Does anyone find it odd...
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
That in regards to the "explosions" they are "showing" happenning in Baghdad right now - that the camera seems to be facing away from them? I mean, you can see the flashes light up the side of the mosque in the center of the frame. Why are the cameras facing away? Are there cameramen with the cameras? Are they remote cams faced in one direction? Are they facing away for other reasons? The explosions are large, sound large, anyhow - why aren't we (ie, the American people) being allowed to see the destruction that some of us implicitly (and explicitly) support?
Just this morning I was looking into YDL for an old PowerComputing PowerTower 166 I have gathering dust. I was about to download an ISO and burn it, too - guess I will have to wait, now...
...engine powered bicycles (and similar small engine vehicles like engine powered gopeds) isn't so much the engine, and it isn't really the noise (which, with a properly designed larger muffler can be muted quite nicely) - it is the laws, or rather the conflicting nature of them.
In many communities in America (and it varies, just like everything else), moped and motorcycle licenses and registration are given out based on engine displacement size. I am not sure what the cutoff is between mopeds and motorcycles, but for mopeds, then engine must have a displacement of somewhere around 200 or more CCs to get a road-use license.
Typically, most goped and bicycle engines are of the "weedeater" or "chainsaw" variety, are are well under 200 CCs (some are under 100 CCs). What you end up with is an inability to license these vehicles for road use, so it is technically illegal to ride the vehicles on city streets. You can't ride them on sidewalks, either (laws for bicycles aside, which typically say you can't ride a bike on a sidewalk, it is also because they are engine powered). So where can you ride these machines?
Technically, private property only. So what about all of these people buzzing around on gopeds? Well, they are breaking the law, and sometimes (not often, but every once in a while when a cop needs to make quota or something) a kid gets busted, and ticketed, with a fine or something. It doesn't matter what kind of license you have, you can't get one to legally use one of these vehicles on the road.
What is really funky, though, is what will happen if fuel cells become small and affordable (I should say when the become commercially available - they are already available in small form factors). Here will be a power source to make electric scooters, bikes (and cars, of course) very practical. So, would these smaller vehicles be legal?
Well, that depends on how the laws are written - if they say "motorized" as opposed to "engine powered" you may be screwed - but don't give up! How often have you seen some older or disabled person "putting" down the sidewalk in one of those "electric mobility vehicles"? What is the difference between that and an electric goped, for instance? Speed, yes - and one is meant for disabled, etc people - but really, what is the difference? Should those people be ticketed as well? Technically, they too are breaking the law! Or is the law only equal for some, and not others? Consistancy, please!
As some of you may know, I am currently in the process of building an electric recumbent vehicle from bicycle parts - I have been working on this thing off and on for over a year now (various things keep me from really working on it like I want to). When it is complete, I do plan to ride it on city streets and bike paths. I hope when those fuel cells become available, I can switch to those. I plan on looking deeply into whether or how I can get a license for it, but from what I know I don't think it is possible (I am planning on installing signals and lights for better safety - I am also hoping to maybe get an "experimental vehicle" license or rider/exemption on my current license). It will be interesting to see what happens, to say the least...
Actually, local government auctions can be a good place to get surplus items, if you are willing to go and bid - the biggest problem with a lot of these type auctions is that they are not "geared toward geeks" - ie, many of them start early in the morning, and sometimes on weekdays. But you can get some amazing deals.
Not sure if they still do it, but there is a Phoenix auction place called "B&B Auctions" or something like that, they run auctions (can't remember times - but they are in the phone book) where I have seen (and participated in) some amazing (and funky) deals computer-wise. Last time I was there, they had a bunch of Sun equipment - nobody was bidding on it because everyone wanted PC stuff, so it went for a song. The biggest problem with that place though is that they parted junk out - so all the special Sun keyboards and optical mice were in a different box (large box FULL of mice and keyboards) - so if you wanted to use the Sun equipment, you had to findd the guy who won the bid on the box, and offer him money to buy those parts you needed (and the seller will typically do it, if you offer right - say $5.00 for each, when he bid and won the box for $10.00 - after you explain how he won't be able to use those items with PCs).
Anyway, I am glad I could help - those places are great places to check out - one other thing, if you go to Apache Reclamation, wear old clothes, shoes, and maybe bring some gloves (especially if you are going into the outdoor yard area) - be VERY careful - some of the stuff is or seems precariously balanced (I walked around this one large "floor mount" industrial piece this last weekend, that was sitting on the ground on its base - I bet a good hard shove would tip it - probably weighed a few tons).
Apache Reclamation and Electronics (Apache & 3rd Ave) - they are a litteral mechanical and electronics junkyard - big or small, they have it all (I have noted a couple of C02 lasers there, as well as some larger heavy equipment, labware, motors, pumps, hydraulics, wire, pneumatics, etc)
Equipment Exchange (515 E Grant Street - behind BOB off of 7th Street) - lots and lots of major electronic and industrial FAB equipment here - ovens, wave solder lines, industrial robots, electron microscopes, regular microscopes, and other such things. Lots of small funky stuff too (be sure to check out the basement area for real fun items).
EliTek (EMC) 3855 N. 29th Ave - mostly PC and used/surplus business equipment. Be wary, they can rip you if you don't know what you are looking at/for. I have gotten some real sweet deals though (recently, an HP LaserJet 6P, 25000 page count - cost me $100.00 - bought a toner cartridge, and got me one hell of a sweet laser printer to replace a crappy ink jet that was always clogging or running out of ink - for under $200!). Sometimes they have funky stuff come in (recently, they had a bunch of Sony 15" LCDs come in - most were broke, but I bought a couple to swap parts for $20.00 - have yet to play with them to see if I can get one working, but for $20.00 it is worth the shot!).
I have posted this possible (note I say possible, I don't really know how it works, nor how efficient it would be) method for hydrogen extraction a few times, but I have yet to hear any response regarding it (ie, if anyone knows more about the process, or that it wouldn't work and why - let me know).
Basically, it goes like this:
Back in the mid-late 18th century, the latest popular pastime was ballooning (mainly in Europe, though some in other areas of the world). Because hot air balloons weren't practical at that point, hydrogen (and coal gas) were the prevalent methods of acheiving lift. In the sport of speed/distance ballooning, getting your balloon filled and aloft the quickest was paramount to winning the race.
Now, at the time, you had two choices for a gas filled balloon - hydrogen, generated by iron and zinc mixed with sulferic acid in casks, the bubbling liquid generating a fair amount of hydrogen, or using coal gas, which was piped throughout a major city for lamps and such. Neither method was great, the hydrogen took a while to gather a fair amount, and was dangerous to work with (not because of explosions or anything, but mainly because of working with acid bubbling in sealed wooden containers), and coal gas simply didn't come in quick large quantities. Another method had to be found, and it was.
In the late 1790's, it was found (and this is the process I don't understand, but I think it is similar to the current method of catalytic steam cracking for hydrogen) that by passing steam continuously over hot iron in a tube, the hydrogen in the water vapor could be isolated in great amounts. So, the formula is steam+hot iron=hydrogen (in some manner).
Now, how to apply this to the modern day?
Well, if any of you have been through Barstow, CA - you know that just outside Barstow is this large solar power generation plant (I think it is currently offline), that uses hundreds of mirrors to focus the sun on a boiler at the top of the tower (I think it is actually a thermal transfer system using brine or something, not a direct energy boiler - not sure). Now this is what I was thinking:
1. Set up two of these towers (or, maybe one would do with the right design?).
2. One of the towers would generate steam, the other would heat up the "tube of iron".
3. Pass the steam from one through the other, and gather the hydrogen.
4. Nearby, is the town of Boron, famous for Borax - there has been an experimental car made (by GM?) which used hydrogen bound in some manner to Borax, so that hydrogen could be stored and transported in "solid" form. This was on/. not too long back. The car used water to liberate the hydrogen, the chemical reaction created heat, (steam?), and hydrogen, which was then used to run the engine.
Ok, there you have it - a simple and cheap (I think) method of generating hydrogen, that doesn't use electrolysis of water or oil cracking, should be relatively polution free, and uses the sun's energy (essentially storing a portion of the sun's energy in the resultant hydrogen). Can anybody tell me what is wrong (or right?) about this idea? It seems blatently obvious based on history, but is there something I am missing that would rule out doing this?
I think they mean something like SLIP, via a modem connection. Think back to using 14.4 and 28.8 modems with Windows 3.1 and Trumpet WinSock to get browsing using Mosaic - then make it use a *lot* less memory. It is possible - but probably hairy like you wouldn't believe.
The original CoCo 2's had 16K standard, but later versions came with 32K and 64K (prior to the introduction of the CoCo 3). At one time, there was a guy selling kits, etc for installing up to 2MB (I think, maybe 4MB?) of RAM into a CoCo 3 using SIMMs (30 or 72 pin - can't remember). Crazy what people can do with their old machines. I am personally kinda excited about this whole thing - I have an old CoCo 3 with 512K that is just begging for something like this.
I think you have it about right, but #4 should say something about that others may create (and sell) devices (hardware or software) to allow you to see/hear/whatever the media is, if the copyright owner hasn't (or won't?) provide a way.
I wander if you can get the papers to drive it on the roads?
This is where things get funky, at least over here in the States. Most (not all, I think) states in the the US have certain license restrictions, and vehicle restrictions. These states won't give you a license for a vehicle if the engine is under a certain minimum combustion chamber volume (typically measured in CC's, sometimes CI's). It varies from typically 100-250 CCs. Anything above this restriction can be licensed for road use. The first class of vehicles, which are typically two-wheeled, are classified under the designation of "moped" or sometimes "scooter". The next class are motorcycles, then automobiles, then typically commercial vehicles (these larger vehicles - automobiles and commercial, are typically measured and classed by gross tonnage, I think).
Anyhow, anything less than a moped cannot typically be licensed for road use - even if they can keep up with traffic flow! Such vehicles are things like gopeds and motorized bicycles (which typically have engines under 100 CCs, or even electric). To make matters worse, the laws also typically state that motorized (sometimes they say engine powered - big difference) vehicles cannot be operated on sidewalks (small thing that helped to kill the Segway, besides cost). Finally, some municipalities require that human-powered bicycles be licensed to operate them.
What a tangled web is woven! All of this introduces a "grey area" of law, especially when you have an electric vehicle (which isn't engine powered, and has *no* CCs) concerned. I would hate to think what would happen if the vehicle was an electric-assist one (which I was thinking about playing with on mine)!
Basically, I am just going to build the thing, and make it seem as much like a recumbent bicycle as I can, and just play with it. If it seems like something I can "take out on the road", so to speak - I will probably look into seeing what can be done legally to license it (hey, and maybe I can get a tax break for alternate-energy usage to boot!)...
...in a "funky" manner. I am not sure what to call it, perhaps "Techno-Renaissance" fits.
My room is relatively small (12' x 12'). I have a window behind me, but the blinds are drawn most of the time. My "desk" is a folding table, with a custom DC power distribution system mounted to the underside to deal with wall-wart issues (that is, I replaced my wall-warts with this system).
In a u-shape around me are black steel shelving racks I bought cheap at k-mart. They are actually composed of 1.5 units, so that they reach to the ceiling. They are bolted together and mounted to the wall to keep them from falling over. Underneath the window is a homemade wooden bookcase made from 1x12 pine, and stained in some brown-oak color. I have books and other things in all of these shelves.
On the top of the bookcase are various "knick-knacks" which evoke a "Renaissance-alchemist" feeling - a fake skull, an old-world style globe, a pewter mug, a glass goblet, and a wooden mortar/pestle. I have on one wall a large old-world style map (5' x 3' or so) in a wooden frame. On another wall I have a "spray-paint" artwork of space. I have another wooden shelf over my closet with other funky knick-knacks.
On my desk sits my monitor, kvm switch, keyboard, and scanner. Below sits my Linux box, and to my right sits my FreeSCO router/nat box for my network. All the wires for everything flow off the table and behind it down to the floor, and along the floor. Computer speakers are mounted to the wall, wires dangling to the floor and around my door to the computer.
I also have a desk lamp attached to the table, which is a magnifying lamp that I replaced the regular incandescent lamp with a compact flourescent type on. The magnifying lens allows me to inspect and work on various electronic projects where I need an "up close" look (I also can use the lamp to magnify small objects to take "up close" macro photos with my fixed-focus digital camera, which is handy). Adequate lighting is my only real issue - the lamp doesn't cut it sometimes (I can't really read by it well, unless I position it over the book). I have some regular flourescent lamps that I plan to attach to the metal shelves which should help, though.
I am taking photos as I build it. The completed project, along with all photos and commentary, will go up on my website when I am finished.
I currently have the main frame finished (ie, cut and welded - still needs painting, but asthetics will be left for last), with the motor mount plate and the seat attached to it.
I am currently working on the steering column extension (had to cut/reweld to lengthen the bit to raise the handlebar piece, but I still need to come up with a longer wedge bolt to hold it in place). I also need to build the foot rests up front (probably going to be a short length of steel tubing with the pedals welded on at the ends, with the tubing welded in a "T" config to another piece of tubing that will slide and be adjustable to leg length). There is also the decision about where to put the batteries - I have given thoughts to a rack above the rear wheel, or in a pannier-style case configuration, or possibly below the keel tube. I like the last two options, though they would be more difficult to construct, because they ensure a low CoG, whereas the first is easier to build, but give a higher CoG, and could be more dangerous in the event of an accident, because they would be behind my head.
The vehicle is a "short wheelbase, above seat steering recumbent" design, which is the simplest to design and build (I wanted under-seat steering, but designing that and getting it to work safely is a bitch). It is made from two bikes which I took apart and welded back together - a 20" girls BMX bike, and a 26" womens 10-speed road bike. I bought both at yard sales, for $15.00 total. My motor was also cheap (IIRC, $25.00 or so). Extra steel was scrap.
I have the motor, which is a nice 90VDC continuous-duty ball bearing motor, has a lot of torque for its size. It needs new bearings, though, which I will probably install or have installed after I get into the final build stages. It will be mounted on the motor mount using two large hose clamps. I didn't want to weld it on, because if I needed to service the motor or replace it, it is hard to break a weld. Plus welding could damage the motor (ruin the magnets, or warp the casing). Any other form of mounting, such a using the screw holes on the motor's c-face, require precise machining of mountings, for which I don't have the tools. The clamps will work good, are fairly standard, and strong.
The motor will drive the rear wheel via the chain to the back wheel. The rear of the vehicle is a 26" 10-speed bike, so I will have a derailleur. If there is enough torque to move my butt and keep it going, then I will have 5 forward speeds. If not, then I will have to weld one of the larger front sprockets in place on the back to reduce the gear ratio front-to-back, and have only one gear (though I could then use a speed controller with the batteries for different speed settings). I am trying to initially avoid a speed controller, due to cost reasons (so far, I am under $100.00 in this thing).
The sprocket for the motor is actually an ANSI #40 9-tooth chain sprocket, milled down for bicycle chain by a local machine shop (ANSI #40 chain has the same pitch as bike chain, 1/2 inch, but is wider, hence the sprocket was wider for the industrial use, and needed milling). Actually, that sprocket is the most crucial piece to find if you are going to be building any kind of motor or engine powered small vehicle - I had to do a bunch of research to find what I needed, and to speak the talk to a local supplier of sprockets. Once I found my part (I think it cost $10.00), he recommended a close-by machine shop, which amazingly (through the charm of my brother-in-law) did the work for free (even if they hadn't, the time for the milling would have only cost me $60.00 max).
This has been a very fun project to work on. It has mainly been a way for me to practice and get better at my welding, while building something both practical and alternative. When I am done, I might submit it as an article for/. (not sure if I want to be/.'d or not). At any rate, it has been something way different from coding on my *nix box, most certainly.
I am currently in the process of building a recumbent electric vehicle from bicycle frames (I basically have everything done, still need to get the foot rests in place, and the drive system in) - I have designed it to use four 12V gel-cell batteries (ie, the 7AH powercell kind), or possibly even glassmat if I can get them cheap enough. However, the things are heavy. I would love to have a fuel cell that I could easily "fill up" with common fuels (gasoline, methanol, ethenol, butane, propane - I don't care).
BTW, before anyone questions "why don't I use a go-ped like engine" - noise is the main reason, laws are another (as in legal grey area).
Though not really new. However, the distances seem larger (I figure it would take one hell of a laser to punch through that much atmosphere).
Commercial-wise, my "favorite" (I am not affiliated with them or anything - I just like the tech) company doing this is a company called AirFiber. What is most cool about the tech is that they have an "auto-alignment" system to compensate for any angular/distance changes in the laser. That would be cool unto itself, but what gives it geek cred (and is little known - though I remember reading an article about it either here or on some other site a few years ago) is that the mirror alignment system was originally designed and prototyped (perhaps even uses it today - dunno) using an automobile electric-mirror positioning system (basically a fancy pushbutton external mirror alignment).
Of course, any discussion about LaserComm or LEDComm wouldn't be complete without mentioning the homebrew Twibright Labs Ronja Project. There are also a few other such projects out there (none as advanced as Ronja, IMHO) - I have mentioned them in other comments on such articles here on/. - search for them if you care...
If you needed to get right-of-way in order to send a microwave transmission between two spots, why is it that Hughes (Dish Network - or whoever they are called now) somehow has permission to "beam" their transmissions all over the f'in United States? I don't remember giving them "right-of-way" access to the ground my home sits on...
On all of your points, AC, I agree - I probably should have put in the qualifier that the founders did forsee this. In a way, a lot of people actually did forsee the possibility of something such as the Patriot Act. I would like to say they didn't forsee the apathy, but even that would be incorrect. These people have been labled kooks and worse - but they have the courage to question the government, which to me speaks of true patriotism.
Yes, I too think it will probably get a lot worse before things come to a head - I only hope when that time comes we are prepared for it and the possible consequences - my greatest fear is that in the mad rush to correct things, the ideals will be lost and what gets put back into place will be worse than what was there before.
If they can only handle a few scripting languages like Perl or Visual Basic then of course they should be discriminated against.
You seem to be ignorant about something: both Perl and VB are Turing Complete languages, plus VB is a (native) compiled language since version 5, and if you count P-code, since forever (if Java is allowed to be a compiled language yet run on a VM, why can't VB P-code be considered compiled? Also, the VB compiler runs a couple of steps, first a translation of the code into something the VC++ compiler understands, then the compilation is done using the VC++ compiler (since version 5, and when native compilation is enabled). Hell, there may be a Perl compiler out there somewhere as well.
What I am trying to get at is there isn't any difference between most "programming" languages and "scripting" languages - they are all programming languages - it does not matter if the source is directly interpreted, compiled to p-code (or other byte-codes) and interpreted, or compiled to native machine code (which, BTW, is on most current processors *still* interpreted - ever hear of microcode?). There are scripting "languages" out there that have the C/C++ syntax - would a C scripter be any less of a application developer than a C programmer? Any language can be a scripting language, and just about any scripting language can be a programming language.
The only types of scripting languages that anyone could even think about rightfully "sneering" at would be a non-Turing Complete one - but in the end who gives a care if the application is developed, works, and satifies the client's needs? THAT is what matters in the end.
Oh, and BTW - I code in VB, and very well I might add (among other languages I know - I am programmer first, VB coder second)...
I am a VB coder - I also know a slew of other languages (at home I mainly play with Perl, Java, and PHP - occasionally C - on my SuSE box). I don't consider myself a "hammer-nail"-only type guy, I have a bag of tricks for various things. If you have noticed any of my other comments on various topics around here, you also know that I know more than just coding - but I digress...
That code you showed was probably the WORST example VB code I have seen. I agree that it was crap code - but not because it was done in VB, but because it was crap - heck, it wasn't even a valid implementation of a bubble sort (it doesn't terminate when no swaps are done, and it "waterfalls" or something with the "i" loop variable that slows it down by iterating through progressively larger and larger sets). Furthermore, the variable are declared (default) as type Variant, rather than a faster Long or Integer type (depending on how many items are in the array). I can almost forgive the array for being of a Variant type, but it given that he was sorting directory contents, probably should have been String. Gsize being a long, but having to be typecast to a Variant for the "i" For-Next. Plus, two loops? Should be doable with only one. Damn, all I can say is that is crap VB code. Had he just made those improvements, it would have ran marginally faster.
Yeah, a Quicksort would have been better - any competant VB coder already has a Quicksort function available in their toolset, or knows where to find a C version to translate from. If raw speed is all you want, Quicksort is the way to go. But you also need to know when to balance speed of execution with speed of coding - unless you already have a VB Quicksort function available, it might take a bit to cobble one up and verify it works properly. Depending on the task, a form of sort not a lot of people know about - better and as easy to implement as a bubble sort, and faster - but slower than a Quicksort - in fact, it only takes a couple more instructions to add into a proper bubble sort to get it working - it is called the "comb" sort.
For most directory content listing sorts, it would work fine (yeah, there are cases where there are a bajillion entries to sort through - this sort isn't for it, but it handles way more entries than a bubble sort in less time - it actually isn't too bad, and is as easy to implement as a bubble sort). Also, depending on the number of entries (for example, if you knew you were always sorting 10-50 items), a Quicksort would be overkill to implement, especially if the project needed to be done yesterday, whereas a bubble sort would be fine for the task, at least until you got a breather to implement something better.
Yeah, the code was crap - not the language (ok, I concede that VB isn't the be-all-end-all of programming languages - but you got to admit that it holds its own - and there are a TON of applications out there written using it, albeit for Windows only, sadly). Personally, I think that if there was an open-source implementation of a VB-like language (ie, a RAD language, with the BASIC-like syntax, but drop the GOTO verb, dammit!), for *nix, you would see the general application market on *nix explode (and by applications, I mean "real-world" apps businesses use, not necessarily desktop or games stuff).
Like it or not, VB is *the* thing that has really made Windows for Microsoft, acting as both a simple to use application development platform, and a glue language/scripting platform that was simple to understand. Unfortunately, that is also its weakness, in that it allows just about anyone to be a "programmer" and create crap code like your co-worker...
Maybe I am calling up a bunch of my friends from one of these payphones (because I don't have a phone, or don't want or need one, or mine is broken, a backhoe dug through the line, whatever) to organize a protest against "The War On 'x'", or future war with Iraq, etc.
Yeah, perhaps this might be considered "non-illegal" today, but who knows what the future would bring. Despite such laws and proto-laws like the DMCA and UCITA, I doubt any of us could have forseen the likes of a law like the PATRIOT Act, nor the ramifications of it (which will reverberate and continue to shape policy for decades to come, BTW). Who is to say what is "legal" today will not be made "illegal" tommorow, where past "confessions" will be used against future "crimes"?
A great explanation can be found here. I don't know if that is the most up-to-date version or not.
Basically, the singularity is the advancement of intelligence, not technology (though technology is the driver of that advancement).
I often wonder about this topic myself. The Singularity, emergence theory, Matrioshka brains, nanotech, and Stephen Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science" are *all* interelated, and should be studied and looked into at depth by those wishing to understand all of this more.
I was thinking something the other night - what if current life (as we perceive and know it) is actually the product of a Turing machine? In a way, I am restating (someone famous from the 18th or 19th century whom I can't remember the name of right now) the theory of how would we know if our reality is "real" - ie, the question of the Matrix? But deeper - not "AI has taken over" - but what if the universe is actually a running Turing Machine (as postulated by Wolfram in ANKOS)? Because a Turing machine is a state machine, if everything was running on this Turing machine, we could never know how fast that machine was running, because from state-to-state could be a long time, but because our "time" is based on the running of the machine, we could never perceive the "changes" between states. Could we? I don't know - but I was thinking about this, how such a thing could be running - but then, what is it running on - and who is running it? And why? Will it be turned off? Can we communicate back "outside" the "box" we are in? Can we prove we are not "inside" a box?
Or is it just that the "universe" and everything in it is defined by a massive Turing machine cellular automata that has been running for a very, very long time?
I know I am going to be flamed for this, but this very topic is discussed at extreme length in Stephen Wolfram's book, "A New Kind of Science". He specifically goes on end about a particular one-dimensional cellular automata, "rule 110" (IIRC), which seems to produce randomness, but which is based off of a small handful of simple rules, and a base starting condition of a single black pixel. He demonstrates in excruciating detail how, no matter how complicated you make a system, that all such systems can be brought back to the set of simple one-dimensional CAs. He demostrates how Turing machines can be set up (via initial starting conditions - not just a single pixel) which use these same CA to perform Turing machine calculations - thus these same CA can, in theory, execute (albeit very slowly) and emulate any current computer or program in existance today. He names this "the principle of computational equivalence".
He explores at great length how systems that are seemingly random can actually be simulated by these self-same CAs, which are based on simple sets of rules - blowing away the time-held notion that complexity arises from an underlying complex ruleset. It stands to reason that given the ruleset, and a result output from the CA, one can work back to the initial starting conditions - the problem arises in that we may only have the initial conditions, figuring out that ruleset is (probably) impossible.
He explores our current methods of perception and analysis, and shows how while our current methods of analysis show that something is random, as humans using our senses we have an affinity for picking out what look to be like patterns - he seems to make the point (unless I have misinterpreted him - which is very likely) that it isn't our senses decieving us, it is our methods of analysis that are incomplete. He also presents ideas and thoughts on how we can overcome these limitations.
The book is much more than that, however - I have read articles dismissing the work as everything from a form of plagerism (at worse) to restating others thoughts (at best). I do not believe this is the case. While it is true many others in the past have played with CAs, what Wolfram has done is go that extra step, building on these ideas and bringing them all together under one umbrella of thought. He acknowledges this throughout the book.
Anyone interested in these topics and others tangent to them owes it to themselves to read Wolfram's book and come to their own conclusions. I honestly believe he is on to something, which could have profound effects in the future (perhaps far in the future, but much sooner if we read it and understand it now).
I am not talking about just taxes - but the whole monetary system in general. I am thinking of something like e-cash (maybe this might be the driving push?), accepted everywhere (on the net), all communications securely encrypted to/from the retailer and "bank". Site the bank in a "tax free" zone (Bahamas?), which would also act as a conversion site from e-case to a credit card, and vice-versa. Essentially, the credit-card pool would be the "reserve", and e-cash would come in and out of it (of course, how to handle interest and such - could be worse than a tax).
Ok, I know that was pretty incoherent - the problem is economically interfacing the virtual with the real (ie, e-cash may not feed you). I wonder if anybody realizes what this is going to do to the internet if it catches on - small businesses would be hit hard (unless a cheap service provider steps up to fill the gap), leaving online large, online retailers to fill the gap, which nobody will shop at, because it would be cheaper to go to the b&m version in town (no shipping, etc). So, their online arms would close down eventually - then little to no "local" (to America, that is) online retailers (maybe that is a good thing, internet pre-1995 or so). Perhaps people will simply start doing more foreign shopping (will be fun to see how they will tax that) - though if you thought shipping was high now, well...
I also agree with the argument of the "taxation w/o representation" of taxing sales outside the state, and use-tax crap - ugh.
What really galls me is they should have seen this coming - and not split out online and mail order sales in their accounting (which I am sure threw up big flags in government), then maybe the use-tax argument (ie, the customers aren't bothering to pay it, bother them, not us) would have come up (ie, it would seem like all sales were catalog sales, which in reality they were). Of course, then they would be wanting purchase history lists, customer names and addresses - to audit all of America (that would have been a big wake up call, though).
How long are we going to take this taxing crap? I have no problem paying taxes, but I *do* have a problem with paying taxes multiple times on the same money - first income tax, then sales tax, etc. This is supposed to be unlawful, but it continues, nobody says enough - gah!
Yeah, this tax thing is a small thing - but it seems like not a day goes by where I don't here about another "small thing" that takes a bit of my liberty and freedom away, and decreases my quality of life (and yeah, I realize as an American it is pretty damn high compared to the rest of the world) - sooner or later the people won't have anything left, and the government will *still* continue to ask (no! make that DEMAND, under penalty of prison) more - more, more, MORE!!!
Something has to break, and it will probably break soon - when it does, it is going to be VERY UGLY...
I didn't think so - the meme has been around for a while.
As far as the human genome being so small (raltively), whereas the sum of it's parts is the greater (a human being) - there is interesting stuff here. From what I have read, a lot of the human genome map is "junk" DNA - that is, DNA codes which seem to serve no useful purpose. Of course, then one reads about self-organizing circuit systems which "build" an oscillator with parts seemingly not needed - but take the parts away, and the circuit ceases to operate.
I really must impress upon you to read Stephen Wolfram's book - despite reviews which seem to pan it as being nothing more than a rehash of older information, I truely believe after reading it that he is on to something - that the information he has given us (and "given" really is the right word - honestly, he isn't making money off the book - something like 50,000 copies printed, and only selling them for around $40.00 (US), for a ~1300 page book!) could possibly lead to the understanding and reverse-engineering of the human genome (ie, being able to code for/on/with it), among other interesting possibilities.
As far as my thoughts about a corporate entity "eliminating" a perceived threat:
I think there is a level at which the business must grow to in order to become such a "self-organized, emergent being" - I think it is somewhere around 500-1000 employees. There also must be excellent communication among the employee units, as well. Most larger companies fit this bill (ie, Microsoft, IBM, Sony, etc). The more units, the "smarter" the entity. The real problem is that as a "sub-unit", an individual will most likely find it impossible to figure out what the "corporate being" is thinking. We have an inkling something is happenning (which is among the reasons why we anthromorphize companies), but we never really know what is truely happenning.
The scary thing is that neither do the people running the corporation - they may pretend they do, but they really don't. We call certain companies "evil" based on their business practices - but rarely are the principles, and hardly ever the employees, of the company act in a malign manner. They simply are following a certain business ruleset (the program), which also runs in a distributed manner (among the employee units and groups within the corporate entity).
Another thing to consider - what happens when you get these corporate groups together, in another organization, with feedback loops, etc - would another "larger" entity arise? Groups like the MPAA and RIAA may be indicative of this. Governments are another larger system like this. Of course, this can scale to the planet. I also tend to wonder about how the internet, connecting people, seems to have a totally "separate" mind from the "corporate entitys" - it is like the employee units are being used in two separate entity "minds", one corporate, the other private - but they do interact, because the corporate helps make up the internet, and vice-versa (this hurts your head if you think too long about it).
I tend to wonder if it isn't at all possible for the elimination of some of the sub-units (ie, those that get "too smart" for the entity minds) wouldn't involve actual death, but a death that seems natural, or at worse, accidental. I also tend to wonder if me merely dicussing this and thinking about it, will cause my "premature departure"? After all, the feedback loop is running as we discuss this, right?
Lastly, on the idea of "killing" these entitys, should it prove to be needed (or desired): If these entitys are a fact, and can be proven - then it would do us well to study exactly why companies like Enron and such folded and went under. People point and say "Greed and Corruption!" - but why did such memes take hold, and how would you "insert" such a meme into the "host entity"? In this case, the meme of "greed and corruption" could act like a virus, devouring the company from inside out. Another way might be to sever the lines of feedback - without feedback, the organism would die (this is true of any organism). In the case of the greed meme, the feedback was probably destroyed by distrust - but are there other ways to sever the links?
Think about the future "hacker" - instead of creating viruses to destroy corporate servers, the hacker might instead be able to create and insert destructive "memes" in the corporate entity, to bring about its total destruction? A more savvy hacker could possibly insert a meme or something to have information come back to him, or possibly even change the entity in some way (imagine a way to change a corporation from greedy to alruistic, or vice-versa) that would benifit him or others? Could one corporate entity do this to another? Why not? Could it be detected, and if so, how?
These and many other questions of this nature arise, and it may be a *very* dangerous, but challenging, game to play, if you choose to play it.
I hear your problem - some people look at *any* bad marks on Ebay as being indicative of the whole of the seller (or bidder, as the case may be). The problem with this is that it is a false indicator.
A more intelligent person would look at the pattern of negatives vs. positives, as well as the comments (and responses to) of the negatives. Add in any "neutral" comments, and where the placement of all those comments are.
For example, if the seller has a high point value, but around December/January they get a quantity of negatives saying "shipping to slow" or "no response", but then in February on there were positives, it would be "Duh, holiday rush - probably a good seller otherwise". If there were sporadic negatives, and the comments seem incoherent, or whatnot - maybe it was just mean people, or someone trying to scam or something - or if the comment was negative but polite - hey, were people, not robots - sometimes the seller screws up, but hopefully will attempt to make it right. If there is nothing but good comments in the past, but then a whole rash of bad comments at the end of a good comment run - that may be a bad sign, a sign that the account was sold or something. Another thing is if there seems to be a "regular" pattern/frequency of good to bad comments (ie, spaced out, but about an equal number of good vs bad) - that may be an indicator of a sharing of the account (one guy sucks, the other is cool) - which may be the case if the account belongs to a business like a surplus dealer or pawn shop.
I try to take in all of this, and sort it out, before bidding. I also take in the number of points, and decide if I am willing to bid with the account on that (ie, if the guy has lower points than what I do, I check to see what the points are for, ratio of sells to buys for positives - ie, he may be a good bidder, but a bad seller, or vice versa). Finally, no matter what, if the bid is for something over $100.00, I will use a credit card, if over $300.00, I would reccommend the use of an escrow service (and a credit card)...
Slashdot Mirror
That in regards to the "explosions" they are "showing" happenning in Baghdad right now - that the camera seems to be facing away from them? I mean, you can see the flashes light up the side of the mosque in the center of the frame. Why are the cameras facing away? Are there cameramen with the cameras? Are they remote cams faced in one direction? Are they facing away for other reasons? The explosions are large, sound large, anyhow - why aren't we (ie, the American people) being allowed to see the destruction that some of us implicitly (and explicitly) support?
Just this morning I was looking into YDL for an old PowerComputing PowerTower 166 I have gathering dust. I was about to download an ISO and burn it, too - guess I will have to wait, now...
In many communities in America (and it varies, just like everything else), moped and motorcycle licenses and registration are given out based on engine displacement size. I am not sure what the cutoff is between mopeds and motorcycles, but for mopeds, then engine must have a displacement of somewhere around 200 or more CCs to get a road-use license.
Typically, most goped and bicycle engines are of the "weedeater" or "chainsaw" variety, are are well under 200 CCs (some are under 100 CCs). What you end up with is an inability to license these vehicles for road use, so it is technically illegal to ride the vehicles on city streets. You can't ride them on sidewalks, either (laws for bicycles aside, which typically say you can't ride a bike on a sidewalk, it is also because they are engine powered). So where can you ride these machines?
Technically, private property only. So what about all of these people buzzing around on gopeds? Well, they are breaking the law, and sometimes (not often, but every once in a while when a cop needs to make quota or something) a kid gets busted, and ticketed, with a fine or something. It doesn't matter what kind of license you have, you can't get one to legally use one of these vehicles on the road.
What is really funky, though, is what will happen if fuel cells become small and affordable (I should say when the become commercially available - they are already available in small form factors). Here will be a power source to make electric scooters, bikes (and cars, of course) very practical. So, would these smaller vehicles be legal?
Well, that depends on how the laws are written - if they say "motorized" as opposed to "engine powered" you may be screwed - but don't give up! How often have you seen some older or disabled person "putting" down the sidewalk in one of those "electric mobility vehicles"? What is the difference between that and an electric goped, for instance? Speed, yes - and one is meant for disabled, etc people - but really, what is the difference? Should those people be ticketed as well? Technically, they too are breaking the law! Or is the law only equal for some, and not others? Consistancy, please!
As some of you may know, I am currently in the process of building an electric recumbent vehicle from bicycle parts - I have been working on this thing off and on for over a year now (various things keep me from really working on it like I want to). When it is complete, I do plan to ride it on city streets and bike paths. I hope when those fuel cells become available, I can switch to those. I plan on looking deeply into whether or how I can get a license for it, but from what I know I don't think it is possible (I am planning on installing signals and lights for better safety - I am also hoping to maybe get an "experimental vehicle" license or rider/exemption on my current license). It will be interesting to see what happens, to say the least...
Not sure if they still do it, but there is a Phoenix auction place called "B&B Auctions" or something like that, they run auctions (can't remember times - but they are in the phone book) where I have seen (and participated in) some amazing (and funky) deals computer-wise. Last time I was there, they had a bunch of Sun equipment - nobody was bidding on it because everyone wanted PC stuff, so it went for a song. The biggest problem with that place though is that they parted junk out - so all the special Sun keyboards and optical mice were in a different box (large box FULL of mice and keyboards) - so if you wanted to use the Sun equipment, you had to findd the guy who won the bid on the box, and offer him money to buy those parts you needed (and the seller will typically do it, if you offer right - say $5.00 for each, when he bid and won the box for $10.00 - after you explain how he won't be able to use those items with PCs).
Anyway, I am glad I could help - those places are great places to check out - one other thing, if you go to Apache Reclamation, wear old clothes, shoes, and maybe bring some gloves (especially if you are going into the outdoor yard area) - be VERY careful - some of the stuff is or seems precariously balanced (I walked around this one large "floor mount" industrial piece this last weekend, that was sitting on the ground on its base - I bet a good hard shove would tip it - probably weighed a few tons).
Apache Reclamation and Electronics (Apache & 3rd Ave) - they are a litteral mechanical and electronics junkyard - big or small, they have it all (I have noted a couple of C02 lasers there, as well as some larger heavy equipment, labware, motors, pumps, hydraulics, wire, pneumatics, etc)
Equipment Exchange (515 E Grant Street - behind BOB off of 7th Street) - lots and lots of major electronic and industrial FAB equipment here - ovens, wave solder lines, industrial robots, electron microscopes, regular microscopes, and other such things. Lots of small funky stuff too (be sure to check out the basement area for real fun items).
EliTek (EMC) 3855 N. 29th Ave - mostly PC and used/surplus business equipment. Be wary, they can rip you if you don't know what you are looking at/for. I have gotten some real sweet deals though (recently, an HP LaserJet 6P, 25000 page count - cost me $100.00 - bought a toner cartridge, and got me one hell of a sweet laser printer to replace a crappy ink jet that was always clogging or running out of ink - for under $200!). Sometimes they have funky stuff come in (recently, they had a bunch of Sony 15" LCDs come in - most were broke, but I bought a couple to swap parts for $20.00 - have yet to play with them to see if I can get one working, but for $20.00 it is worth the shot!).
Ok, out in Scottsdale there is the Electronics Goldmine, mainly an online store. Also, I like All Electronics in LA for parts, too.
I know of several other places, mainly online parts stores, but most of those I haven't purchased from, so I can't reccommend them...
Basically, it goes like this:
Back in the mid-late 18th century, the latest popular pastime was ballooning (mainly in Europe, though some in other areas of the world). Because hot air balloons weren't practical at that point, hydrogen (and coal gas) were the prevalent methods of acheiving lift. In the sport of speed/distance ballooning, getting your balloon filled and aloft the quickest was paramount to winning the race.
Now, at the time, you had two choices for a gas filled balloon - hydrogen, generated by iron and zinc mixed with sulferic acid in casks, the bubbling liquid generating a fair amount of hydrogen, or using coal gas, which was piped throughout a major city for lamps and such. Neither method was great, the hydrogen took a while to gather a fair amount, and was dangerous to work with (not because of explosions or anything, but mainly because of working with acid bubbling in sealed wooden containers), and coal gas simply didn't come in quick large quantities. Another method had to be found, and it was.
In the late 1790's, it was found (and this is the process I don't understand, but I think it is similar to the current method of catalytic steam cracking for hydrogen) that by passing steam continuously over hot iron in a tube, the hydrogen in the water vapor could be isolated in great amounts. So, the formula is steam+hot iron=hydrogen (in some manner).
Now, how to apply this to the modern day?
Well, if any of you have been through Barstow, CA - you know that just outside Barstow is this large solar power generation plant (I think it is currently offline), that uses hundreds of mirrors to focus the sun on a boiler at the top of the tower (I think it is actually a thermal transfer system using brine or something, not a direct energy boiler - not sure). Now this is what I was thinking:
1. Set up two of these towers (or, maybe one would do with the right design?).
2. One of the towers would generate steam, the other would heat up the "tube of iron".
3. Pass the steam from one through the other, and gather the hydrogen.
4. Nearby, is the town of Boron, famous for Borax - there has been an experimental car made (by GM?) which used hydrogen bound in some manner to Borax, so that hydrogen could be stored and transported in "solid" form. This was on /. not too long back. The car used water to liberate the hydrogen, the chemical reaction created heat, (steam?), and hydrogen, which was then used to run the engine.
Ok, there you have it - a simple and cheap (I think) method of generating hydrogen, that doesn't use electrolysis of water or oil cracking, should be relatively polution free, and uses the sun's energy (essentially storing a portion of the sun's energy in the resultant hydrogen). Can anybody tell me what is wrong (or right?) about this idea? It seems blatently obvious based on history, but is there something I am missing that would rule out doing this?
I think they mean something like SLIP, via a modem connection. Think back to using 14.4 and 28.8 modems with Windows 3.1 and Trumpet WinSock to get browsing using Mosaic - then make it use a *lot* less memory. It is possible - but probably hairy like you wouldn't believe.
The original CoCo 2's had 16K standard, but later versions came with 32K and 64K (prior to the introduction of the CoCo 3). At one time, there was a guy selling kits, etc for installing up to 2MB (I think, maybe 4MB?) of RAM into a CoCo 3 using SIMMs (30 or 72 pin - can't remember). Crazy what people can do with their old machines. I am personally kinda excited about this whole thing - I have an old CoCo 3 with 512K that is just begging for something like this.
Anyhow, I think that is right...IANAL...
This is where things get funky, at least over here in the States. Most (not all, I think) states in the the US have certain license restrictions, and vehicle restrictions. These states won't give you a license for a vehicle if the engine is under a certain minimum combustion chamber volume (typically measured in CC's, sometimes CI's). It varies from typically 100-250 CCs. Anything above this restriction can be licensed for road use. The first class of vehicles, which are typically two-wheeled, are classified under the designation of "moped" or sometimes "scooter". The next class are motorcycles, then automobiles, then typically commercial vehicles (these larger vehicles - automobiles and commercial, are typically measured and classed by gross tonnage, I think).
Anyhow, anything less than a moped cannot typically be licensed for road use - even if they can keep up with traffic flow! Such vehicles are things like gopeds and motorized bicycles (which typically have engines under 100 CCs, or even electric). To make matters worse, the laws also typically state that motorized (sometimes they say engine powered - big difference) vehicles cannot be operated on sidewalks (small thing that helped to kill the Segway, besides cost). Finally, some municipalities require that human-powered bicycles be licensed to operate them.
What a tangled web is woven! All of this introduces a "grey area" of law, especially when you have an electric vehicle (which isn't engine powered, and has *no* CCs) concerned. I would hate to think what would happen if the vehicle was an electric-assist one (which I was thinking about playing with on mine)!
Basically, I am just going to build the thing, and make it seem as much like a recumbent bicycle as I can, and just play with it. If it seems like something I can "take out on the road", so to speak - I will probably look into seeing what can be done legally to license it (hey, and maybe I can get a tax break for alternate-energy usage to boot!)...
My room is relatively small (12' x 12'). I have a window behind me, but the blinds are drawn most of the time. My "desk" is a folding table, with a custom DC power distribution system mounted to the underside to deal with wall-wart issues (that is, I replaced my wall-warts with this system).
In a u-shape around me are black steel shelving racks I bought cheap at k-mart. They are actually composed of 1.5 units, so that they reach to the ceiling. They are bolted together and mounted to the wall to keep them from falling over. Underneath the window is a homemade wooden bookcase made from 1x12 pine, and stained in some brown-oak color. I have books and other things in all of these shelves.
On the top of the bookcase are various "knick-knacks" which evoke a "Renaissance-alchemist" feeling - a fake skull, an old-world style globe, a pewter mug, a glass goblet, and a wooden mortar/pestle. I have on one wall a large old-world style map (5' x 3' or so) in a wooden frame. On another wall I have a "spray-paint" artwork of space. I have another wooden shelf over my closet with other funky knick-knacks.
On my desk sits my monitor, kvm switch, keyboard, and scanner. Below sits my Linux box, and to my right sits my FreeSCO router/nat box for my network. All the wires for everything flow off the table and behind it down to the floor, and along the floor. Computer speakers are mounted to the wall, wires dangling to the floor and around my door to the computer.
I also have a desk lamp attached to the table, which is a magnifying lamp that I replaced the regular incandescent lamp with a compact flourescent type on. The magnifying lens allows me to inspect and work on various electronic projects where I need an "up close" look (I also can use the lamp to magnify small objects to take "up close" macro photos with my fixed-focus digital camera, which is handy). Adequate lighting is my only real issue - the lamp doesn't cut it sometimes (I can't really read by it well, unless I position it over the book). I have some regular flourescent lamps that I plan to attach to the metal shelves which should help, though.
I currently have the main frame finished (ie, cut and welded - still needs painting, but asthetics will be left for last), with the motor mount plate and the seat attached to it.
I am currently working on the steering column extension (had to cut/reweld to lengthen the bit to raise the handlebar piece, but I still need to come up with a longer wedge bolt to hold it in place). I also need to build the foot rests up front (probably going to be a short length of steel tubing with the pedals welded on at the ends, with the tubing welded in a "T" config to another piece of tubing that will slide and be adjustable to leg length). There is also the decision about where to put the batteries - I have given thoughts to a rack above the rear wheel, or in a pannier-style case configuration, or possibly below the keel tube. I like the last two options, though they would be more difficult to construct, because they ensure a low CoG, whereas the first is easier to build, but give a higher CoG, and could be more dangerous in the event of an accident, because they would be behind my head.
The vehicle is a "short wheelbase, above seat steering recumbent" design, which is the simplest to design and build (I wanted under-seat steering, but designing that and getting it to work safely is a bitch). It is made from two bikes which I took apart and welded back together - a 20" girls BMX bike, and a 26" womens 10-speed road bike. I bought both at yard sales, for $15.00 total. My motor was also cheap (IIRC, $25.00 or so). Extra steel was scrap.
I have the motor, which is a nice 90VDC continuous-duty ball bearing motor, has a lot of torque for its size. It needs new bearings, though, which I will probably install or have installed after I get into the final build stages. It will be mounted on the motor mount using two large hose clamps. I didn't want to weld it on, because if I needed to service the motor or replace it, it is hard to break a weld. Plus welding could damage the motor (ruin the magnets, or warp the casing). Any other form of mounting, such a using the screw holes on the motor's c-face, require precise machining of mountings, for which I don't have the tools. The clamps will work good, are fairly standard, and strong.
The motor will drive the rear wheel via the chain to the back wheel. The rear of the vehicle is a 26" 10-speed bike, so I will have a derailleur. If there is enough torque to move my butt and keep it going, then I will have 5 forward speeds. If not, then I will have to weld one of the larger front sprockets in place on the back to reduce the gear ratio front-to-back, and have only one gear (though I could then use a speed controller with the batteries for different speed settings). I am trying to initially avoid a speed controller, due to cost reasons (so far, I am under $100.00 in this thing).
The sprocket for the motor is actually an ANSI #40 9-tooth chain sprocket, milled down for bicycle chain by a local machine shop (ANSI #40 chain has the same pitch as bike chain, 1/2 inch, but is wider, hence the sprocket was wider for the industrial use, and needed milling). Actually, that sprocket is the most crucial piece to find if you are going to be building any kind of motor or engine powered small vehicle - I had to do a bunch of research to find what I needed, and to speak the talk to a local supplier of sprockets. Once I found my part (I think it cost $10.00), he recommended a close-by machine shop, which amazingly (through the charm of my brother-in-law) did the work for free (even if they hadn't, the time for the milling would have only cost me $60.00 max).
This has been a very fun project to work on. It has mainly been a way for me to practice and get better at my welding, while building something both practical and alternative. When I am done, I might submit it as an article for /. (not sure if I want to be /.'d or not). At any rate, it has been something way different from coding on my *nix box, most certainly.
BTW, before anyone questions "why don't I use a go-ped like engine" - noise is the main reason, laws are another (as in legal grey area).
Commercial-wise, my "favorite" (I am not affiliated with them or anything - I just like the tech) company doing this is a company called AirFiber. What is most cool about the tech is that they have an "auto-alignment" system to compensate for any angular/distance changes in the laser. That would be cool unto itself, but what gives it geek cred (and is little known - though I remember reading an article about it either here or on some other site a few years ago) is that the mirror alignment system was originally designed and prototyped (perhaps even uses it today - dunno) using an automobile electric-mirror positioning system (basically a fancy pushbutton external mirror alignment).
Of course, any discussion about LaserComm or LEDComm wouldn't be complete without mentioning the homebrew Twibright Labs Ronja Project. There are also a few other such projects out there (none as advanced as Ronja, IMHO) - I have mentioned them in other comments on such articles here on /. - search for them if you care...
If you needed to get right-of-way in order to send a microwave transmission between two spots, why is it that Hughes (Dish Network - or whoever they are called now) somehow has permission to "beam" their transmissions all over the f'in United States? I don't remember giving them "right-of-way" access to the ground my home sits on...
Yes, I too think it will probably get a lot worse before things come to a head - I only hope when that time comes we are prepared for it and the possible consequences - my greatest fear is that in the mad rush to correct things, the ideals will be lost and what gets put back into place will be worse than what was there before.
You seem to be ignorant about something: both Perl and VB are Turing Complete languages, plus VB is a (native) compiled language since version 5, and if you count P-code, since forever (if Java is allowed to be a compiled language yet run on a VM, why can't VB P-code be considered compiled? Also, the VB compiler runs a couple of steps, first a translation of the code into something the VC++ compiler understands, then the compilation is done using the VC++ compiler (since version 5, and when native compilation is enabled). Hell, there may be a Perl compiler out there somewhere as well.
What I am trying to get at is there isn't any difference between most "programming" languages and "scripting" languages - they are all programming languages - it does not matter if the source is directly interpreted, compiled to p-code (or other byte-codes) and interpreted, or compiled to native machine code (which, BTW, is on most current processors *still* interpreted - ever hear of microcode?). There are scripting "languages" out there that have the C/C++ syntax - would a C scripter be any less of a application developer than a C programmer? Any language can be a scripting language, and just about any scripting language can be a programming language.
The only types of scripting languages that anyone could even think about rightfully "sneering" at would be a non-Turing Complete one - but in the end who gives a care if the application is developed, works, and satifies the client's needs? THAT is what matters in the end.
Oh, and BTW - I code in VB, and very well I might add (among other languages I know - I am programmer first, VB coder second)...
That code you showed was probably the WORST example VB code I have seen. I agree that it was crap code - but not because it was done in VB, but because it was crap - heck, it wasn't even a valid implementation of a bubble sort (it doesn't terminate when no swaps are done, and it "waterfalls" or something with the "i" loop variable that slows it down by iterating through progressively larger and larger sets). Furthermore, the variable are declared (default) as type Variant, rather than a faster Long or Integer type (depending on how many items are in the array). I can almost forgive the array for being of a Variant type, but it given that he was sorting directory contents, probably should have been String. Gsize being a long, but having to be typecast to a Variant for the "i" For-Next. Plus, two loops? Should be doable with only one. Damn, all I can say is that is crap VB code. Had he just made those improvements, it would have ran marginally faster.
Yeah, a Quicksort would have been better - any competant VB coder already has a Quicksort function available in their toolset, or knows where to find a C version to translate from. If raw speed is all you want, Quicksort is the way to go. But you also need to know when to balance speed of execution with speed of coding - unless you already have a VB Quicksort function available, it might take a bit to cobble one up and verify it works properly. Depending on the task, a form of sort not a lot of people know about - better and as easy to implement as a bubble sort, and faster - but slower than a Quicksort - in fact, it only takes a couple more instructions to add into a proper bubble sort to get it working - it is called the "comb" sort.
For most directory content listing sorts, it would work fine (yeah, there are cases where there are a bajillion entries to sort through - this sort isn't for it, but it handles way more entries than a bubble sort in less time - it actually isn't too bad, and is as easy to implement as a bubble sort). Also, depending on the number of entries (for example, if you knew you were always sorting 10-50 items), a Quicksort would be overkill to implement, especially if the project needed to be done yesterday, whereas a bubble sort would be fine for the task, at least until you got a breather to implement something better.
Yeah, the code was crap - not the language (ok, I concede that VB isn't the be-all-end-all of programming languages - but you got to admit that it holds its own - and there are a TON of applications out there written using it, albeit for Windows only, sadly). Personally, I think that if there was an open-source implementation of a VB-like language (ie, a RAD language, with the BASIC-like syntax, but drop the GOTO verb, dammit!), for *nix, you would see the general application market on *nix explode (and by applications, I mean "real-world" apps businesses use, not necessarily desktop or games stuff).
Like it or not, VB is *the* thing that has really made Windows for Microsoft, acting as both a simple to use application development platform, and a glue language/scripting platform that was simple to understand. Unfortunately, that is also its weakness, in that it allows just about anyone to be a "programmer" and create crap code like your co-worker...
Yeah, perhaps this might be considered "non-illegal" today, but who knows what the future would bring. Despite such laws and proto-laws like the DMCA and UCITA, I doubt any of us could have forseen the likes of a law like the PATRIOT Act, nor the ramifications of it (which will reverberate and continue to shape policy for decades to come, BTW). Who is to say what is "legal" today will not be made "illegal" tommorow, where past "confessions" will be used against future "crimes"?
Think it can't happen? It already has.
Basically, the singularity is the advancement of intelligence, not technology (though technology is the driver of that advancement).
I often wonder about this topic myself. The Singularity, emergence theory, Matrioshka brains, nanotech, and Stephen Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science" are *all* interelated, and should be studied and looked into at depth by those wishing to understand all of this more.
I was thinking something the other night - what if current life (as we perceive and know it) is actually the product of a Turing machine? In a way, I am restating (someone famous from the 18th or 19th century whom I can't remember the name of right now) the theory of how would we know if our reality is "real" - ie, the question of the Matrix? But deeper - not "AI has taken over" - but what if the universe is actually a running Turing Machine (as postulated by Wolfram in ANKOS)? Because a Turing machine is a state machine, if everything was running on this Turing machine, we could never know how fast that machine was running, because from state-to-state could be a long time, but because our "time" is based on the running of the machine, we could never perceive the "changes" between states. Could we? I don't know - but I was thinking about this, how such a thing could be running - but then, what is it running on - and who is running it? And why? Will it be turned off? Can we communicate back "outside" the "box" we are in? Can we prove we are not "inside" a box?
Exciting, and scary at the same time...
I know I am going to be flamed for this, but this very topic is discussed at extreme length in Stephen Wolfram's book, "A New Kind of Science". He specifically goes on end about a particular one-dimensional cellular automata, "rule 110" (IIRC), which seems to produce randomness, but which is based off of a small handful of simple rules, and a base starting condition of a single black pixel. He demonstrates in excruciating detail how, no matter how complicated you make a system, that all such systems can be brought back to the set of simple one-dimensional CAs. He demostrates how Turing machines can be set up (via initial starting conditions - not just a single pixel) which use these same CA to perform Turing machine calculations - thus these same CA can, in theory, execute (albeit very slowly) and emulate any current computer or program in existance today. He names this "the principle of computational equivalence".
He explores at great length how systems that are seemingly random can actually be simulated by these self-same CAs, which are based on simple sets of rules - blowing away the time-held notion that complexity arises from an underlying complex ruleset. It stands to reason that given the ruleset, and a result output from the CA, one can work back to the initial starting conditions - the problem arises in that we may only have the initial conditions, figuring out that ruleset is (probably) impossible.
He explores our current methods of perception and analysis, and shows how while our current methods of analysis show that something is random, as humans using our senses we have an affinity for picking out what look to be like patterns - he seems to make the point (unless I have misinterpreted him - which is very likely) that it isn't our senses decieving us, it is our methods of analysis that are incomplete. He also presents ideas and thoughts on how we can overcome these limitations.
The book is much more than that, however - I have read articles dismissing the work as everything from a form of plagerism (at worse) to restating others thoughts (at best). I do not believe this is the case. While it is true many others in the past have played with CAs, what Wolfram has done is go that extra step, building on these ideas and bringing them all together under one umbrella of thought. He acknowledges this throughout the book.
Anyone interested in these topics and others tangent to them owes it to themselves to read Wolfram's book and come to their own conclusions. I honestly believe he is on to something, which could have profound effects in the future (perhaps far in the future, but much sooner if we read it and understand it now).
Other related links:
Collection of Reviews on ANKOS
Stephen Wolfram's Web Site
ANKOS Web Site
BTW - check out the other experiments on there - cool stuff...
Ok, I know that was pretty incoherent - the problem is economically interfacing the virtual with the real (ie, e-cash may not feed you). I wonder if anybody realizes what this is going to do to the internet if it catches on - small businesses would be hit hard (unless a cheap service provider steps up to fill the gap), leaving online large, online retailers to fill the gap, which nobody will shop at, because it would be cheaper to go to the b&m version in town (no shipping, etc). So, their online arms would close down eventually - then little to no "local" (to America, that is) online retailers (maybe that is a good thing, internet pre-1995 or so). Perhaps people will simply start doing more foreign shopping (will be fun to see how they will tax that) - though if you thought shipping was high now, well...
I also agree with the argument of the "taxation w/o representation" of taxing sales outside the state, and use-tax crap - ugh.
What really galls me is they should have seen this coming - and not split out online and mail order sales in their accounting (which I am sure threw up big flags in government), then maybe the use-tax argument (ie, the customers aren't bothering to pay it, bother them, not us) would have come up (ie, it would seem like all sales were catalog sales, which in reality they were). Of course, then they would be wanting purchase history lists, customer names and addresses - to audit all of America (that would have been a big wake up call, though).
How long are we going to take this taxing crap? I have no problem paying taxes, but I *do* have a problem with paying taxes multiple times on the same money - first income tax, then sales tax, etc. This is supposed to be unlawful, but it continues, nobody says enough - gah!
Yeah, this tax thing is a small thing - but it seems like not a day goes by where I don't here about another "small thing" that takes a bit of my liberty and freedom away, and decreases my quality of life (and yeah, I realize as an American it is pretty damn high compared to the rest of the world) - sooner or later the people won't have anything left, and the government will *still* continue to ask (no! make that DEMAND, under penalty of prison) more - more, more, MORE!!!
Something has to break, and it will probably break soon - when it does, it is going to be VERY UGLY...
As far as the human genome being so small (raltively), whereas the sum of it's parts is the greater (a human being) - there is interesting stuff here. From what I have read, a lot of the human genome map is "junk" DNA - that is, DNA codes which seem to serve no useful purpose. Of course, then one reads about self-organizing circuit systems which "build" an oscillator with parts seemingly not needed - but take the parts away, and the circuit ceases to operate.
I really must impress upon you to read Stephen Wolfram's book - despite reviews which seem to pan it as being nothing more than a rehash of older information, I truely believe after reading it that he is on to something - that the information he has given us (and "given" really is the right word - honestly, he isn't making money off the book - something like 50,000 copies printed, and only selling them for around $40.00 (US), for a ~1300 page book!) could possibly lead to the understanding and reverse-engineering of the human genome (ie, being able to code for/on/with it), among other interesting possibilities.
As far as my thoughts about a corporate entity "eliminating" a perceived threat:
I think there is a level at which the business must grow to in order to become such a "self-organized, emergent being" - I think it is somewhere around 500-1000 employees. There also must be excellent communication among the employee units, as well. Most larger companies fit this bill (ie, Microsoft, IBM, Sony, etc). The more units, the "smarter" the entity. The real problem is that as a "sub-unit", an individual will most likely find it impossible to figure out what the "corporate being" is thinking. We have an inkling something is happenning (which is among the reasons why we anthromorphize companies), but we never really know what is truely happenning.
The scary thing is that neither do the people running the corporation - they may pretend they do, but they really don't. We call certain companies "evil" based on their business practices - but rarely are the principles, and hardly ever the employees, of the company act in a malign manner. They simply are following a certain business ruleset (the program), which also runs in a distributed manner (among the employee units and groups within the corporate entity).
Another thing to consider - what happens when you get these corporate groups together, in another organization, with feedback loops, etc - would another "larger" entity arise? Groups like the MPAA and RIAA may be indicative of this. Governments are another larger system like this. Of course, this can scale to the planet. I also tend to wonder about how the internet, connecting people, seems to have a totally "separate" mind from the "corporate entitys" - it is like the employee units are being used in two separate entity "minds", one corporate, the other private - but they do interact, because the corporate helps make up the internet, and vice-versa (this hurts your head if you think too long about it).
I tend to wonder if it isn't at all possible for the elimination of some of the sub-units (ie, those that get "too smart" for the entity minds) wouldn't involve actual death, but a death that seems natural, or at worse, accidental. I also tend to wonder if me merely dicussing this and thinking about it, will cause my "premature departure"? After all, the feedback loop is running as we discuss this, right?
Lastly, on the idea of "killing" these entitys, should it prove to be needed (or desired): If these entitys are a fact, and can be proven - then it would do us well to study exactly why companies like Enron and such folded and went under. People point and say "Greed and Corruption!" - but why did such memes take hold, and how would you "insert" such a meme into the "host entity"? In this case, the meme of "greed and corruption" could act like a virus, devouring the company from inside out. Another way might be to sever the lines of feedback - without feedback, the organism would die (this is true of any organism). In the case of the greed meme, the feedback was probably destroyed by distrust - but are there other ways to sever the links?
Think about the future "hacker" - instead of creating viruses to destroy corporate servers, the hacker might instead be able to create and insert destructive "memes" in the corporate entity, to bring about its total destruction? A more savvy hacker could possibly insert a meme or something to have information come back to him, or possibly even change the entity in some way (imagine a way to change a corporation from greedy to alruistic, or vice-versa) that would benifit him or others? Could one corporate entity do this to another? Why not? Could it be detected, and if so, how?
These and many other questions of this nature arise, and it may be a *very* dangerous, but challenging, game to play, if you choose to play it.
A more intelligent person would look at the pattern of negatives vs. positives, as well as the comments (and responses to) of the negatives. Add in any "neutral" comments, and where the placement of all those comments are.
For example, if the seller has a high point value, but around December/January they get a quantity of negatives saying "shipping to slow" or "no response", but then in February on there were positives, it would be "Duh, holiday rush - probably a good seller otherwise". If there were sporadic negatives, and the comments seem incoherent, or whatnot - maybe it was just mean people, or someone trying to scam or something - or if the comment was negative but polite - hey, were people, not robots - sometimes the seller screws up, but hopefully will attempt to make it right. If there is nothing but good comments in the past, but then a whole rash of bad comments at the end of a good comment run - that may be a bad sign, a sign that the account was sold or something. Another thing is if there seems to be a "regular" pattern/frequency of good to bad comments (ie, spaced out, but about an equal number of good vs bad) - that may be an indicator of a sharing of the account (one guy sucks, the other is cool) - which may be the case if the account belongs to a business like a surplus dealer or pawn shop.
I try to take in all of this, and sort it out, before bidding. I also take in the number of points, and decide if I am willing to bid with the account on that (ie, if the guy has lower points than what I do, I check to see what the points are for, ratio of sells to buys for positives - ie, he may be a good bidder, but a bad seller, or vice versa). Finally, no matter what, if the bid is for something over $100.00, I will use a credit card, if over $300.00, I would reccommend the use of an escrow service (and a credit card)...