One of the things that I love about GPS data is that they've pretty much decided on a standard -- the NMEA data format. When I first got my Navman GPS for my iPAQ, I thought it was cool. I thought that the included navigation software was cool, and I thought that seeing my exact coordinates was cool. That could have been the end of it, and I would have been happy.
However, most GPS devices dump their data out in a standard CSV format. This makes it very easy for 3rd party software developers to treat a GPS device as a commodity. Rather than dealing specifically with Garman / Navman / etc, they just read the standard. It's great.
It also makes it trivial to write your own apps that interface with a saved data file. I wrote a really small app to overlay a car trip on a map, including red dots where I stopped. Now you can really say, "I'm serious -- look at how bad traffic was!" I've heard of other innovative programs, too, like correlating the timestamp on a picture from a digital camera with the GPS log to give you the coordinates where the picture was taken.
1)&nbs p; UTC time of position fix, hhmmss.sss format. 2) Status, A = data valid, V = data not valid. 3) Latitude, ddmm.mmmm format. 4) Latitude hemisphere, N or S. 5) Longitude, dddmmm.mmmm format. 6) Longitude hemisphere, E or W. 7) Speed over ground, 0.0 to 1851.8 knots. 8) Course over ground, 000.0 to 359.9 degrees, true. 9) Date, ddmmyy format. 10) Magnetic variation, 000.0 to 180.O. 11) Degrees 12) Checksum.
You could apply many of the ideas in his article to the concept of code reuse. However, he is far from making the recommendation that we toss abstractions completely.
Do you care to rewrite IE/Mozilla so you don't have to deal with its internals? Do you care to rewrite your TCL/C#/MFC application in native API calls so you don't have to deal with its internals? If you do, then you're doing yourself a disservice. Rewriting those abstractions to avoid the internals means you'll be neck-deep in them.
When I was learning Dvorak, I printed out a Dvorak keyboard layout and had it rest against my monitor and the function keys of my keyboard.
That way, when I _really_ needed to know where a letter was, I would just look at the picture, rather than the keyboard. After a few hours, you stop looking at the paper -- and you don't have to worry about starting the bad habit of looking at the keys on your keyboard.
You can still learn Dvorak on ergonomic keyboards / converted typewriters / etc without having to mash the carefully-designed hardware.
You greedy moderators are all bastards. I wanted to mod this +funny, but selfish moderators before me already capped the post! CAPPED THE FUCKING POST!!!
Thanks for this mirror. When I saw how light the page was, I wondered how the site could have been slashdotted. Well, this is how:
Page weight (HTML + Graphics): 43kb = 0.043 Mb)
Slashdot serves 50,000,000 pages per month according to the Slashdot FAQ
50,000,000 pages per month = 138,888 pages per hour (assuming peak hours
get 1/12 of the the daily traffic.)
This page got slashdotted in about 1 hour.
If every/. page view during that hour clicked through, this site served
0.043Mb * 138,888 = 5972 Mb.
This is still waaay under the bandwidth caps of most hosting accounts, but is probably more than anybody wants to serve in an hour. You've still got the rest of the month to go!
I was worried that the signal would degrade after the war started (like it did with the last war,) but I continue to use my Navman GPS sleeve on my iPAQ for a great deal of automated driving directions.
According to the article, "this is the non-binding outcome of a one-year mediation effort by the patent office between VG Wort, Fujitsu Siemens Computers, Germany's largest computer manufacturer and other makers."
Where does VG Wort, an association of German musicians, composers, etc, get the right to even suggest this? This isn't coming from drunken politicans, this isn't coming from overactive legislation, this is coming from a private agency. What's stopping these computer companies from just thumbing their nose at VG Wort?
I really do think we need a tariff on clothes though. Without clothes, I would be to embarassed to go to the store and buy music. And when I buy music, I inevitably pirate it on my favourite P2P service. So truly, clothes are the "enabler" in this vast ring of music piracy.
Back in the day, "Ansi Bombs" were considered an art form. With the art scene so active, you could usually embed some evil escape string in a good looking graphic and know that you were going to get people.
The problem was DOS' overly-powerful ANSI.SYS interpreter. It let you remap any key to an arbitrary set of keys, making keyboard macros pretty easy. However, it also let evildoers remap "Space" to, for example, "del *.*, enter, y, enter." Luckily, there were third party ANSI interpreters that didn't suffer this vulnerability.
One time, when I was about to reformat my HD, I even wrote an ANSI bomb to do it. Crazy stuff. There's an interesting (and of course, old) paper about it here.
I've never really understood how so many dupes show up on Slashdot. Until now.
I stumbled on this site when I was trying to figure out how many solder points would go into a home-made modem for a bbs. I thought it was cool, and didn't recognize it as a dupe even though I read/. The page-views were in the low hundreds, so I felt safe that it hadn't seen much traffic. So I submitted it.
Feel free to troll in response to this, because I won't reply to them anyways. But for those with an open mind, you might like to know one way a dupe can legitimately happen.
when I test-sent the html-file as an attachment to myself
That should explain it, although I could be wrong. If your filter doesn't look inside of attachments (which I think is the norm,) it could very well look like spam. If it does look inside of attachments, I think it's time to review the mail you trained your "spam" on. Many others, even those using SpamAssassin with its default threshold, have mentioned that the CryptoGram gets through.
When you run SpamAssassin in test mode, it tells you what rules got hit. You can also look at the headers in "Spam-Tagged" email to see what rules got hit. I looked for "Spam Testing" pages on the 'net, but had no luck.
Could someone run the Crypto newsletter through SA to find out what cased its evaluation?
As an aside, Counterpane could have done this to find out what the problem was, too. Not that they should have to, but they could have.
You're right, it's not easy. SpamAssassin does indeed have measurements that suggest a mail is not spam (the full list of tests are here, the negative ones,) but there very few.
I worked on spam filtering for a project in University, based on the computational linguistics field of genre classification. I first ran tons of spam and good email through a decision tree maker (using many statistics: word length, verb tense, number of possessive pronouns, and more) Once I let the _computer_ decide which statistics were important, I could run any mail through this decision tree and find out two things: the probability that it was spam, but also the probability that it was good email. This proved very effective, as does the simpler keyword-based prediction of bayesian filtering.
Determining statistics for good email is harder than determining statistics for spam, but it is possible.
This is exactly the problem with most content filtering approaches.
It is very hard to discern the difference between talk about sex, spam, viruses, etc and talk from sex, spam, viruses, etc. Newsletter authors go as far as writing "v*rus" and "sl*mmer" so that pitiful content filtering blocks don't trash them.
It gets even worse for email lists that use inline text ads. The ads alone would constitute spam, but they're nestled within several paragraphs of high-quality discussion.
The problem is that content filtering approaches usually only analyze the "spamminess" of a piece. They usually don't analyze the "goodness" of a piece. So if I put "hot teens go crazy for debt-free viagra while earning $$$ from home" in the middle of some fine Shakespeare, that will get flagged as spam.
The new "bayesian" approaches are finally dealing with this problem -- something can look an awful lot like spam, but it will be saved if it looks even more like legitimate email.
In this case, spam doesn't generally run for 21 pages with words like "cryptography," and "full disclosure."
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that didn't do it. I didn't realize there was a ton of shit to go through to be a tracker. Here's a public one: Here Nice guy there, by the way.
I think this should do it: Halo Jump (High Res) Torrent
Red vs Blue (DiVX) Red vs Blue (Quicktime)
I'm downloading the Warthog jump right now (ETA 25 mins,) so I'll make that torrent when I get it.
There's a ton of MS source code geocached, you just need to visit the right websites to find it.
Longitude: -122.13099913, Latitude: 47.63839512
One of the things that I love about GPS data is that they've pretty much decided on a standard -- the NMEA data format. When I first got my Navman GPS for my iPAQ, I thought it was cool. I thought that the included navigation software was cool, and I thought that seeing my exact coordinates was cool. That could have been the end of it, and I would have been happy.
However, most GPS devices dump their data out in a standard CSV format. This makes it very easy for 3rd party software developers to treat a GPS device as a commodity. Rather than dealing specifically with Garman / Navman / etc, they just read the standard. It's great.
It also makes it trivial to write your own apps that interface with a saved data file. I wrote a really small app to overlay a car trip on a map, including red dots where I stopped. Now you can really say, "I'm serious -- look at how bad traffic was!" I've heard of other innovative programs, too, like correlating the timestamp on a picture from a digital camera with the GPS log to give you the coordinates where the picture was taken.
The most useful GPS data is the "RMC" string:
If you're interested, the data format is here.
You could apply many of the ideas in his article to the concept of code reuse. However, he is far from making the recommendation that we toss abstractions completely.
Do you care to rewrite IE/Mozilla so you don't have to deal with its internals? Do you care to rewrite your TCL/C#/MFC application in native API calls so you don't have to deal with its internals? If you do, then you're doing yourself a disservice. Rewriting those abstractions to avoid the internals means you'll be neck-deep in them.
Heh, but you're the kind of guy who touches the glass of his monitor, I'll bet :)
I could never stand to deface my computer that way...
When I was learning Dvorak, I printed out a Dvorak keyboard layout and had it rest against my monitor and the function keys of my keyboard.
That way, when I _really_ needed to know where a letter was, I would just look at the picture, rather than the keyboard. After a few hours, you stop looking at the paper -- and you don't have to worry about starting the bad habit of looking at the keys on your keyboard.
You can still learn Dvorak on ergonomic keyboards / converted typewriters / etc without having to mash the carefully-designed hardware.
Actually, it was more RAM.
She's a nympho, you know.
For the love of all things scientific, have mercy on their 122MB TIFF image.
And to think that we've turned servers into slag by Slashdotting a 43kb page.
You greedy moderators are all bastards. I wanted to mod this +funny, but selfish moderators before me already capped the post! CAPPED THE FUCKING POST!!!
They like to leave them in their RSS feed, though!
But at least they save us the trouble of having to realize it's a dupe :)
You can get the 1.3mb PDF (so you can read it on your own time, have your download manager wait instead of you) here
Thanks for this mirror. When I saw how light the page was, I wondered how the site could have been slashdotted. Well, this is how:
This is still waaay under the bandwidth caps of most hosting accounts, but is probably more than anybody wants to serve in an hour. You've still got the rest of the month to go!
Nuff said.
I was worried that the signal would degrade after the war started (like it did with the last war,) but I continue to use my Navman GPS sleeve on my iPAQ for a great deal of automated driving directions.
I think I'm missing something here.
According to the article, "this is the non-binding outcome of a one-year mediation effort by the patent office between VG Wort, Fujitsu Siemens Computers, Germany's largest computer manufacturer and other makers."
Where does VG Wort, an association of German musicians, composers, etc, get the right to even suggest this? This isn't coming from drunken politicans, this isn't coming from overactive legislation, this is coming from a private agency. What's stopping these computer companies from just thumbing their nose at VG Wort?
I really do think we need a tariff on clothes though. Without clothes, I would be to embarassed to go to the store and buy music. And when I buy music, I inevitably pirate it on my favourite P2P service. So truly, clothes are the "enabler" in this vast ring of music piracy.
Back in the day, "Ansi Bombs" were considered an art form. With the art scene so active, you could usually embed some evil escape string in a good looking graphic and know that you were going to get people.
The problem was DOS' overly-powerful ANSI.SYS interpreter. It let you remap any key to an arbitrary set of keys, making keyboard macros pretty easy. However, it also let evildoers remap "Space" to, for example, "del *.*, enter, y, enter." Luckily, there were third party ANSI interpreters that didn't suffer this vulnerability.
One time, when I was about to reformat my HD, I even wrote an ANSI bomb to do it. Crazy stuff. There's an interesting (and of course, old) paper about it here.
The fact that it runs Linux was just one cool part of the project
Exactly. That's why my summary also mentions the GPS, HAM Radio, Digital camera, surplus batteries, and Perl!
I've never really understood how so many dupes show up on Slashdot. Until now.
I stumbled on this site when I was trying to figure out how many solder points would go into a home-made modem for a bbs. I thought it was cool, and didn't recognize it as a dupe even though I read /. The page-views were in the low hundreds, so I felt safe that it hadn't seen much traffic. So I submitted it.
Feel free to troll in response to this, because I won't reply to them anyways. But for those with an open mind, you might like to know one way a dupe can legitimately happen.
Where are my Mod +Funny points when I need them? :)
Wow, sounds exactly like a game of Mastermind. But instead, you only get the "right color, maybe right place" pegs back.
when I test-sent the html-file as an attachment to myself
That should explain it, although I could be wrong. If your filter doesn't look inside of attachments (which I think is the norm,) it could very well look like spam. If it does look inside of attachments, I think it's time to review the mail you trained your "spam" on. Many others, even those using SpamAssassin with its default threshold, have mentioned that the CryptoGram gets through.
When you run SpamAssassin in test mode, it tells you what rules got hit. You can also look at the headers in "Spam-Tagged" email to see what rules got hit. I looked for "Spam Testing" pages on the 'net, but had no luck.
Could someone run the Crypto newsletter through SA to find out what cased its evaluation?
As an aside, Counterpane could have done this to find out what the problem was, too. Not that they should have to, but they could have.
You're right, it's not easy. SpamAssassin does indeed have measurements that suggest a mail is not spam (the full list of tests are here, the negative ones,) but there very few.
I worked on spam filtering for a project in University, based on the computational linguistics field of genre classification. I first ran tons of spam and good email through a decision tree maker (using many statistics: word length, verb tense, number of possessive pronouns, and more) Once I let the _computer_ decide which statistics were important, I could run any mail through this decision tree and find out two things: the probability that it was spam, but also the probability that it was good email. This proved very effective, as does the simpler keyword-based prediction of bayesian filtering.
Determining statistics for good email is harder than determining statistics for spam, but it is possible.
This is exactly the problem with most content filtering approaches.
It is very hard to discern the difference between talk about sex, spam, viruses, etc and talk from sex, spam, viruses, etc. Newsletter authors go as far as writing "v*rus" and "sl*mmer" so that pitiful content filtering blocks don't trash them.
It gets even worse for email lists that use inline text ads. The ads alone would constitute spam, but they're nestled within several paragraphs of high-quality discussion.
The problem is that content filtering approaches usually only analyze the "spamminess" of a piece. They usually don't analyze the "goodness" of a piece. So if I put "hot teens go crazy for debt-free viagra while earning $$$ from home" in the middle of some fine Shakespeare, that will get flagged as spam.
The new "bayesian" approaches are finally dealing with this problem -- something can look an awful lot like spam, but it will be saved if it looks even more like legitimate email.
In this case, spam doesn't generally run for 21 pages with words like "cryptography," and "full disclosure."