The point is that the GPL doesn't specify release behavior for code that isn't distributed so any "program" P developed with regard to the GPL should not reference such release behavior -- hence the substitution principle works.
The real "grand unified theory" of SIMD is CAPP or content addressable parallel processors. I read a book on this topic back in the 1970s and it was pretty clear to me that it:
Was a great way of dealing with relational data
Would have to await much larger scales of integration before becoming practical.
Since then the computer world has become much more relational due to relational databases, and the levels of integration of skyrocketed, but no one major manufacturer of silicon has bothered to revisit this very simple and powerful route to high power computing.
The beauty of these processors is they integrate memory with computation so that the massive economies of scale we witness in memory fabrication apply to computation speeds as well so long as we can move toward relational rather than function computing as a paradigm. Fortunately this appears to be supported by the study of quantum computers, however those computers may never see the light of day for more fundamental reasons.
The fact that it puts these additional requirements / restrictions on the user makes it incompatible with the GPL.
It's no more incompatible than is a class that overrides a method of a superclass "incompatible" with that superclass. In this instance, the release "method" is more strict.
The solution is synthesis of a sky-time market from scientist demand. Scientist demand should derive money provided by their funding source to purchase required sky-time. If there is sufficient market demand for Hubble sky-time it will be profitable to repair or replace based on rational market calculations by investors.
The willingness of private investors to put up capital to service such markets shouldn't be underestimated. This is an exciting area of endeavour, just as is space transportation as witnessed by the recent investments in that field by adventurous angel investors.
Indeed, historically there has been a pattern of private financing of cutting edge telescopes without even a promise of any return at all. We can expect the private sector to step up to the plate if the government will stop pretending it is the source of innovation in technology and instead the source of funding for public-domain scientific research.
In this stage, which lasted (roughly speaking) from the late 1800's
to the middle of the 1900's, rich benefactors donated the money to establish
observatories although they themselves were not practising astronomers.
I gave some examples and anecdotal histories in class. For instance:
(i) James Lick made his fortune by funding "gold rush"
hopefuls in San Francisco. He provided them a grubstake by buying up their
land cheaply, and wound up owning most of what is now downtown San Francisco.
He wanted to build an enormous pyramid in the city to commemorate himself,
but was persuaded by the Regents of the University of California to build
an observatory instead: Lick Observatory, just east of San Jose.
(ii) A man named Yerkes made his fortune building street car
systems, and donated the money for the Yerkes 40-inch refractor, still
the largest such telescope in the world. It is at Williams Bay, north of
Chicago, and is operated by the University of Chicago. Yerkes was apparently
quite an unscrupulous businessmen, by all accounts, and was never favoured
with the respect which he hoped his endowment might buy for him.
(iii) David Dunlap made his fortune in Ontario silver mines,
and was interested in astronomy. After his death, his widow donated a lot
of money to the University of Toronto, who built the David Dunlap Observatory
in Richmond Hill. When it opened in 1935, it was the second-largest telescope
in the world.
(iv) The Carnegie Foundation, established by the Scotsman Andrew
Carnegie, funds many philanthropic endeavours, including public libraries.
It provided the money for the famous 200-inch telescope on Mount Palomar,
which saw first light in 1950.
Amazingly, the days of such generosity are not completely gone: the
new Keck telescopes on Mauna Kea are being provided by a Mr. Keck, the
head of Standard Oil (I believe). The total cost is in the region of 200
million dollars; the telescopes are operated by the University of California.
A Rocket a Day Keeps the High Costs Away
on
Hondas in Space
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
SpaceX's philosophy of "test the crap out of it" is a good one if taken to the whole system level. This is essentially what John Walker's essay A Rocket a Day Keeps the High Costs Away is all about. In Walker's scenario the idea is to have the entire operation going through everything necessary to launch frequently so as to work the kinks out of the system, from manufacture of expendible rocket to actual flight operation. Now, Walker never actually did this but Walker did make his money developing and selling AutoCAD, which is a manufacturing industry staple, so he does have some credibility.
In SpaceX's case, the reusability aspect with ocean recovery of parts means a single rocket is not going to be cycled through the entire launch operation in a day even though it is theoretically possible to do so with an ocean launch system. However, with a small fleet of vehicles, it might be feasible to get the whole system cranking out a couple of launches a week.
That's when it starts to look like an aerospace "Honda" since you start applying Deming's statistical methods to the operation.
If you don't mind some extra work per node LocustWorld's MeshAP sofware (Linux-based) runs on 266Mhz PCs with 64Mb RAM. You can "flash" an old 2G hard drive with the software. Such old systems can usually be had for around $40. An 802.11b PCI card runs $30. Pigtail $20. LMR400 cable to reach outside and to the roof maybe $40. A 9dbi omni antenna about $50.
$180/node.
You can install SIP for VoIP if you want.
Malcolm Gladwell Blinks At Racial Realities
on
Blink
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Now, it would be tremendously
useful if Gladwell had figured out some general rules of
thumb for when to rely on your instantaneous hunches and
when not to.
But as far as I can tell, his book reduces to two messages:
Go with your gut reactions, but
only when they are right
And even when your gut reactions
are factually correct, ignore them when they are
politically incorrect.
Gladwell does make a
genuinely useful point about how when people try to put
their ideas into words, they often distort them into
meaninglessness or falsehood.
Ironically, this happens to
Gladwell every time he writes about race.
Because there were already plenty
of books on the market advising
corporate workers in tiresome detail how to look
before they leap, the sales potential of a book telling
them, "Wotthehell, just go ahead and leap," was
clear.
Unfortunately for Gladwell, the
best-known examples of
thinking without thinking are racial and gender
prejudices. But, then, you've forgotten Rule #2--Readers
despise logic and consistency. So Gladwell just assumes
that his otherwise beloved "rapid cognition" is
100% wrong whenever it's based on race or gender
stereotypes.
(And that's why he makes a $1
million annually and I don't.)
The most intriguing aspect of
Gladwell's book is that its hopeless confusion and
mind-melting political correctness stem from the
author's own racial background. Although mostly white,
Gladwell is partly of African descent (his
mother was black, Scottish, and Jewish). But he
doesn't look noticeably black in
most of his
pictures.
The origin of Blink, he
writes on his
website, came when, "on a whim," he let his
hair grow long into a loose but large Afro.
As soon as Gladwell grew his Afro,
he claims, he started getting hassled by The Man:
highway patrolmen wrote him
speeding tickets, airport security gave him the evil
eye, and the
NYPD questioned him for 20 minutes because they were
looking for a rapist with an Afro.
The solution is synthesis of a sky-time market from scientist demand. Scientist demand should derive money provided by their funding source to purchase required sky-time. If there is sufficient market demand for Hubble sky-time it will be profitable to repair. Otherwise it should be sold for scrap/ditched.
It's too bad true altruism and talent like Torvalds' was squandered on Unix. Unix was great for the 1970s but there was so much more potential by the time he developed the kernel code for the 386 that its tragic he didn't find the right people to develop the higher levels of his OS.
The biggest problem these days is turning a patent into money. That takes a certain set of skills that are usually disjoint with creativity.
You have been buying the lines from con-artists who claim they're inventors when they're actually tax collectors with an ability to write up neat ideas that almost anyone could come up with except those making judgements about "obviousness" during law suits.
DARPA can really advance the field of AI if it simply offers substantial prize awards for the highest compression ratios achieve for a text corpus of their choosing. There should be separate classes of competition for each of at least time limits for the corpus compressions:
1 hour
10 hours
100 hours
Each class should have its own championship title of $1 million, with each runner-up winning 1/2 the money of the next higher.
Each contestant must provide 2 systems -- a compressor and a decompressor. DARPA feeds the compressor the corpus and the compressor feeds DARPA the compressed corpus. DARPA then measures the ratio and feeds the decompressor system the compressed corpus, which then returns the original corpus, or is disqualified. Compression and decompression times must add up to no more than the time limit for the competition class.
The rationale for this approach to advancing the state of AI is given by a short paper by Matthew Mahoney titled "Text Compression as a Test for Artificial Intelligence" (1 page poster, compressed Postscript) published in the 1999 AAAI Proceedings. Matt Mahoney shows that text
prediction or compression is a stricter test for AI than the Turing
test.
So far there have been lots of promises and decades spent. Let's try something different with well-founded objetive metrics tied to serious near-term commercial incentives for evolutionary progress.
Ubuntu has the ease of use of Linspire without messing up the apt/Synaptic package management system. Moreover, you can preempt any political resistance to organizational adoption by prominently featuring the Ubuntu logo with all communiques. Any resistance to adoption and you can retire rich by following this simple procedure:
Loudly accuse anyone who objects to your choice of Ubuntu of being sexist racist white supremacists. If they happen to be black you can call them "Oreo" blacks.
When they fire you for being a jerk, hire Johnny Cochrane and sue them.
Collect millions and then retire, really rich, to South Africa where the AIDS vectors don't usually rape really rich whites like Mark Shutleworth and you.
The smaller the sample, the larger the domain covered, and the quicker and more accurate the prediction, the greater the intelligence.
Good point. However it is difficult to value time in a single competitive metric whereas compression ratio (where the initial and compressed sizes include the size of the algorithm/knowledge of the AI) is a single number.
Perhaps the way around this is to have different prizes for different time classes, varying by an exponential. You'd have, say, 3 competitions with timeouts of one unit of time, 10 time units and 100 time units. This could make the contest run in a reasonable period of time at a reasonable cost.
There needs to be an annual prize for the highest compression ratio using random pages from the web as the corpus. This would probably do more for real advancement of artificial intelligence than the Turing competitions.
followed by the explanation:
Intelligence can be seen as the ability to take a sample of some space and generalize it to predict things about the space from which the sample was drawn. The smaller the sample and the more accurate the prediction, the greater the intelligence. This is also a short description of
what a compression algorithm does.
and
Text Compression as a Test for Artificial Intelligence, 1999 AAAI Proceedings. Matt Mahoney shows that text prediction or compression is a stricter test for AI than the Turing test. (1 page poster, compressed Postscript).
'It's not a healthy thing to lock yourself in a room and create your own reality.'
If this Judge thinks having a taste of reality is a healthy thing, they should have themselves placed into the prison system with which they punish people and see if they have any better grasp of reality afterwards.
In addition to which, audio is more easily recorded than video by such cameras and it is rare for a prison guard to be among prisoners without other guards. If all the guards covered their badges at the same time the proper move would be to simply fire them. This would be a step forward.
If government needs cameras monitoring potential criminals it should start monitoring racist gang rapists in the government's own prison system rather than public thoroughfares. Amazingly the most famous organization supposedly opposing prisoner rape, Stop Prisoner Rape, could not bring itself to even support deployment of tamper-proof badge cameras to be worn by all prison guards to audit their behavior. Clearly the recent behavior of US prison officials as they are spreading around the world is bringing to light the true nature of the US government's authority over its population.
No, there is no organization protecting you from prisoner rape and there is no organization protecting you from crime by watching your every move.
There is only Big Brother and what he perpetrates against you, unmonitored by the public, in Room 101.
I haven't been keeping track of the status of ISPs so I can believe what you are saying is true. If so then the difficulty is upon us. There is no clear boundary between ISP and publication.
An ISP censors at its own peril. Common carrier status provides freedom from liability for content carried. Common carrier status is abrogated by censoring content carried. The Planet is risking undermining its own legal status while at the same time undermining, via court precedent, the common carrier status of all ISPs due to the immature nature of the law governing this new regime of media.
The question at hand is this: How do we mold the early videotex
environment so that noise is suppressed without limiting the free flow
of information between customers?
The first obstacle is, of course, legal. As the knights of U.S.
feudalism, corporate lawyers have a penchant for finding ways of
stomping out innovation and diversity in any way possible. In the
case of videotex, the attempt is to keep feudal control of information
by making videotex system ownership imply liability for information
transmitted over it. For example, if a libelous communication takes
place, corporate lawyers for the plaintiff will bring suit against the
carrier rather than the individual responsible for the communication.
The rationalizations for this clearly unreasonable and contrived
position are quite numerous. Without a common carrier status, the
carrier will be treading on virgin ground legally and thus be
unprotected by precedent. Indeed, the stakes are high enough that the
competitor could easily afford to fabricate an event ideal for the
purposes of such a suit. This means the first legal precedent could
be in favor of holding the carrier responsible for the communications
transmitted over its network, thus forcing (or giving an excuse for)
the carrier to inspect, edit and censor all communications except,
perhaps, simple person-to-person or "electronic mail". This, in turn,
would put editorial control right back in the hands of the feudalists.
Potential carriers' own lawyers are already hard at work worrying
everyone about such a suit. They would like to win the battle against
diversity before it begins. This is unlikely because videotex is
still driven by technology and therefore by pioneers.
Then we have Sun CEO Scott McNealy complaining before congress in 2000 that, "We already half way through the fiscal year, capped out on the number of really bright Israelis and Indians.". He gets more and more H-1b visas allocated.
Intelligence can be seen as the ability to take a sample of some space and generalize it to predict things about the space from which the sample was drawn. The smaller the sample and the more accurate the prediction, the greater the intelligence. This is also a short description of what a compression algorithm does.
Slashdot Mirror
The point is that the GPL doesn't specify release behavior for code that isn't distributed so any "program" P developed with regard to the GPL should not reference such release behavior -- hence the substitution principle works.
- Was a great way of dealing with relational data
- Would have to await much larger scales of integration before becoming practical.
Since then the computer world has become much more relational due to relational databases, and the levels of integration of skyrocketed, but no one major manufacturer of silicon has bothered to revisit this very simple and powerful route to high power computing.Fortunately there is at least a little ongoing research.
The beauty of these processors is they integrate memory with computation so that the massive economies of scale we witness in memory fabrication apply to computation speeds as well so long as we can move toward relational rather than function computing as a paradigm. Fortunately this appears to be supported by the study of quantum computers, however those computers may never see the light of day for more fundamental reasons.
It's no more incompatible than is a class that overrides a method of a superclass "incompatible" with that superclass. In this instance, the release "method" is more strict.
The willingness of private investors to put up capital to service such markets shouldn't be underestimated. This is an exciting area of endeavour, just as is space transportation as witnessed by the recent investments in that field by adventurous angel investors.
Indeed, historically there has been a pattern of private financing of cutting edge telescopes without even a promise of any return at all. We can expect the private sector to step up to the plate if the government will stop pretending it is the source of innovation in technology and instead the source of funding for public-domain scientific research.
From a brief history of private endowment of telescopes:
In this stage, which lasted (roughly speaking) from the late 1800's to the middle of the 1900's, rich benefactors donated the money to establish observatories although they themselves were not practising astronomers. I gave some examples and anecdotal histories in class. For instance:
(i) James Lick made his fortune by funding "gold rush" hopefuls in San Francisco. He provided them a grubstake by buying up their land cheaply, and wound up owning most of what is now downtown San Francisco. He wanted to build an enormous pyramid in the city to commemorate himself, but was persuaded by the Regents of the University of California to build an observatory instead: Lick Observatory, just east of San Jose.
(ii) A man named Yerkes made his fortune building street car systems, and donated the money for the Yerkes 40-inch refractor, still the largest such telescope in the world. It is at Williams Bay, north of Chicago, and is operated by the University of Chicago. Yerkes was apparently quite an unscrupulous businessmen, by all accounts, and was never favoured with the respect which he hoped his endowment might buy for him.
(iii) David Dunlap made his fortune in Ontario silver mines, and was interested in astronomy. After his death, his widow donated a lot of money to the University of Toronto, who built the David Dunlap Observatory in Richmond Hill. When it opened in 1935, it was the second-largest telescope in the world.
(iv) The Carnegie Foundation, established by the Scotsman Andrew Carnegie, funds many philanthropic endeavours, including public libraries. It provided the money for the famous 200-inch telescope on Mount Palomar, which saw first light in 1950.
Amazingly, the days of such generosity are not completely gone: the new Keck telescopes on Mauna Kea are being provided by a Mr. Keck, the head of Standard Oil (I believe). The total cost is in the region of 200 million dollars; the telescopes are operated by the University of California.
In SpaceX's case, the reusability aspect with ocean recovery of parts means a single rocket is not going to be cycled through the entire launch operation in a day even though it is theoretically possible to do so with an ocean launch system. However, with a small fleet of vehicles, it might be feasible to get the whole system cranking out a couple of launches a week.
That's when it starts to look like an aerospace "Honda" since you start applying Deming's statistical methods to the operation.
$180/node.
You can install SIP for VoIP if you want.
Now, it would be tremendously useful if Gladwell had figured out some general rules of thumb for when to rely on your instantaneous hunches and when not to.
But as far as I can tell, his book reduces to two messages:
Gladwell does make a genuinely useful point about how when people try to put their ideas into words, they often distort them into meaninglessness or falsehood.
Ironically, this happens to Gladwell every time he writes about race.
Because there were already plenty of books on the market advising corporate workers in tiresome detail how to look before they leap, the sales potential of a book telling them, "Wotthehell, just go ahead and leap," was clear.
Unfortunately for Gladwell, the best-known examples of thinking without thinking are racial and gender prejudices. But, then, you've forgotten Rule #2--Readers despise logic and consistency. So Gladwell just assumes that his otherwise beloved "rapid cognition" is 100% wrong whenever it's based on race or gender stereotypes.
(And that's why he makes a $1 million annually and I don't.)
The most intriguing aspect of Gladwell's book is that its hopeless confusion and mind-melting political correctness stem from the author's own racial background. Although mostly white, Gladwell is partly of African descent (his mother was black, Scottish, and Jewish). But he doesn't look noticeably black in most of his pictures.
The origin of Blink, he writes on his website, came when, "on a whim," he let his hair grow long into a loose but large Afro.
As you can see in this picture of Gladwell with his Afro, he wound up with more of a Napoleon Dynamite Mormon 'fro than the genuine kinky kind that ABA basketball players espoused back in the 1970s. Still, it does finally make him look marginally black.
As soon as Gladwell grew his Afro, he claims, he started getting hassled by The Man: highway patrolmen wrote him speeding tickets, airport security gave him the evil eye, and the NYPD questioned him for 20 minutes because they were looking for a rapist with an Afro.
"That episode on the street got me th
The solution is synthesis of a sky-time market from scientist demand. Scientist demand should derive money provided by their funding source to purchase required sky-time. If there is sufficient market demand for Hubble sky-time it will be profitable to repair. Otherwise it should be sold for scrap/ditched.
It's too bad true altruism and talent like Torvalds' was squandered on Unix. Unix was great for the 1970s but there was so much more potential by the time he developed the kernel code for the 386 that its tragic he didn't find the right people to develop the higher levels of his OS.
America's Space Prize is a competition.
You have been buying the lines from con-artists who claim they're inventors when they're actually tax collectors with an ability to write up neat ideas that almost anyone could come up with except those making judgements about "obviousness" during law suits.
Each class should have its own championship title of $1 million, with each runner-up winning 1/2 the money of the next higher.
Each contestant must provide 2 systems -- a compressor and a decompressor. DARPA feeds the compressor the corpus and the compressor feeds DARPA the compressed corpus. DARPA then measures the ratio and feeds the decompressor system the compressed corpus, which then returns the original corpus, or is disqualified. Compression and decompression times must add up to no more than the time limit for the competition class.
The rationale for this approach to advancing the state of AI is given by a short paper by Matthew Mahoney titled "Text Compression as a Test for Artificial Intelligence" (1 page poster, compressed Postscript) published in the 1999 AAAI Proceedings. Matt Mahoney shows that text prediction or compression is a stricter test for AI than the Turing test.
So far there have been lots of promises and decades spent. Let's try something different with well-founded objetive metrics tied to serious near-term commercial incentives for evolutionary progress.
You're welcome.
Good point. However it is difficult to value time in a single competitive metric whereas compression ratio (where the initial and compressed sizes include the size of the algorithm/knowledge of the AI) is a single number.
Perhaps the way around this is to have different prizes for different time classes, varying by an exponential. You'd have, say, 3 competitions with timeouts of one unit of time, 10 time units and 100 time units. This could make the contest run in a reasonable period of time at a reasonable cost.
This is basically what I was referring to in my response to "Using The Web For Linguistic Research" when I said:
followed by the explanation: andIf this Judge thinks having a taste of reality is a healthy thing, they should have themselves placed into the prison system with which they punish people and see if they have any better grasp of reality afterwards.
Ever hear of indentured servitude?
In addition to which, audio is more easily recorded than video by such cameras and it is rare for a prison guard to be among prisoners without other guards. If all the guards covered their badges at the same time the proper move would be to simply fire them. This would be a step forward.
No, there is no organization protecting you from prisoner rape and there is no organization protecting you from crime by watching your every move.
There is only Big Brother and what he perpetrates against you, unmonitored by the public, in Room 101.
I haven't been keeping track of the status of ISPs so I can believe what you are saying is true. If so then the difficulty is upon us. There is no clear boundary between ISP and publication.
As I wrote 23 years ago:
The grace period may be about over.
Text Compression as a Test for Artificial Intelligence, 1999 AAAI Proceedings. Matt Mahoney shows that text prediction or compression is a stricter test for AI than the Turing test. (1 page poster, compressed Postscript).
Here's the correct link.
Then we have Sun CEO Scott McNealy complaining before congress in 2000 that, "We already half way through the fiscal year, capped out on the number of really bright Israelis and Indians.". He gets more and more H-1b visas allocated.
Then we have Sun's stock going from above $60/share to below $3/share.
And now Sun is complaining about something else and we're supposed to consider this "news that matters"?
Intelligence can be seen as the ability to take a sample of some space and generalize it to predict things about the space from which the sample was drawn. The smaller the sample and the more accurate the prediction, the greater the intelligence. This is also a short description of what a compression algorithm does.