While I think that Van Allen's concerns come from an important introspection brewing in the space community regarding mission safety and purpose -- and hence have an important short-term merit -- I think that history ultimately will reveal such a prohibitory stance toward direct human participation in spaceflight to be anachronistic. Unless as a civilization we choose to shirk the undeniable energy and material resources that avail us in space, and we also choose to stem the population growth of humanity, we will find great purpose by settling the solar system.
I find many of these criticisms of Lilypond to be unfounded. I think that some people misguidely search for the singular, ideal solution to a software problem, when singular solutions simply do not exist. If you want a Finale-a-like, or a Sibelius-a-like, either start coding, or politely ask developers to consider making one. But please refrain from attacking a software model that may simply not be for you. Most people want to see their results directly rather than interact with a meta-language. As a music professor, I have never used Lilypond (nor heard of it) but I use the common typesetting tool LaTeX to write articles. I am very used to working with an abstract specification for a document, and Lilypond seems to be somewhat intriguing to me. Perhaps I am minority, but this should not matter. The tool exists and real honest people may actually find it useful. Why can't Lilypond be what it is to those that find it an invaluable tool? If you want something different go create it! I work on MacOS X and I have never ever used Finale or Sibelius or any other music typesetting language here, as I am a computer musician, but I may consider creating acoustic music again as I discover typesetting tools like this.
Apple is really ahead of the game here -- iDVD is very reliable and easy to use, though simplistic. Apple's DVD Studio Pro gives excellent authoring support for more sophisticated authoring.
MacOS X is an excellent UNIX alternative.... and you won't ever have to pay SCO licensing fees for OSX... =)
Yes you are right, I was under a rock too. I will apologize as it is obvious that Hawley has done significant publishing on the topic of music and computers.
I would like to point out however that USENIX and the Computing Systems Journal are less familar journals to many computer musicians.
The long-published "Computer Music Journal" from MIT's own press, the proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC), and most importantly for this particular context: the Proceedings of the NIME (New Interfaces for Musical Expression) Conference, are venues that have countless articles that directly approach the topic of interfacing musicians to computers, from a wide gamut of philosophical and technical standpoints
IRCAM has published an excellent ebook on the topic of interfaces as well, which seems to have manifest after Hawley left.
MIT Professor Joe Paradiso is doing excellent work toward the end of extending musical interfaces, and he has presented at the NIME conference repeatedly.
I thought that Hawley's quote made him seem unaware of his colleague's work. Perhaps I am mistaken.
My rant, for which I apologize was a reaction to one quote:
' For him, there is 'no difference between an ivory keyboard and a QWERTY keyboard.'
I perhaps misunderstood his meaning, perhaps not. I am familar with this field and I know that great developments have been made, and this statement to me seemed unfortunately ignorant of them. I apologize if I am mistaken.
It is really odd that a MIT professor, who is virtually unpublished, and apparently highly ignorant, in the field of computer music, is sparking a conversation about musical interfaces.
Even the MIDI standard, which has been in active use for more than 20 years defies his belief that computers consider a QWERTY keyboard in an equivalent manner to a musical keyboard. Admittedly, MIDI is catastrophically lossy approximation of musical gesture, but it allows all sorts of parallel nuance to be transmitted to computers -- and has done so for two decades.
There are even developments at the Media Lab itself, which are not considered to be the best in the field, with interactive musical interfaces which far outpace this ignorant characterization of music technology. Bio-electric senors, accelerometers, bend sensors, pressure sensors, ad nauseum... all are actively being utilized by composers throughout the world to extend the musical performance interface. It is like he has his head under a rock. The fact that he doesn't acknowledge such developments is disturbing for a professor at the MIT Media Lab. This statement could have been made as late as 1982 and no further.
As much as I would like to believe that "music binds us together" I find such to be a romantic overgeneralization. Instead, music binds together some people -- people who choose to associate themselves with a particular lifestyle or ethos that is culturally associated with a music. Skaters, european bohemians, teen boppers, trekkies, rat pack foagies and many many more subcultures share an ethos, but it is hardly universal and the individuals in question may experience and consume their shared music in radically different ways.
You may have been thinking of John Williams' Star Wars theme and the community of Slashdotters who are, in your opinion, bound together with this single music. But it would require a Slashdot poll to find out if even this particular community is "bound" or "unified" by such music.
Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments
on
Singularity Sky
·
· Score: 1
Whether user control over comment sorting has any relevence would require a poll determining how many slashdotter actually utilize the feature.
Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments
on
Singularity Sky
·
· Score: 1
Thanks! But which is the default?
=)
Nicer try!
Ecology of Slashdot comments
on
Singularity Sky
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Not off topic, but meta topic.
Rarely do I get to see an interesting slashdot posting as it first appears. A moment of spare comments that allow me to post and comment. Unfortunately I have no interest to comment on this particular article -- but instead comment upon the peculiar way in which Slashdot articles resonate.
Comments are a pyramid on slashdot. The earliest posters receive guaranteed exposure to meta-moderation. As the life of the posting grows, new comers, no matter how relevant their comments may be, are relegated to the end.
New commenters should appear at the top rather than the bottom and be given a better opportunity for exposure and moderation.
Thus people will see recent posts and posts that score highly.
Hoorah
To say that knowledge of assembly language is a requirement of programmer excellence is a ludicrous generalization. The measurement of the ability of a programmer is enormously context-dependent. I can imagine that a low-level micro-controller programmer could possibly be far less qualified as a developer for a large Smalltalk based order management system, than a programmer with no knowledge of assembly or even C, who instead has a strong theoretical basis in object-oriented systems and Smalltalk development experience. Programming abstractions have created vastly different programming contexts which resonate with markedly different programming abilities and experience. Why does such ignorant conjecture pass the moderators on Slashdot?
I am a music professional and I hate DAT tape recorders. DAT has pitiful reliability and terrible shelf life. They also tend to have unreliable digital audio i/o. DAT tape is expensive and limited in recording duration. I am not willing to fork out $1500-$2000 for a decent portable DAT, and such a device would not fit in my pocket. Though considerably smaller than the Tascam and Sony professional DAT decks, I have had terrible difficulties with AIWA and Sony consumer DAT recorders. DAT is an atrocious medium that screams for a hard disk replacement. While the iPod with an audio input would not have high quality microphone preamps, it would definitely have tremendous utility for portable recording. DAT decks cannot compete with the iPod's compact profile and the enormous storage capacity (even when writing uncompressed pcm audio). The ease and reliability of digital audio transfer with an iPod would be most welcome.
Of course I would prefer a slightly larger device with balanced microphone inputs, but what company would even consider manufacturing one?
I almost didn't read this article when I saw it, but I was so glad I did. The article revealed that there were two devices that had stereo audio input and supported digital recording. I have been dreaming for this for more than a year. This is an extremely useful and powerful development that Apple really should not underestimate in their micro-managed effort to have the most elegant mp3 player design.
It seems that there is a strong, ignornant force at Apple that does not understand the value of analog audio inputs. Repeatedly, Apple has removed analog inputs from both their desktop and laptop computers. Thankfully, the current machines have them -- but only from massive consumer requests (including a letter from myself).
I already own the original revision iPod and I would jump in my car tomorrow and drive to an Apple store and buy a new one if it simply had a high-quality audio input.
It is asinine that someone would be entrusted to maintain the integrity of our democracy through their voting systems to have such a cynical view of the value of voting. It is not sensational to point out such text; it is yet another symptom of the corruption that is destroying the integrity of America's elections.
The most significant flaw with Kling's strategy is that Bayesian logic cannot infere the value of the unknown. Kling advocates an AI implementation of mainstream gatekeeping -- those that thrive on fringe information, thinking that defies machine, let alone human, categorization, will be atrociously neglected by such schemes. The fact that the his schemes reek with attitude, indicates perhaps that crap klings to Kling whenever he visits a restroom.
In OSX, it takes neglibile time to create a PDF formatted version of a Project Gutenberg text with nice readable fonts (such as Verdana). Such a text doesn't have as much value-added as a professionally generated PDF, but the advantages of plain-text distribution (size and malleability) out-weigh the disadvantages.
Slashdot Mirror
I find many of these criticisms of Lilypond to be unfounded. I think that some people misguidely search for the singular, ideal solution to a software problem, when singular solutions simply do not exist. If you want a Finale-a-like, or a Sibelius-a-like, either start coding, or politely ask developers to consider making one. But please refrain from attacking a software model that may simply not be for you. Most people want to see their results directly rather than interact with a meta-language. As a music professor, I have never used Lilypond (nor heard of it) but I use the common typesetting tool LaTeX to write articles. I am very used to working with an abstract specification for a document, and Lilypond seems to be somewhat intriguing to me. Perhaps I am minority, but this should not matter. The tool exists and real honest people may actually find it useful. Why can't Lilypond be what it is to those that find it an invaluable tool? If you want something different go create it! I work on MacOS X and I have never ever used Finale or Sibelius or any other music typesetting language here, as I am a computer musician, but I may consider creating acoustic music again as I discover typesetting tools like this.
Apple is really ahead of the game here -- iDVD is very reliable and easy to use, though simplistic. Apple's DVD Studio Pro gives excellent authoring support for more sophisticated authoring. MacOS X is an excellent UNIX alternative.... and you won't ever have to pay SCO licensing fees for OSX... =)
Yes you are right, I was under a rock too. I will apologize as it is obvious that Hawley has done significant publishing on the topic of music and computers. I would like to point out however that USENIX and the Computing Systems Journal are less familar journals to many computer musicians. The long-published "Computer Music Journal" from MIT's own press, the proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC), and most importantly for this particular context: the Proceedings of the NIME (New Interfaces for Musical Expression) Conference, are venues that have countless articles that directly approach the topic of interfacing musicians to computers, from a wide gamut of philosophical and technical standpoints IRCAM has published an excellent ebook on the topic of interfaces as well, which seems to have manifest after Hawley left. MIT Professor Joe Paradiso is doing excellent work toward the end of extending musical interfaces, and he has presented at the NIME conference repeatedly. I thought that Hawley's quote made him seem unaware of his colleague's work. Perhaps I am mistaken. My rant, for which I apologize was a reaction to one quote: ' For him, there is 'no difference between an ivory keyboard and a QWERTY keyboard.' I perhaps misunderstood his meaning, perhaps not. I am familar with this field and I know that great developments have been made, and this statement to me seemed unfortunately ignorant of them. I apologize if I am mistaken.
It is really odd that a MIT professor, who is virtually unpublished, and apparently highly ignorant, in the field of computer music, is sparking a conversation about musical interfaces. Even the MIDI standard, which has been in active use for more than 20 years defies his belief that computers consider a QWERTY keyboard in an equivalent manner to a musical keyboard. Admittedly, MIDI is catastrophically lossy approximation of musical gesture, but it allows all sorts of parallel nuance to be transmitted to computers -- and has done so for two decades. There are even developments at the Media Lab itself, which are not considered to be the best in the field, with interactive musical interfaces which far outpace this ignorant characterization of music technology. Bio-electric senors, accelerometers, bend sensors, pressure sensors, ad nauseum... all are actively being utilized by composers throughout the world to extend the musical performance interface. It is like he has his head under a rock. The fact that he doesn't acknowledge such developments is disturbing for a professor at the MIT Media Lab. This statement could have been made as late as 1982 and no further.
As much as I would like to believe that "music binds us together" I find such to be a romantic overgeneralization. Instead, music binds together some people -- people who choose to associate themselves with a particular lifestyle or ethos that is culturally associated with a music. Skaters, european bohemians, teen boppers, trekkies, rat pack foagies and many many more subcultures share an ethos, but it is hardly universal and the individuals in question may experience and consume their shared music in radically different ways. You may have been thinking of John Williams' Star Wars theme and the community of Slashdotters who are, in your opinion, bound together with this single music. But it would require a Slashdot poll to find out if even this particular community is "bound" or "unified" by such music.
Whether user control over comment sorting has any relevence would require a poll determining how many slashdotter actually utilize the feature.
Thanks! But which is the default? =) Nicer try!
Not off topic, but meta topic. Rarely do I get to see an interesting slashdot posting as it first appears. A moment of spare comments that allow me to post and comment. Unfortunately I have no interest to comment on this particular article -- but instead comment upon the peculiar way in which Slashdot articles resonate. Comments are a pyramid on slashdot. The earliest posters receive guaranteed exposure to meta-moderation. As the life of the posting grows, new comers, no matter how relevant their comments may be, are relegated to the end. New commenters should appear at the top rather than the bottom and be given a better opportunity for exposure and moderation. Thus people will see recent posts and posts that score highly. Hoorah
To say that knowledge of assembly language is a requirement of programmer excellence is a ludicrous generalization. The measurement of the ability of a programmer is enormously context-dependent. I can imagine that a low-level micro-controller programmer could possibly be far less qualified as a developer for a large Smalltalk based order management system, than a programmer with no knowledge of assembly or even C, who instead has a strong theoretical basis in object-oriented systems and Smalltalk development experience. Programming abstractions have created vastly different programming contexts which resonate with markedly different programming abilities and experience. Why does such ignorant conjecture pass the moderators on Slashdot?
Share the bugs please, or refrain in the future from trolling.
I am a music professional and I hate DAT tape recorders. DAT has pitiful reliability and terrible shelf life. They also tend to have unreliable digital audio i/o. DAT tape is expensive and limited in recording duration. I am not willing to fork out $1500-$2000 for a decent portable DAT, and such a device would not fit in my pocket. Though considerably smaller than the Tascam and Sony professional DAT decks, I have had terrible difficulties with AIWA and Sony consumer DAT recorders. DAT is an atrocious medium that screams for a hard disk replacement. While the iPod with an audio input would not have high quality microphone preamps, it would definitely have tremendous utility for portable recording. DAT decks cannot compete with the iPod's compact profile and the enormous storage capacity (even when writing uncompressed pcm audio). The ease and reliability of digital audio transfer with an iPod would be most welcome. Of course I would prefer a slightly larger device with balanced microphone inputs, but what company would even consider manufacturing one?
I almost didn't read this article when I saw it, but I was so glad I did. The article revealed that there were two devices that had stereo audio input and supported digital recording. I have been dreaming for this for more than a year. This is an extremely useful and powerful development that Apple really should not underestimate in their micro-managed effort to have the most elegant mp3 player design. It seems that there is a strong, ignornant force at Apple that does not understand the value of analog audio inputs. Repeatedly, Apple has removed analog inputs from both their desktop and laptop computers. Thankfully, the current machines have them -- but only from massive consumer requests (including a letter from myself). I already own the original revision iPod and I would jump in my car tomorrow and drive to an Apple store and buy a new one if it simply had a high-quality audio input.
It is asinine that someone would be entrusted to maintain the integrity of our democracy through their voting systems to have such a cynical view of the value of voting. It is not sensational to point out such text; it is yet another symptom of the corruption that is destroying the integrity of America's elections.
The most significant flaw with Kling's strategy is that Bayesian logic cannot infere the value of the unknown. Kling advocates an AI implementation of mainstream gatekeeping -- those that thrive on fringe information, thinking that defies machine, let alone human, categorization, will be atrociously neglected by such schemes. The fact that the his schemes reek with attitude, indicates perhaps that crap klings to Kling whenever he visits a restroom.
In OSX, it takes neglibile time to create a PDF formatted version of a Project Gutenberg text with nice readable fonts (such as Verdana). Such a text doesn't have as much value-added as a professionally generated PDF, but the advantages of plain-text distribution (size and malleability) out-weigh the disadvantages.