I am not one of the people selling this book there. I just happen to really like half.com.
Are avatar-oriented chat rooms still around? I remember hearing about them as an example of why VRML would be "the next big thing". VRML died, so what happened to the avatars?
I've had an interest in a distributed computing framework that would allow people to create a project like seti@home, distributed.net, and the like, without having to solve the same cross-platform issues every single time.
The basic idea is to have virtual machine (of sorts) that provides an API friendly to algorithm implementation. (Lots of math and data manipulation functions) The virtual machine can limit both CPU utilization and memory/disk usage by the actual distributed program. The program is written in a scripting langage (grab your favorite one) that can be compiled on the fly. The API functions would be implemented in the fastest possible way for each platform.
You could designed the virtual machine so that users could easily add programs to it for background execution. The client's security would be ensured by the resource limits enforced by the virtual machine and the lack of "dangerous" features in the scripting language.
I never was able to solve the data integrity issue in a satisfactory way, though. Rogue clients in this scheme could always submit bogus results to the server. That's not catestrophic, but it means that the distributed platform could not be used in an uncontrolled environment like the Internet. If anyone has some ideas on how to solve this problem, feel free to post or email me. (Or you could go patent them and maybe make yourself some money.)
Oh yeah, I also thought that "Hive" would be a cool name for such a program.:)
That's pretty funny. We all need a little perspective on the never-ending OS flamewar. Of course, this goes both ways:
In other news, Bill Gates has reportedly checked himself into a psychiatric ward for treatment of severe depression. Close friends of Gates say that he recently got himself an account on the popular Slashdot website. After several weeks of reading thousands of negative comments about his pride and joy, the Windows operating system, Gates became withdrawn and despondent. He reportedly spent hours in his Seattle mansion whimpering "Why do they hate me? I just want to make people happy. Why?"
Just before checking himself into the nearby hospital, Gate instructed his Senior Vice President of Research, Rick Rashid, to look into the "Linux" operating system. He put him in contact with Slashdot operating systems expert TuXR0X who told Gates the startling news "L1nuX r0x0rS! Winbl0ws sux0rs!".
These days I think I read as many posts spouting against the Slashdot party line as in favor of it. Things are a lot more equitable these days. You're not just wrong if you're pro-MS; you're wrong if you're pro-anything.
I want to read a longer, more thorough treatment of intellectual property that argues for its reduction. Most essays on the topic spend so much time introducing the idea that they never get around to addressing all of the concerns/objections to the idea. Can anyone recommend some longer essays/books on the topic?
If Nupedia ever became good enough to drive Britannica over the edge, then we wouldn't need Britannica anymore. Nupedia has no history or brand-name going for it, so it will only be able to damage Britannica through overwhelming technical and content superiority. If they achieve that, then wouldn't you rather let the second-rate encyclopedia die?
Until then, Britannica's market is secure and their financial problems will be their own making and no one elses.
GNUpedia is not toast, but being refocused. Nupedia and the repository-formerly-known-as-GNUpedia at first appeared to be very similar in goals and even considered merging. However there was a desire to be more open than Nupedia permitted, and that seems to have become GNUpedia's new focus.
Because both are using the FDL, GNUpedia could engulf Nupedia, and good articles from GNUpedia can be fed through the review process on Nupedia. I forsee a nice symbiotic relationship.
As for the issues with Nupedia's editorial control, I think they are taking a valid approach. In order to attract experts, they need to ensure a high standard of quality. However, I sincerely hope that undergrads can contribute, because I'd like to start filling in their very empty physics and mathematics sections.
Yeah, the content is thin right now, but the infrastructure is in place to make scaling the operation a possiblity. It will be quite a while before GNUpedia transitions out of the hand-waving stage (there are a lot of details to sort out).
But, yes, there is certainly room for alternatives. (Though it doesn't look like GNUpedia wants to compete in the same realm as Nupedia.)
Slashdot Mirror
Is there some grace period between concept description and usage I should know about so I don't sound like a loser in the future? All I really want in life is people I'll never meet to think that I am smart and knowledgable.
Anyway, the other reply is closer to my intent.
As for us "giving up our chance," I don't think its creators were going for fame and glory, so to speak. The Internet turned out the way it did because the original primary users wanted it that way. When you want raw information in a hurry, boring pages work quite well. I don't need dramatic or interactive API documentation. If the "common man" wants that, he can pay someone to do it. Just so long as the Internet doesn't become one huge, interlinked Flash animation, it won't bother me.
The Internet isn't a zero-sum game. There's plenty of room for everyone.
[That's such a fun abbreviation.]
Not like we haven't heard it a zillion times already. . .
You Have Been Trolled . . . (what's the rest?)
This guy explains how to convert XML DOM objects to Python objects: A Closer Look at Python's [xml.dom] Module
As a follow-up: Python also has a feature for creating a "sandbox" for Python programs called RExec (for "restricted execution").
Good info. I was moving away from Perl I didn't think it would be easily securable. I hadn't considered the Safe module, however.
Are there any scripting languages that could be easily modified to serve as the basis for such a system? Candidates should be:
I'm leaning toward Python simply because Guile will scare away potential users and Perl would be too hard to lock down and/or modify. Does anyone know about how Python scores on the above criteria?
Disclaimer: No, I am not one of the people selling this book there. I just happen to really like half.com.
Are avatar-oriented chat rooms still around? I remember hearing about them as an example of why VRML would be "the next big thing". VRML died, so what happened to the avatars?
The basic idea is to have virtual machine (of sorts) that provides an API friendly to algorithm implementation. (Lots of math and data manipulation functions) The virtual machine can limit both CPU utilization and memory/disk usage by the actual distributed program. The program is written in a scripting langage (grab your favorite one) that can be compiled on the fly. The API functions would be implemented in the fastest possible way for each platform.
You could designed the virtual machine so that users could easily add programs to it for background execution. The client's security would be ensured by the resource limits enforced by the virtual machine and the lack of "dangerous" features in the scripting language.
I never was able to solve the data integrity issue in a satisfactory way, though. Rogue clients in this scheme could always submit bogus results to the server. That's not catestrophic, but it means that the distributed platform could not be used in an uncontrolled environment like the Internet. If anyone has some ideas on how to solve this problem, feel free to post or email me. (Or you could go patent them and maybe make yourself some money.)
Oh yeah, I also thought that "Hive" would be a cool name for such a program. :)
Did you use sed to write that? :)
Satire.
. . . anything.
In other news, Bill Gates has reportedly checked himself into a psychiatric ward for treatment of severe depression. Close friends of Gates say that he recently got himself an account on the popular Slashdot website. After several weeks of reading thousands of negative comments about his pride and joy, the Windows operating system, Gates became withdrawn and despondent. He reportedly spent hours in his Seattle mansion whimpering "Why do they hate me? I just want to make people happy. Why?"
Just before checking himself into the nearby hospital, Gate instructed his Senior Vice President of Research, Rick Rashid, to look into the "Linux" operating system. He put him in contact with Slashdot operating systems expert TuXR0X who told Gates the startling news "L1nuX r0x0rS! Winbl0ws sux0rs!".
Gates is expected to be released in three weeks.
What story are you referring to?
Tell me that I need to produce a 50-page formatted report by tomorrow, and I'll take the RedHat CD so I can have a decent LaTeX platform. :)
These days I think I read as many posts spouting against the Slashdot party line as in favor of it. Things are a lot more equitable these days. You're not just wrong if you're pro-MS; you're wrong if you're pro-anything.
Correction: Anyone else notice that RedHat is just following microsoft[sic] footprints?
Linux != Redhat, though [insert RedHat world domination conspiracy theory here].
I want to read a longer, more thorough treatment of intellectual property that argues for its reduction. Most essays on the topic spend so much time introducing the idea that they never get around to addressing all of the concerns/objections to the idea. Can anyone recommend some longer essays/books on the topic?
Until then, Britannica's market is secure and their financial problems will be their own making and no one elses.
Because both are using the FDL, GNUpedia could engulf Nupedia, and good articles from GNUpedia can be fed through the review process on Nupedia. I forsee a nice symbiotic relationship.
As for the issues with Nupedia's editorial control, I think they are taking a valid approach. In order to attract experts, they need to ensure a high standard of quality. However, I sincerely hope that undergrads can contribute, because I'd like to start filling in their very empty physics and mathematics sections.
But, yes, there is certainly room for alternatives. (Though it doesn't look like GNUpedia wants to compete in the same realm as Nupedia.)
Overview of the Editorial Process
Then go check out their reviewers in their categories. These people are usually college-level professors:
Not every category has reviewers yet, and some reviewers are bio-less, but this seems to be the direction that Nupedia is going.