I also must wonder if Novell's only intent is to stay a key part of Linux to maintain this Microsoft partnership?
Or if Microsoft is urging them to become an even bigger player so that Microsoft can feel like and threaten people that Microsoft owns even more of the Linux kernel, not just the vague patent threats? One of the articles mentions this notion of not 'owning the source code' but rather 'owning the source of the code.' Could this be Microsoft's new target?
Then there's the super fun idea that Novell is putting in source code from Windows that Windows "accidentally" gave Novell which does several things at once. It justifies Novell's payment for protection from Microsoft litigation, it hobbles their competitors in the Linux realm and it gives Microsoft the power to go after any user or company using Linux with the 'stolen' code. It would also tie up Linux for a bit until that mess was sorted out.
I mean, since Novell's already demonstrated they're Microsoft's bitch and admitted it what is preventing any of the above whacked out theories from being true?
I listen to a lot of NPR news stories and the majority of my fellow Americans find these stories to be tilting to the left. I see them as unbiased an, as a result, am often labeled a liberal. How do you plan on dealing with different countries that have populaces with different mindsets? For example you cover stories on abortion and in some countries this is legal at any stage and others it is not. I would expect the citizens of a country where it is illegal to view any story allowing it in only the first trimester to be very liberal while in the USA that may be viewed as a more balanced middle ground. Do you cater (inadvertently or on purpose) to one single population/area/demographic?
What do you offer to entice users to register and rank stories for you? It seems that the benefits just come from the people that do all the work, is your only incentive that the person feels good for helping you out? Do you rank your users? Is there a reward system even if it's only number of stories ranked?
The article said you are hoping to raise your current set of 600 users to something more like 10,000--what are you doing to accomplish that?
Did anyone else find it uncomfortably odd that there was a big magenta T-Mobil ad right in the middle of Engadget's page as they "stuck it to them."
You know, refusing to host their magenta ads might be a better way to stick it to them... or perhaps they were asking you not to use magenta so that users wouldn't confuse the ad with the site?
Well, for the sake of discussion I will try to give you an example so that you might pick it apart.
"more data" More data means that you understand directors and actors/actresses often do a lot of the same work. So for every movie that the user likes, you weight their stars they gave it with a name. Then you cross reference movies containing those people using a database (like IMDB). So if your user loved The Sting and Fight Club, they will also love Spy Games which had both Redford & Pitt starring in it.
"better algorithm" If you naively look at the data sets, you can imagine that each user represents a taste set and that high correlations between two movies in several users indicates that a user who has not seen the second movie will most likely enjoy it. So if 1,056 users who saw 12 Monkeys loved Donnie Darko but your user has only seen Donnie Darko, highly recommend them 12 Monkeys.
You could also make an elaborate algorithm that uses user age, sex & location... or even a novel 'distance' algorithm that determines how far away they are from liking 12 Monkeys based on their highly ranked other movies.
Honestly, I could provide endless ideas for 'better algorithms' although I don't think any of them would even come close to matching what I could do with a database like IMDB. Hell, think of the Bayesian token analysis you could do on the reviews and message boards alone!
I believe the the original paper can be found here from Dec of 2007.
There are some obvious criticisms:
In the first stage, 30 human participants were asked to rate from 1-7 the beauty of several dozen pictures. For a masters project (which this was), that's a decent sample size. For research and practice, I do not think that will suffice.
Second, this was done using eigenalysis and principle component analysis. While that's interesting, I have not always found that to be a great approach. Five or six years ago, they were all the rage although I cannot really find anything fruitful that has come from applying this to human faces. This also means that they cannot generate the 'most beautiful' face but if they did, it would simply be the composition of all their eigenvectors (in this case, ghostly looking images of faces) into one representing the highest scoring beauty.
The lead researcher said this program 'constitutes a substantial advance in the development of artificial intelligence.' Having taken several AI, computer vision & machine learning courses, I don't find this to be at all substantial. An interesting masters project for sure, but several years ago I saw people doing the same things at local universities with the same results.
Why don't they tell us how this scored some celebrities from around the world like say Iman Abdulmajid, Zsa Zsa Gabor & Angelina Jolie? I have a feeling that their system is over-trained and would perform poorly in real life. Facial beauty requires imagination and this system was hand trained on a hundred points. I don't think that's enough but I wish they would have published more results to either prove or disprove my criticisms.
I'm shocked there's no mention here of ball lightening and I wonder if they can time the discharge of 60 MHz RF radiation from each lightening strike. If they can, I would be interested in seeing the outliers that last longer than a fraction of a second. Ball lightening is often reported to last several seconds and I think this would be easy to spot if they wanted to try to verify that it actually occurs in nature.
Honestly, I kind of expected that endeavor to fail as a result of those two news stories, I'm pleased to find out they are continuing on their contract although I question further contracts with Virgin.
As a side note, I'd have to ask: this is what passes for research these days? I'm unimpressed. Thank you, that's precisely the kind of suppressive rhetoric I was talking about, I couldn't have illustrated that better myself. It passed for research back then, not "these days" and whether or not someone could play it back or not still made it impressive. Curiosity in the weakest minds can lead to some of the greatest discoveries.
What's wrong with saying "Scott devised a way to record but not play back while Edison devised both" in the history books?
Furthermore, many accounts I've read claim that Leibniz beat Newton to calculus. I wasn't there so I can't say but I still think his name should be mentioned more than it is. Especially since some accounts give Leibniz credit with both the first and second (hence the term Leibniz Integral Rule) fundamental theories of calculus even if his logic to find them was flawed.
The fact that you side step Einstein's efforts to overlook quantum theory by pointing out an amazing discovery by him is hilarious. Should I try to circumvent the calculus discussion by pointing out Leibniz's contributions to philosophy?
Frankly, I am dumbfounded why it's difficult to list the multiple peoples it takes to make a brilliant discovery and even further dumbfounded when a man of science attempts to take credit for or repress someone's work.
I'm still shocked fewer people don't realize Leibniz beat Newton to Calculus. Oh well, great disputes make for great reading.
Oh well, one could spend countless hours recalling the great debates of science, it's a shame that some of them are about who's name goes in the history books. Strangely, ingenuity & legacy complexes seem to go hand in hand. I'm saddened to think that there may be others buried in history by ultra competitive researchers.
Looks pretty much like a poster child example of why the patent system is broken. Either that or the USPTO needs to start looking at revoking patents in hind sight or after professional review by many leading members of the field. So much for patent reform!
are you saying you want to be able to just walk in no questions asked and stay as long as you want in any nation? Wouldn't it be great? I mean, that almost sounds like freedom, doesn't it?
Sorry but no, I expect and want to be permitted to enter through legally established means, so that I may be an upstanding guest of the place I am visiting. What does legality have to do with where you want to live? Why do Americans receive protection in their pursuit of life, liberty & happiness?
Where does this hilarious double standard of "human rights" stem from? Why does the Bill of Rights say "Men" and not "Americans" when it talks of equality?
I guess we just fundamentally disagree. I guess I'll just go back to reading Samuel Langhorne Clemens & Thomas Paine and try to imagine how it used to be. It's a good thing they're dead and don't have to face today's America.
Don Reisinger muses on the fickleness of consumer loves and hates. I would view it more as power inevitably leads to corruption. And the real kicker is that no matter how good you try to be, there is always some aspect of your power that is corrupt to some extent.
No one can be president or leader of a nation and be corruption free. An easy target is Bush. His religion encourages him to turn the other cheek but that is not what happened after 9/11. His religion encourages him to love his neighbor and to treat him as he would want to be treated. Yet a fence between his country and Mexico says otherwise. The examples in this case are endless.
The same goes for "large company A." Once A gets large enough, it's not too difficult to start to find evil creeping in. Googles advertisement abilities already upset/disgust me. My difficulty in affording Apple products make me think they are discriminating against the poor. The list goes on.
I don't know if this is so much about the consumer as it is about power--the more you have, the more corrupt you are.
There's no reason not to use anti-virus on Macs. Yet by and large it won't happen. If you do use it, you are an outlier.
What's my explanation for your perfectly good logic? Mac users have a false sense of security (see ensuing posts about Mac security totaling Herculean proportions).
Stepping outside your comfort zone is a great thing if you have the time or need to do it. Me, I learned scheme & lisp, prolog, a number of instruction set languages and various scripting languages in my undergrad. Because I needed to see what it was like in realms other than Java & C++.
However, these days, I spend my free time looking at frameworks for the latter two languages. Do I want to know Ruby? Sure. But it's not going to make me better at my job. My employer has me jumping from JBoss to Weblogic to Websphere to Jetty to Glassfish to... whatever's under the sun for application container and all the while I'm trying to be an expert at Maven (which seems limitless) and Ant so I can do a decent job building. Not to mention the UI aspects: JSF, Tiles, Javascript, AJAX, DHTML, JSPs, JSeamless, Flex, GWT... they just go on and on.
I hate to say it but this specialization programming and time spent with other people's frameworks and libraries seems to make me more valuable in my own realm. You're right, it's a good idea for me to pick up Ruby (or whatever I'm supposed to learn next) because Java is not going to be around forever. But honestly, I feel a lot of people around me could stop re-inventing the wheel week after week at work and just take a couple days to tweak someone else's solution to work.
That said, Lisp & Prolog were my most favorite and least practical languages I've learned (I think Lisp stands for Lost In Stupid Parentheses).
I guess my answer to your question just another question: "What is your motive for learning a new language?" If it's to broaden your view of the world, go with something out of left field. If it's to be more valuable or better at what you do in Java, C++, Pearl, etc then I would actually tell you to start learning how everyone uses those languages.
Honestly, a lot of the older coders I know just don't have the time. The company will both pay for and tell them what they need to learn next or they ain't learning anything at all.
Complaints have been registered far and wide of our cowboy president. Democrats voting on bills hasn't done anything--some Democrats seem to have sat idly by as it happened. If you're elected into office, how are you going to stop this? More importantly with the president in his last term, how are you going to undo what has been done? Whether Clinton, Obama or McCain win, give us plans of action for how you intend to undo what you listed on your site: "warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, covert CIA 'black site' prisons, use of torture in interrogations and other tactics in tension or direct violation with the law have sparked outrage here at home and sullied our name abroad."
After reading your views, I see a few things that put you at odds with the current Democrat party. What causes you to align yourself with the Democrat party? What differences do you personally see in yourself that by and large the Democrats adhere to? If elected, would you promise to remain Democrat or would you entertain the idea of going third party/independent?
If elected as Senator for Oregon, how hard would you push for environmental action? You seem to promote fiscal responsibility and I find these two topics to have interesting relationships to each other. Hypothetically (and I know this wouldn't be your responsibility) if Oregon had the chance to switch to a garbage disposal system that resulted in twice as much materials being salvaged from waste but also cost the citizens twice as much to fund, would you make the switch?
On Slashdot, we often get stories where great new ideas come but require extra cash to go green. They are under heavy fire from fiscally responsible people. Where do you stand on this? I can think of many things if you'd care to address them. Like the investment to move to a wind powered infrastructure, compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb usage being enforced by the government, tighter emissions on all transportation, electronic circuitry recycling costs, etc.
If you care to further elaborate, I'm also interested in how fiscal responsibility can be maintained in addition to your pledge to reform healthcare.
From your website on issues, you say:
I would join many other U.S. senators, and the rest of what we might call Google Nation, in supporting "net neutrality." We need to prevent broadband providers from creating a two-tiered system of access to information, in which content providers with money would have an advantage over those without it, and Internet users would often find it harder to Google their way to the information they really need. Your net neutrality rhetoric rings true with this readership, for the most part. How exactly do you propose you would enforce this?
I mean, you say yourself that the companies with money are going to want this, how do you plan to fight the opposition? If your opponent Gordon Smith opposes net neutrality, you're going to face a lot more of that in the senate. Voting to ensure it in bills is one thing but what makes you unique to any other Senator trying to keep the net neutral? What are the best things we can do to help this? I tried explaining it to my friends and family but often find I've at best confused them.
Allow me to play the devil's advocate, argue against this point:
The government controls too much of our lives right now, why let them control the internet with a facade of "net neutrality?" It's just another form of restricting the market to evolve naturally, why would we want that?
This is just an elaborate game of pong, isn't it... It was factored into the defense budget after televised fear mongering of an invading alien race hailing from planet Nintendu 64.
Anton Zeilinger at the University of Vienna and colleagues have taken an important step towards this by bouncing individual photons off the Ajisai geodetic satellite (essentially a space-based disco ball) which is orbiting at 1400km. Big deal. Drunken frat boys at sports games bounce millions of "single photons" off of the opposing team members with pen lasers. *snort* You're a few zeptometers short of the goal.
Not to mention photons are like words: you shouldn't use those you don't understand. Is it a wave or is it matter? Huh, Mr. Smarty Pants? Oh, what's that you say? A boson followed by a long explanation, how utterly predictable! Ha, you would say that. No. I want answers and I wanted them back when the church would persecute you for publishing them!
We need something smaller. Go back to the lab, anything larger than a Planck Length is unacceptable. And only 1400km? So help me god, if you can't express the distance it travels in double up arrow notation or tetration, I don't want to hear about it. Come on people, this is real science, not some religious mumbo jumbo (6,000 years? Is that the absolute limit of your imagination!?)... and if there's one thing I rely on from real science, it's announcements of experiments with inconceivable units performed in a totally contrived and intangible environment. The fact that I understood this experiment speaks libraries of congress about its complexity (or lack thereof). I'm encouraging you to go the extra yottameter here.
Slashdot Mirror
I am reminded of the $350 Million that Microsoft paid Novell last year and must wonder if the 200% increase in sales that Novell reports can be linked to that?
I also must wonder if Novell's only intent is to stay a key part of Linux to maintain this Microsoft partnership?
Or if Microsoft is urging them to become an even bigger player so that Microsoft can feel like and threaten people that Microsoft owns even more of the Linux kernel, not just the vague patent threats? One of the articles mentions this notion of not 'owning the source code' but rather 'owning the source of the code.' Could this be Microsoft's new target?
Then there's the super fun idea that Novell is putting in source code from Windows that Windows "accidentally" gave Novell which does several things at once. It justifies Novell's payment for protection from Microsoft litigation, it hobbles their competitors in the Linux realm and it gives Microsoft the power to go after any user or company using Linux with the 'stolen' code. It would also tie up Linux for a bit until that mess was sorted out.
I mean, since Novell's already demonstrated they're Microsoft's bitch and admitted it what is preventing any of the above whacked out theories from being true?
I listen to a lot of NPR news stories and the majority of my fellow Americans find these stories to be tilting to the left. I see them as unbiased an, as a result, am often labeled a liberal. How do you plan on dealing with different countries that have populaces with different mindsets? For example you cover stories on abortion and in some countries this is legal at any stage and others it is not. I would expect the citizens of a country where it is illegal to view any story allowing it in only the first trimester to be very liberal while in the USA that may be viewed as a more balanced middle ground. Do you cater (inadvertently or on purpose) to one single population/area/demographic?
What do you offer to entice users to register and rank stories for you? It seems that the benefits just come from the people that do all the work, is your only incentive that the person feels good for helping you out? Do you rank your users? Is there a reward system even if it's only number of stories ranked?
The article said you are hoping to raise your current set of 600 users to something more like 10,000--what are you doing to accomplish that?
Did anyone else find it uncomfortably odd that there was a big magenta T-Mobil ad right in the middle of Engadget's page as they "stuck it to them."
... or perhaps they were asking you not to use magenta so that users wouldn't confuse the ad with the site?
You know, refusing to host their magenta ads might be a better way to stick it to them
You could also make an elaborate algorithm that uses user age, sex & location
Honestly, I could provide endless ideas for 'better algorithms' although I don't think any of them would even come close to matching what I could do with a database like IMDB. Hell, think of the Bayesian token analysis you could do on the reviews and message boards alone!
There are some obvious criticisms: In the first stage, 30 human participants were asked to rate from 1-7 the beauty of several dozen pictures. For a masters project (which this was), that's a decent sample size. For research and practice, I do not think that will suffice.
Second, this was done using eigenalysis and principle component analysis. While that's interesting, I have not always found that to be a great approach. Five or six years ago, they were all the rage although I cannot really find anything fruitful that has come from applying this to human faces. This also means that they cannot generate the 'most beautiful' face but if they did, it would simply be the composition of all their eigenvectors (in this case, ghostly looking images of faces) into one representing the highest scoring beauty. The lead researcher said this program 'constitutes a substantial advance in the development of artificial intelligence.' Having taken several AI, computer vision & machine learning courses, I don't find this to be at all substantial. An interesting masters project for sure, but several years ago I saw people doing the same things at local universities with the same results.
Why don't they tell us how this scored some celebrities from around the world like say Iman Abdulmajid, Zsa Zsa Gabor & Angelina Jolie? I have a feeling that their system is over-trained and would perform poorly in real life. Facial beauty requires imagination and this system was hand trained on a hundred points. I don't think that's enough but I wish they would have published more results to either prove or disprove my criticisms.
I'm shocked there's no mention here of ball lightening and I wonder if they can time the discharge of 60 MHz RF radiation from each lightening strike. If they can, I would be interested in seeing the outliers that last longer than a fraction of a second. Ball lightening is often reported to last several seconds and I think this would be easy to spot if they wanted to try to verify that it actually occurs in nature.
How do you respond to allegations that you plan to switch to the Pirate Party after your hostile take over of the senate?
As far as I know Virgin and Scaled Composites are the same endeavor, they are both signed to a two year deal to build SpaceShipTwo.
Also, it should be noted that there was a an accident involving two deaths last year at Scaled Composites and prior to that their buyout by Northrup Grumman.
Honestly, I kind of expected that endeavor to fail as a result of those two news stories, I'm pleased to find out they are continuing on their contract although I question further contracts with Virgin.
What's wrong with saying "Scott devised a way to record but not play back while Edison devised both" in the history books?
Furthermore, many accounts I've read claim that Leibniz beat Newton to calculus. I wasn't there so I can't say but I still think his name should be mentioned more than it is. Especially since some accounts give Leibniz credit with both the first and second (hence the term Leibniz Integral Rule) fundamental theories of calculus even if his logic to find them was flawed.
The fact that you side step Einstein's efforts to overlook quantum theory by pointing out an amazing discovery by him is hilarious. Should I try to circumvent the calculus discussion by pointing out Leibniz's contributions to philosophy?
Frankly, I am dumbfounded why it's difficult to list the multiple peoples it takes to make a brilliant discovery and even further dumbfounded when a man of science attempts to take credit for or repress someone's work.
Well, time to add another to the list.
Remember, if you want to be a scientist, you just have to be smart. If you want to be a well-known-until-the-end-of-time scientist, you have to be smart and suffer from at least a little megalomania (see the war of currents or Einstein's failure to accept quantum theory).
I'm still shocked fewer people don't realize Leibniz beat Newton to Calculus. Oh well, great disputes make for great reading.
Oh well, one could spend countless hours recalling the great debates of science, it's a shame that some of them are about who's name goes in the history books. Strangely, ingenuity & legacy complexes seem to go hand in hand. I'm saddened to think that there may be others buried in history by ultra competitive researchers.
First off, they don't quite link to the patent so on a non-slashdottable version is here or you can go straight to the full massive PDF if you want (single file if you have problems viewing above in Linux).
Looks pretty much like a poster child example of why the patent system is broken. Either that or the USPTO needs to start looking at revoking patents in hind sight or after professional review by many leading members of the field. So much for patent reform!
Where does this hilarious double standard of "human rights" stem from? Why does the Bill of Rights say "Men" and not "Americans" when it talks of equality?
I guess we just fundamentally disagree. I guess I'll just go back to reading Samuel Langhorne Clemens & Thomas Paine and try to imagine how it used to be. It's a good thing they're dead and don't have to face today's America.
No one can be president or leader of a nation and be corruption free. An easy target is Bush. His religion encourages him to turn the other cheek but that is not what happened after 9/11. His religion encourages him to love his neighbor and to treat him as he would want to be treated. Yet a fence between his country and Mexico says otherwise. The examples in this case are endless.
The same goes for "large company A." Once A gets large enough, it's not too difficult to start to find evil creeping in. Googles advertisement abilities already upset/disgust me. My difficulty in affording Apple products make me think they are discriminating against the poor. The list goes on.
I don't know if this is so much about the consumer as it is about power--the more you have, the more corrupt you are.
For campaign funding, perhaps you could take a cut of that undisclosed settlement for BusyBox (which I believe you started) that was paid out to two other developers?
What's my explanation for your perfectly good logic? Mac users have a false sense of security (see ensuing posts about Mac security totaling Herculean proportions).
Don't forget Piet. That's produced some of the most beautiful code I've ever seen. It also handles abstraction in a novel way.
I seem to be at odds here with this mentality.
... whatever's under the sun for application container and all the while I'm trying to be an expert at Maven (which seems limitless) and Ant so I can do a decent job building. Not to mention the UI aspects: JSF, Tiles, Javascript, AJAX, DHTML, JSPs, JSeamless, Flex, GWT ... they just go on and on.
Stepping outside your comfort zone is a great thing if you have the time or need to do it. Me, I learned scheme & lisp, prolog, a number of instruction set languages and various scripting languages in my undergrad. Because I needed to see what it was like in realms other than Java & C++.
However, these days, I spend my free time looking at frameworks for the latter two languages. Do I want to know Ruby? Sure. But it's not going to make me better at my job. My employer has me jumping from JBoss to Weblogic to Websphere to Jetty to Glassfish to
I hate to say it but this specialization programming and time spent with other people's frameworks and libraries seems to make me more valuable in my own realm. You're right, it's a good idea for me to pick up Ruby (or whatever I'm supposed to learn next) because Java is not going to be around forever. But honestly, I feel a lot of people around me could stop re-inventing the wheel week after week at work and just take a couple days to tweak someone else's solution to work.
That said, Lisp & Prolog were my most favorite and least practical languages I've learned (I think Lisp stands for Lost In Stupid Parentheses).
I guess my answer to your question just another question: "What is your motive for learning a new language?" If it's to broaden your view of the world, go with something out of left field. If it's to be more valuable or better at what you do in Java, C++, Pearl, etc then I would actually tell you to start learning how everyone uses those languages.
Honestly, a lot of the older coders I know just don't have the time. The company will both pay for and tell them what they need to learn next or they ain't learning anything at all.
Complaints have been registered far and wide of our cowboy president. Democrats voting on bills hasn't done anything--some Democrats seem to have sat idly by as it happened. If you're elected into office, how are you going to stop this? More importantly with the president in his last term, how are you going to undo what has been done? Whether Clinton, Obama or McCain win, give us plans of action for how you intend to undo what you listed on your site: "warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, covert CIA 'black site' prisons, use of torture in interrogations and other tactics in tension or direct violation with the law have sparked outrage here at home and sullied our name abroad."
After reading your views, I see a few things that put you at odds with the current Democrat party. What causes you to align yourself with the Democrat party? What differences do you personally see in yourself that by and large the Democrats adhere to? If elected, would you promise to remain Democrat or would you entertain the idea of going third party/independent?
If elected as Senator for Oregon, how hard would you push for environmental action? You seem to promote fiscal responsibility and I find these two topics to have interesting relationships to each other. Hypothetically (and I know this wouldn't be your responsibility) if Oregon had the chance to switch to a garbage disposal system that resulted in twice as much materials being salvaged from waste but also cost the citizens twice as much to fund, would you make the switch?
On Slashdot, we often get stories where great new ideas come but require extra cash to go green. They are under heavy fire from fiscally responsible people. Where do you stand on this? I can think of many things if you'd care to address them. Like the investment to move to a wind powered infrastructure, compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb usage being enforced by the government, tighter emissions on all transportation, electronic circuitry recycling costs, etc.
If you care to further elaborate, I'm also interested in how fiscal responsibility can be maintained in addition to your pledge to reform healthcare.
I mean, you say yourself that the companies with money are going to want this, how do you plan to fight the opposition? If your opponent Gordon Smith opposes net neutrality, you're going to face a lot more of that in the senate. Voting to ensure it in bills is one thing but what makes you unique to any other Senator trying to keep the net neutral? What are the best things we can do to help this? I tried explaining it to my friends and family but often find I've at best confused them.
Allow me to play the devil's advocate, argue against this point: The government controls too much of our lives right now, why let them control the internet with a facade of "net neutrality?" It's just another form of restricting the market to evolve naturally, why would we want that?
Not to mention photons are like words: you shouldn't use those you don't understand. Is it a wave or is it matter? Huh, Mr. Smarty Pants? Oh, what's that you say? A boson followed by a long explanation, how utterly predictable! Ha, you would say that. No. I want answers and I wanted them back when the church would persecute you for publishing them!
We need something smaller. Go back to the lab, anything larger than a Planck Length is unacceptable. And only 1400km? So help me god, if you can't express the distance it travels in double up arrow notation or tetration, I don't want to hear about it. Come on people, this is real science, not some religious mumbo jumbo (6,000 years? Is that the absolute limit of your imagination!?)
Bask in its glory!