In rankings for chess (used elsewhere too), resistance points are used to break deadlocks when people have scored the same. This is mostly of use in incomplete competitions as when everyone plays everyone, the results of this are far less important because true playing strength will eventually come out.
When I was programming reversi/othello programs ca. 1985-1989 I saw a phenomenon where in e.g. a field of 12 programs, and 6 games each program played, ranking by points was sometimes grossly unjust, so I decided to experiment with a matrix multiplication method where a matrix of results * vector of players strengths should give the player 's strength again and one could (hopefully) iteratively obtain the right values. This had the problem of some values converging to zero, but the idea was ok (strength from a certain iteration on gave the right intuitive results where players with higher scores could still be ranked lower because they mainly played lesser opponents. I never worked it out such that it always worked. The idea seemed (and still seems) right though.
Anyway, this sort of idea seems the same as Kamen's, namely that ones score gets higher the higher the opponents score. This is again obvious from thinking about a limited number of rounds, and thinking of resistance points, so I cannot understand why anyone should be able to patent this. It may not be obvious to a layman, but if you dive into ranking stuff, this idea is not an invention.
Then again, perhaps my idea in the 1980s was invention worthy:)
"And the FAA's Air Traffic Organization, which heads up ATC operations, received more than 800 security incident alerts in fiscal 2008, but still had not fixed 17 percent of the flaws that caused them, 'including critical incidents in which hackers may have taken over control of ATO computers,' the report says.... While the number of serious flaws in the FAA's apps appears to be staggering, Jeremiah Grossman, CTO of WhiteHat Security, says the rate is actually in line with the average number of bugs his security firm finds in most Web applications. .
As someone else mentioned and as I implied in my response about their obvious ineptitude in the previous slashdot story: Why are critical systems directly available through the web?
Using Windows? Sheesh, if they were serious about security at least install something like OpenBSD, or perhaps even OpenVMS.
It all fits though with their inability to see their own flaws because of a general 'we are superior' attitude that's present in most areas connected with air-travel.
For dutch readers, webpages on this and more on the subject of behaviour of people (in dutch organisations such as Schiphol, NLR, LVNL, and areas of the government that deals with air-traffic) see:
increasing use of commercial software and Internet Protocol-based technologies as part of an effort to modernize the air traffic control systems poses a higher security risk to the systems than when they relied primarily on proprietary software, the report said.
That's what's usally called ineptitude, but those FAA guys like to spin it round so someone else, or circumstances beyond their control, are the problem.
From what I've read about air-industry people in the US they are no different from in the Netherlands: People who almost invariable have a superiority complex and think they're doing tremendously important work while not having justify why they make so much noise, are so inept at sound calculations (dBA which is pointless for noise as related to annoyance, contrary to Sone for example), produce reports with incorrect units (upper and lower case wrong showing they don't have a proper education in elementary physics) etc.
Recently small aircraft were prohibited from flying near Schiphol. Reason was transponders are now in all of them, the LVNL (dutch airtraffic control) couldn't handle all those signals. A tremendous display of ineptitude again as they had plenty of time to prepare their systems (software), but being the sort of people they are, this is actually logical. Because they feel superior, they don't actually consider they might be doing things badly or need to change. In other words, despite them feeling they are superior, they are in fact amateurs...
Sorry about the typos above, etc. If you want to look it up, the writer's name is actually Simon Rozendaal (first name not Simone).
Also note that I gave the example of astronauts being taller when they return, because knowing this there should ring a bell when someone tells you how tall he is with 0.5cm "accuracy" as that will vary (which Rozendaal should know because of that) so even if he didn't measure how tall he was at different times in his youth, this example should give enough information to deduce this also happens when sleeping. But not with "scientific journalist" Simon Rozendaal.
Elsevier is also the name of a dutch weekly magazine that was one of the first things they published. It's not a scientific magazine, but it does publish articles on science by one Simone Rozendaal, a well known nutter who doesn't know anything about science nor has any interest in it consedering the bull he writes. I wrote to the publishering giving a list of all the stupendously moronic stuff he wrote, but got no reply. Suprising eh?
Examples:
He printed lies in an article about 'Benno Baksteen', a pilot and serial-liar who promotes the air travel industry. Examples of Baksteen's lies that Rozendaal puts in that article without checking:
1. Schiphol spends more money on insulation than the rest of the world together.
2. In the Netherlands, people complain more that the rest of the world together.
Both are complete and absolute bullshit and are easily checked, as I did and Rozendaal didn't.
Then he says about Baksteen himself that he is "192.5 cm, tall and accurate."
Accurate? This moron doesn't even know that ones length can vary by 0.5 cm (in the morning you're taller than at night) so he hasn't measured himself at different times in his youth, then found "He, it can differ by 0.5 cm!" as I found. Also note that this is a well known thing that happens with astronouts returning from trips on the Space shuttle who can be a few cm's longer, for a short while.
Another example is his nonsens about global warming being a non-issue. Note that I don't mind people not believing it, but if you don't believe it, you should have good reasons especially as that results in arguments from such people that we don't need to take any action in this area, which, if they are wrong, will be disastrous in the future. I won't dive into this as this message is getting fairly long, but I will finish with this example from long ago about acid rain. He still says that acid rain wasn't a problem (and even that completely different processes were occurring that were unknown at the time) because:
1. He didn't see the tree's were in bad health (as if he's an expert on how trees should look!)
2. There was no waldsterben (forests dying out) that was predicted. There bloody wasn't because a massive effort was taken to reduce sulphur output in particular! This statement is just as moronic as saying "There was no year2000 problem, because nothing happened". Nothing (or almost nothing) happened indeed in y2000, but very likely because of the massive effort to prevent the problem ans fix all the software, and not because there was no problem in software!
> The Pirate Bay already moved most of its servers
> to the Netherlands, a move that could keep the
> site running even if The Pirate Bay loses its
> appeal.
Is this move true? If so it would be pointless as similar legal battles in NL made it clear that such torrent sites are essentially (considered to be, by judges etc.) illegal.
Mininova for example was in NL for a while, but left because of this.
This is common with adults too. Someone mentions something. You don't think it's important or relevant. Then later you think (and perhaps admit) that the one making the comment was right.
You see, people need to have some sort of imprint of something being relevant in a certain situation (because people don't think about everything, so they will skip your information at first unless it's in a philosophical type conversation where people are forced to, and/or want to understand/use information given). However, they usually will have made a mental not of what you said and then apply it later.
Because of this, sometimes giving advice can be frustrating: You give advice. Other person doesn't do it. Then a few months later he comes with an 'idea of his own' that is actually the idea you presented to him/her.
It's in more complex situations this delayed application of information happens in adult life, but it's pretty obvious it happens.
Skeptics, here in the Netherlands, are almost exclusively people who are not working in even a related field, or retired. Now, being retired means you have no more career/position to worry about, and for many such people apparently the 'old boys network' of friends is more important than actual science. It's nicely summed up here in a response to an article in the Volkskrant (2007.1.11) about some "scientists who say the cimate problem isn't caused by humans":
But on examining their credentials, they aren't really scientists, or if they are, well, they actually *were* (i.e. retired) or the few that still are, are so in some completely unrelated field. Then their arguments don't hold up (because they don't actually give hard facts and reasons), etc. The article that was published in the paper is what's referred to as an 'opinion piece".
I've checked out several other people on the 'skeptic' side, and never seen a proper argument, but plenty of nonsens and unbelievably inane arguments that would be a disgrace to a five-year old kid.
What Dyson himself said in a previous slashdot article makes me see him in the same light:
Dyson: There is no doubt that parts of the world are getting warmer, but the warming is not global
No need: due to extra CO2 more energy is being stored in the earth, could be water warming up, etc. Also, ocean currents could change, which would mean an ice age in Europe despite global warming is possible. The average temperature goes up though. And that's what's meant by global warming.
Dyson:
When I listen to the public debates about climate change, I am impressed by the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories.
He shouldn't listen to public debates! That's almost always not where real science is done or shown.
Whether global global warming really is a problem or not, you need to take it seriously and try to pollute as little as possible, because it's moronic to gamble with this one ecosystem we have.
"Oh, and very inflammatory article. Seems more of a manifesto/hack job than a reporting piece."
Wait, is he thinking that an article entitled "Microsoft skullfucks Icelands economy" might be a mainstream piece of professional journalism?
Why not? As opposed a piece that's just an expanded version of a press release from a company? Or some article with no fact checking and plenty of lies and made up facts? For example: Every article I've checked in one field, about people related to the air travel industry, was mostly garbage. The so called "journalists" don't care either, if you present them the facts, they never respond or rectify, and the magazines/newspapers will print the junk from those people, and the liars they quote, again and again. Examples here in NL are:
Simon Rozendaal: A pseudo journalist in the magazine Elsevier.
Benno Baksteen: A pilot and serial-liar who's often been interviewed in magazines, on TV etc.
Whether HTML to XML shouldn't matter, some webpage is modifed into another in some not too difficult way. I therefore assume the universal translator is prior art, and, much more fun:
I first thought when I read it: 'Shock bracelet', that's to measure shocks, on say what acceleration cargo was subjected to, during handling... Seemed a bit weird, but hey, maybe planes trips are that bad and they need input on improving them:)
The actual type is more disturbing. And apparantly, plane trips *are* that bad (or getting there).
When I finally upgraded my main computer (PPRO 200, ca. 104 MB RAM) in 2005 to a fast machine (AMD64 3000+, 1GB) Netscape 3 on FreeBSD 4.11 started almost instantly and was just as fast with rendering HTML etc. Of course, webstandards 'improve' and to use them (e.g. slashdot no longer rendered properly) I had to install firefox. Result: Slower than netscape 3 on the PPRO 200. Bummer.
Too bad NS3 doesn't run on more recent FreeBSD, but of course, the browser to have would really be Netscape 1. No automatic image decoding (UUE) so you had to guess whether it was worth it, and just one main window for HTML, newsgroups (bookmarks too IIRC).
All right, you asked so you shall receive: What I'd like to see is a prominently displayed button with a daemon image that does this:
- Format the windows partition (to make sure you're not weaseling out and going back, and this button should *not* pop up a 'Are you sure?' nag)
- Tell you to insert a FreeBSD installation CD or ask for a server address from where to install over the net
- Reboot when done
Once that's in place, I might actually use windows for serious matters, a single time...
It did not have a faster CPU. It had a CPU running at a higher external bus clock. You'd think that after all these years that people would realize that MHz != performance, but I guess not.
It did have a faster CPU. A 3.58 MHz Z80 is about equivalent to a 1.79 MHz 6502. I.e. this is for a certain program implemented in machine code on these CPUs by programmers of the same ability who put the same amount of time into it. The C64 has a 6510 runnning at only 1MHz which is quite a bit slower.
Arguably the fastest, in theory, 8-bit machine was the Atari series. They ran a 2 MHz 6502 (declocked to sync with video), which was twice as fast as any of the other 6502 machines and effectively the same as an 8MHz Z80. But again, these machines always finished at the bottom of the heap in BASIC benchmarks, which again demonstrates the point at the top.
No, the Ataris run at 1.79 MHz which is 1.79 times faster than most other 6502 machines at the time. The BBC micro (late 1981) runs the 6502 at 2MHz and that is about equal to a 4MHz Z80. It's true that inherent speed and Basic speed are different and Basic speed was often used to tell how fast a machine is, which is irrelevant for say games (usually machine code).
Slashdot Mirror
In rankings for chess (used elsewhere too), resistance points are used to break deadlocks when people have scored the same. This is mostly of use in incomplete competitions as when everyone plays everyone, the results of this are far less important because true playing strength will eventually come out.
:)
When I was programming reversi/othello programs ca. 1985-1989 I saw a phenomenon where in e.g. a field of 12 programs, and 6 games each program played, ranking by points was sometimes grossly unjust, so I decided to experiment with a matrix multiplication method where a matrix of results * vector of players strengths should give the player 's strength again and one could (hopefully) iteratively obtain the right values. This had the problem of some values converging to zero, but the idea was ok (strength from a certain iteration on gave the right intuitive results where players with higher scores could still be ranked lower because they mainly played lesser opponents. I never worked it out such that it always worked. The idea seemed (and still seems) right though.
Anyway, this sort of idea seems the same as Kamen's, namely that ones score gets higher the higher the opponents score. This is again obvious from thinking about a limited number of rounds, and thinking of resistance points, so I cannot understand why anyone should be able to patent this. It may not be obvious to a layman, but if you dive into ranking stuff, this idea is not an invention.
Then again, perhaps my idea in the 1980s was invention worthy
As someone else mentioned and as I implied in my response about their obvious ineptitude in the previous slashdot story: Why are critical systems directly available through the web?
Using Windows? Sheesh, if they were serious about security at least install something like OpenBSD, or perhaps even OpenVMS.
It all fits though with their inability to see their own flaws because of a general 'we are superior' attitude that's present in most areas connected with air-travel.
For dutch readers, webpages on this and more on the subject of behaviour of people (in dutch organisations such as Schiphol, NLR, LVNL, and areas of the government that deals with air-traffic) see:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~swhs/kritiek/schiphol/index.html
That's what's usally called ineptitude, but those FAA guys like to spin it round so someone else, or circumstances beyond their control, are the problem.
From what I've read about air-industry people in the US they are no different from in the Netherlands: People who almost invariable have a superiority complex and think they're doing tremendously important work while not having justify why they make so much noise, are so inept at sound calculations (dBA which is pointless for noise as related to annoyance, contrary to Sone for example), produce reports with incorrect units (upper and lower case wrong showing they don't have a proper education in elementary physics) etc.
Recently small aircraft were prohibited from flying near Schiphol. Reason was transponders are now in all of them, the LVNL (dutch airtraffic control) couldn't handle all those signals. A tremendous display of ineptitude again as they had plenty of time to prepare their systems (software), but being the sort of people they are, this is actually logical. Because they feel superior, they don't actually consider they might be doing things badly or need to change. In other words, despite them feeling they are superior, they are in fact amateurs...
You can find more on the web on this (in dutch).
Sorry about the typos above, etc. If you want to look it up, the writer's name is actually Simon Rozendaal (first name not Simone).
Also note that I gave the example of astronauts being taller when they return, because knowing this there should ring a bell when someone tells you how tall he is with 0.5cm "accuracy" as that will vary (which Rozendaal should know because of that) so even if he didn't measure how tall he was at different times in his youth, this example should give enough information to deduce this also happens when sleeping. But not with "scientific journalist" Simon Rozendaal.
Examples:
He printed lies in an article about 'Benno Baksteen', a pilot and serial-liar who promotes the air travel industry. Examples of Baksteen's lies that Rozendaal puts in that article without checking:
Both are complete and absolute bullshit and are easily checked, as I did and Rozendaal didn't.
Then he says about Baksteen himself that he is "192.5 cm, tall and accurate."
Accurate? This moron doesn't even know that ones length can vary by 0.5 cm (in the morning you're taller than at night) so he hasn't measured himself at different times in his youth, then found "He, it can differ by 0.5 cm!" as I found. Also note that this is a well known thing that happens with astronouts returning from trips on the Space shuttle who can be a few cm's longer, for a short while.
Another example is his nonsens about global warming being a non-issue. Note that I don't mind people not believing it, but if you don't believe it, you should have good reasons especially as that results in arguments from such people that we don't need to take any action in this area, which, if they are wrong, will be disastrous in the future. I won't dive into this as this message is getting fairly long, but I will finish with this example from long ago about acid rain. He still says that acid rain wasn't a problem (and even that completely different processes were occurring that were unknown at the time) because:
> The Pirate Bay already moved most of its servers
> to the Netherlands, a move that could keep the
> site running even if The Pirate Bay loses its
> appeal.
Is this move true? If so it would be pointless as similar legal battles in NL made it clear that such torrent sites are essentially (considered to be, by judges etc.) illegal. Mininova for example was in NL for a while, but left because of this.
This is common with adults too. Someone mentions something. You don't think it's important or relevant. Then later you think (and perhaps admit) that the one making the comment was right.
You see, people need to have some sort of imprint of something being relevant in a certain situation (because people don't think about everything, so they will skip your information at first unless it's in a philosophical type conversation where people are forced to, and/or want to understand/use information given). However, they usually will have made a mental not of what you said and then apply it later.
Because of this, sometimes giving advice can be frustrating: You give advice. Other person doesn't do it. Then a few months later he comes with an 'idea of his own' that is actually the idea you presented to him/her.
It's in more complex situations this delayed application of information happens in adult life, but it's pretty obvious it happens.
Skeptics, here in the Netherlands, are almost exclusively people who are not working in even a related field, or retired. Now, being retired means you have no more career/position to worry about, and for many such people apparently the 'old boys network' of friends is more important than actual science. It's nicely summed up here in a response to an article in the Volkskrant (2007.1.11) about some "scientists who say the cimate problem isn't caused by humans":
http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/bericht/100021
But on examining their credentials, they aren't really scientists, or if they are, well, they actually *were* (i.e. retired) or the few that still are, are so in some completely unrelated field. Then their arguments don't hold up (because they don't actually give hard facts and reasons), etc. The article that was published in the paper is what's referred to as an 'opinion piece".
I've checked out several other people on the 'skeptic' side, and never seen a proper argument, but plenty of nonsens and unbelievably inane arguments that would be a disgrace to a five-year old kid.
What Dyson himself said in a previous slashdot article makes me see him in the same light:
Dyson: There is no doubt that parts of the world are getting warmer, but the warming is not global
No need: due to extra CO2 more energy is being stored in the earth, could be water warming up, etc. Also, ocean currents could change, which would mean an ice age in Europe despite global warming is possible. The average temperature goes up though. And that's what's meant by global warming.
Dyson: When I listen to the public debates about climate change, I am impressed by the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories.
He shouldn't listen to public debates! That's almost always not where real science is done or shown.
Whether global global warming really is a problem or not, you need to take it seriously and try to pollute as little as possible, because it's moronic to gamble with this one ecosystem we have.
So, where can I download the FreeBSD version to test it myself?
"Oh, and very inflammatory article. Seems more of a manifesto/hack job than a reporting piece."
Wait, is he thinking that an article entitled "Microsoft skullfucks Icelands economy" might be a mainstream piece of professional journalism?
Why not? As opposed a piece that's just an expanded version of a press release from a company? Or some article with no fact checking and plenty of lies and made up facts? For example: Every article I've checked in one field, about people related to the air travel industry, was mostly garbage. The so called "journalists" don't care either, if you present them the facts, they never respond or rectify, and the magazines/newspapers will print the junk from those people, and the liars they quote, again and again. Examples here in NL are:
Simon Rozendaal: A pseudo journalist in the magazine Elsevier.
Benno Baksteen: A pilot and serial-liar who's often been interviewed in magazines, on TV etc.
Professional journalism? Don't make me laugh.
It never will when you get stuff like this in your hands: Doom version 1.1 artwork/manual etc.
Just to spite those who uploaded that trojan, I will start downloading FreeBSD 7.1 later today.
Here it is:
http://www.mininova.org/search/?search=freebsd
Ha!
Actually, the joke will be on the investigator who found, say, a JPEG. ('show me that again')
Whether HTML to XML shouldn't matter, some webpage is modifed into another in some not too difficult way. I therefore assume the universal translator is prior art, and, much more fun:
http://www.psyclops.com/translator/
The linked article translated into
pcworld article in skinhead
Much better!
I first thought when I read it: 'Shock bracelet', that's to measure shocks, on say what acceleration cargo was subjected to, during handling... Seemed a bit weird, but hey, maybe planes trips are that bad and they need input on improving them :)
The actual type is more disturbing. And apparantly, plane trips *are* that bad (or getting there).
When I finally upgraded my main computer (PPRO 200, ca. 104 MB RAM) in 2005 to a fast machine (AMD64 3000+, 1GB) Netscape 3 on FreeBSD 4.11 started almost instantly and was just as fast with rendering HTML etc. Of course, webstandards 'improve' and to use them (e.g. slashdot no longer rendered properly) I had to install firefox. Result: Slower than netscape 3 on the PPRO 200. Bummer.
Too bad NS3 doesn't run on more recent FreeBSD, but of course, the browser to have would really be Netscape 1. No automatic image decoding (UUE) so you had to guess whether it was worth it, and just one main window for HTML, newsgroups (bookmarks too IIRC).
> Keep those wishes coming
All right, you asked so you shall receive: What I'd like to see is a prominently displayed button with a daemon image that does this:
- Format the windows partition (to make sure you're not weaseling out and going back, and this button should *not* pop up a 'Are you sure?' nag)
- Tell you to insert a FreeBSD installation CD or ask for a server address from where to install over the net
- Reboot when done
Once that's in place, I might actually use windows for serious matters, a single time...
3) go fuck yourself.
Not a viable option. Most people aren't that lithe.
It did not have a faster CPU. It had a CPU running at a higher external bus clock. You'd think that after all these years that people would realize that MHz != performance, but I guess not.
It did have a faster CPU. A 3.58 MHz Z80 is about equivalent to a 1.79 MHz 6502. I.e. this is for a certain program implemented in machine code on these CPUs by programmers of the same ability who put the same amount of time into it. The C64 has a 6510 runnning at only 1MHz which is quite a bit slower.
Arguably the fastest, in theory, 8-bit machine was the Atari series. They ran a 2 MHz 6502 (declocked to sync with video), which was twice as fast as any of the other 6502 machines and effectively the same as an 8MHz Z80. But again, these machines always finished at the bottom of the heap in BASIC benchmarks, which again demonstrates the point at the top.
No, the Ataris run at 1.79 MHz which is 1.79 times faster than most other 6502 machines at the time. The BBC micro (late 1981) runs the 6502 at 2MHz and that is about equal to a 4MHz Z80. It's true that inherent speed and Basic speed are different and Basic speed was often used to tell how fast a machine is, which is irrelevant for say games (usually machine code).
Wouter
You know, I've been getting extremely tired of reading about Microsoft crap on slashdot. I get the feeling "just die! (like SCO will)".
Btw, I was just reading some old 1984 computer mags, and saw some MS ads. Among other things they contained the following:
Microsoft.
Right. First time.
The astute reader will notice the typos, but for others, let me correct that:
Microsoft.
Wrong. Every time.
[ Theo The Rat ]
| Eh, what does that mean?
That's obvious. Theo left the sinking netbsd-ship!