Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Would Scottish Independence Mean the End of UK's Nuclear Arsenal?

sillybilly Re:Actually, it does ! (329 comments)

I disagree. I think every country has the right to self defense, and possess these. However I'd be a big fan of a global nuclear weapon's ban that everybody signs.

PS. What are the Scots thinking of trying to be independent? If I were them I'd be happy to be ganged up with England, as long as England is not exploiting me economically because I'm Scot, nor does it restrict my liberties such as freedom of expression, or practicing my own Gaelic mother tongue. tradition. But hey. they are the Scots, and you have to let them decide for themselves. I just think they are proving themselves stupid. Instead of separation, they should be trying to liberties and while united, and only if that's impossible while being united, when push comes to shove, do you have to lower your expectations and strive for independence. But they might be misjudging England, and its willingness to allow for broad reaching internal freedoms, within the UK, such as practicing your own language, etc. United is usually better than divided. The proverb says together we stand, alone we fall. But there are of course many exceptions.

6 hours ago
top

How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

sillybilly Re:That's not quick? (155 comments)

If Tesla has stock, there might be a most opportune moment to sell in the future, right when reality of $20,000 just for the battery, smacks everyone in the face. Unfortunately my broker won't let me sell short, he won't give me a margin account, I keep applying, and get no reply. But it'd be really easy money, say 2 or 5 years from now. Of course it's gonna sell like candy at the beginning, due to the hype it gets fr,om Slashdot and the media, and even the California government, for say $40,000 - $80,000 range. It can never compete with a Corolla for instance.
If you ever play Railroad Tycoon II the 2nd Century, you learn that the more you progress away from the heyday of steam, even with available electric and diesel locomotive engines, (and of course competition for passengers from airplanes and cars and trucks for freight being the real killer of rail), you cannot make ends meet, because of engine cost. There is a single theme for RRII 2nd century, is that you get all this wonderful tech, but you cannot afford it, The only way to win in late years, such as past 2010, is to optimize and get the cheapest but still decent engines available. Which is like a prophecy to anyone living under today's minimum wage economy, even with a Corolla, you absolutely cannot afford a $20,000 brand new Corolla on minimum wage, and your only hope is mediocre, but very cost effective used cars, such as mid 90's Saturns with sticks, which you can get for under $2000, which is an order of magnitude. But that is a common theme of the future, for anyone trying to stay out of bankruptcy, engine cost engine cost engine cost. Even with today's fuel prices, it's still the engine cost that makes or breaks your bank account. After housing, which is the worst thing out of what with the economy and inability to compete in the global market place against unfair competition who does not have the same housing and transportation costs that we do, so instead we go home, and sit and cry, boo hoo, unfair competition, we can't compete because our cost of living is high. All you need to fix that high cost of living issue is to buy one of these Tesla's.

7 hours ago
top

How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

sillybilly Re:That's not quick? (155 comments)

It's a friggin inconvenience to park at a gas station when you're car is outta juice, and they have to have an enterntainment park next to every one of them to keep you busy while you wait the "superfast" recharce of 30 minutes. They can't really exchance Li-ion batteries, like they can propane cylinders, because propane cylinders are relatively cheap, but with an electric vehicle Li-ion you're talking at least $20,000, so how you're gonna drop of your perfectly good $20,000 battery, and exchange it for someone else's crappy one, that's been abused, and it's only worth $1,500. That's a big deal, you can't swallow a cost like that like you can for propane exchange cylinders for instance.
The other big deal of EV's is the limited range, with huge batteries. The energy density of all batteries, including Li-ion is much smaller than fuels, by at least an order of magnitude - i.e. 0.3-1.0 MJ/kg for a battery, and 44 MJ/kg for gasoline and diesel including biodiesel, and something like 20 MJ/kg for Ethanol/Methanol/Liquid Ammonia. Nuclear powerplant generated liquid ammonia is the fuel of the future, because it's carbon neutral. It's the answer to the storage problems of the hydrogen economy - tag it on to nitrogen, and you got no hydrogen storage problem. I don't understand what's so complicated about this.

7 hours ago
top

UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime

sillybilly Re: Jurisdiction 101 (345 comments)

By the way most movies coming out of Hollywood are action movies, where something happens, somebody either gets killed, or something blows up, or there is a car chase, or in general it's about guns, sex, and violence. That's what sells, so if you can see that in a movie, why not this one? Wait, one is "fictional" grueling details of historical events, such as King Henry the VIII's wives' heads rolling, vs. this one that's "real" in the more near present history. don't really understand what's the big deal in watching the gruely details of a video - which I haven't watched, nor interested in it - when people who want to see nasty things can watch, for instance a surgery movie, to see guts. Or go work in a butcher shop, where you get to slice and dies cows or chickens for bloody body parts, and even just going to the supermarket, it's fully of bloody meat everywhere.

8 hours ago
top

UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime

sillybilly Re: Jurisdiction 101 (345 comments)

Maybe multiple 9mm shots are preferable to behading, on the beheadee's part, because, as during the French revolution they found out, people could keep blinking after their head was cut, for various lengths, but most around 35 seconds or so. So you don't die instantly, and experience horror for at least 35 seconds.

Btw the UK may not have a Freedom of Speech 1st amendment right for it's population, it's good to live in the USA, where you can say anything. At least I try to say anything on Slashdot, and I'm still not dead yet, nor in jail over it.

8 hours ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

By the way I found illustrative examples of what Unix should be like, on the pussy analogy:

First of all, here is a rococo-pussy (this is not what you want Unix to look like):
    http://nudes13.hegre-art.com/h...
It's dark, mysterious, full of features, difficult to debug.
Here it is for closer inspection, under the hood, it's still dark, mysterious and difficult to find the fleas in it:
    http://nudes13.hegre-art.com/h...

Compared the above to this unix-pussy:
    http://content8.pureandsexy.or...
It's light, simple, low on features, easy to debug.
And for closer inspection, under the hood:
  http://content8.pureandsexy.or...
It's still not that complicated, streamlined, and follows Einstein's principle of make it as simple as possible, but not simpler. It still has all the features of a pussy, properly implemented, headache free. You cannot get any simpler than that, or it's no longer a pussy.

When it comes to pussy, both are equally gorgeous, and functional. Variety is the spice of life. But when it comes to Unix, only the light, simple, easy to see, understand and debug, nonmysterious, low on complications but still getting everything done variety is what's beautiful.

9 hours ago
top

China Pulls Plug On Genetically Modified Rice and Corn

sillybilly Re:Could be the pesticide lobby which has killed i (147 comments)

The Chinese government remembers the opium wars, and exploitation of China over profits, and disregard for their welfare in it. What do you think would happen with GMO plants that you don't own, and not only in the intellectual property sense, where it could be pirated, but you don't own it because it's not fertile seed, and you have to keep going back to the original manufacturer for a survival, after he successfully convinced you to get rid of all seeds able to produce fertile seeds themselves, so you no longer have a means to go back to them if seed prices go up, by, mm, say 10 million times of their present cost? And that price is not an overstatement, there is a huge amount of money to be made blackmailing the whole world's population over their stomachs. Everybody has to eat, no matter what the price, therefore the price, in absence of excess supply, which of course would be artificially created by withholding GMO seeds, tends to infinity. To withhold GMO seeds all you have to do is create artificial catastrophies around the available funds of seeds, and lose much of the supply like that. Supply/demand, with a hard demand, is a really easy way to make money if you can cut the supply hard and fast. But only after the alternatives to run to, such as traditional fertile seeds have been abandoned, and it's not possible to have them as an option.

yesterday
top

National Science Foundation Awards $20 Million For Cloud Computing Experiments

sillybilly Re:What do they mean by cloud? (25 comments)

You still, get to keep some of your data on your cellphone memory. True cloud computing is where you can get blackmailed for access to your data, plus government snooping is automated, with common sense network traffic monitoring therefore inspection at each access instance to your data by you, as opposed to the feds raiding your house to look at your hard drives, which in the old days required a warrant, so you could keep accessing your own data for free, without having to pay ransom for it constantly. For now you don't get blackmailed over your cloud stored data, because there are many legal, offline competitor alternatives. Alternatives which have to be eliminated by those pent up on blackmailing you for some good ransom money in the future. It's so hard to make money on software, by trying to sell you an operating system as a subscription service with daily security patches that patch the patches that patch the patches.. it's a joke, so a business model where the operating system is free, but you hand over the data and pay each time you access it, sounds like a much more workable one, to those whose daily bread comes from computer software related things..Why work hard to make new software when the old stuff was much better, when you can just sit back and get fat collecting over cloud data storage ransom fees? Of course there is a fair price, in that they do have to provide the cloud infrastructure, they buy the harddrives and you get to rent them, as opposed to having your own, and there is sometimes a fair rent price, but in the free market the usual question is not what a fair, economic benefit and accordingly price such a service should carry, but instead, what is the price the market is willing to bear under blackmailing situations? Only the commies would ever dream of calculating fair prices, and assigning them to everything in the economy, as in absolute 100% price control on everything, instead of letting the free market manage it, and as their case proved, instead of economic efficiency and fairness and justice, all they created were empty stores and people standing in line at the stores, because the prices were so cheap, and miscalculated, that every time it arrived at the store it fully sold out. In a blackmail prone situation, as in, if you're a city dweller, you have to stand in line for bread, no matter what the price of bread, you're getting blackmailed. Usually in the commie era it was the self reliant independently able to exist without a job or even a government villages, where free independent growing of food still went on anyway, and they were the ones who constantly kept the city dwellers decently fed. The only issue a village has is military security, for which it needs a city like contraption, or at the very least a monastery like scientific advancement zone, to where the villagers provide the excess production to sustain these "parasites" who can defend them against an invasion

yesterday
top

Calif. Court Rules Businesses Must Reimburse Cell Phone Bills

sillybilly Re:Salesmen (159 comments)

The whole main posting topic is similar to business provided cars vs. rental cars. At one point in time I was stuck renting cars to get to work for a while, my boss keeping under so much stress and uncertainty about the future that I never got to the point to making the jump into purchasing a car, right after college, for months on and on. And they teased me to go to some scale manufacturer, with my own car, and were waiting for me to raise the miles done under business hours using a personal car issue, but of course I shrugged it off, last thing you need when you're trying to get hired on so you can jump into buying a car, is to bring whether you should be hired over making dumb decisions like that. It was supposed to be 4 months temp to hire, with enough pay in to temporarily afford a rental, unlike a minimum wage job, but pretty much all that pay went into this extended temporary situation of not knowing what the fuck I'm gonna be doing next week. As soon as I jumped into debt to get a reliable car, I would have been fired, it was just so much in the air. When they told me after 6 months that they like what I'm doing in some respect, but they can't hire me for at least another 6 months I quit. It was not a very healthy job anyway, always inhaling fumed silica dust and solvent in the lab, and that silica dust depositing on my eyeglass frames that were supposedly titanium, chewed it up, it was weird. Plus the lab coats I wore all had a spot of some kind of burning chemical half way up the arm, in an, let's annoy you kinda way, plus they announced a hiring freeze, then told you about the 6 months, because of the hiring freeze, then they post other college grads getting hired straight out college, without being temps first, during the hiring freeze, on the bulletin board posting saying that their greatest skill is drinking the most beer at keg parties. So it was like a general agreement it was time to go without actually getting fired.

So the point is would you charge a business for the gas cost and car cost it takes you to conduct your employment? There are rules that if you're on the clock they might reimburse you on car cost, but that's so up in the air, how about when you're not on the clock? Everyone is expected to have their own cars from their salaries, their own clothes, unless there are company provided uniforms, and in this sense a phone sometimes may be in the same ballpark as the clothes, so are you gonna charge the company for the wear and tear from the use of your shoes and clothes while being on the clock? That's how I'd consider looking at it. Own clothes vs. uniforms provided by the company, own car vs. company car, own phone vs. company provided phone. And out of those using your own car for business while on the clock is the most reasonable, but there are these exempt and non-exempt rules about overtime too, where managers are exempt from being paid overtime for the hours they work over 40 each week, instead they get a monthly salary (which in Feb is nice.) But if you work hours for free, and dedicating yourself to the company like that, then why nitpick on getting paid for using your car while doing regular work during non-overtime hours, and instead managing your personal affairs from the hopefully big salary the company is able to give you, without being bogged down the paperwork overhead of calculating how much they owe you over it. But of course the rule is that there is no rule. And it's easy to see how it can lead to exploitation, but the ultimate answer to that is that nobody forces you to work a job you don't like to work, or want to work, it's only exploitation if you're forced to work, as in you can't find a low cost of living for yourself, and you have to accept any exploiting job thrown at you, you have to keep up with the other dogs jumping higher for that piece of bacon, which is the general trend in the present unemployment atmosphere. There are no jobs, therefore all jobs are highly vulnerable to exploitation, so the court may have that on their side. If the economy picks up and unemployment drops, then you can go back to the common sense of don't sweat the small stuff, and do the best you can for the company without nitpicking, so they can make money and pay you a high paycheck. The overhead, the cost of administration of figuring out the correct amount to reimburse, and verifying that's it's not false, or fighting abuses like that, is huge compared to the sums being reimbursed. There may be a net economic gain to you as an employee, but when you count the team, the gang, the both of you, the overall effect of reimbursing is an economic loss to the gang.

yesterday
top

Researchers Find Security Flaws In Backscatter X-ray Scanners

sillybilly Re:Frankly (143 comments)

There are lots of portable x-ray devices , usually for on the road or nursing home type fell and broke a bone situations, and it's friggin lovely when the neighbors use it on you. At my previous residence there was not a single spot in the whole place where I could be and not be sick, I usually ended up in the entrance lobby or the kitchen area, never in the bedroom, as, I figured out lately why, but not back then, there was a contractor van with two black dudes that always looked at me weird when they came out of the driveway right when I walked by on the sidewalk, and I did not understand why back then. I guess everyone got a job to do, and I'm not an angel either. So lucky me, I got a thick cast iron metal tub now on a top floor, so the only way to really irradiate me with microwaves or x-rays or whatever the heck goes through wooden houses like they are paper, so the only way to get me now is from an airplane, or if someone climbed the roof. But the house is really tall, so dark hour drone strikes are most feasible, but the good thing about that is that if they are low power, because you can't take up a huge amount of electric power, unless the plane itself is huge. But lately it's been getting better, I mean last week or so, a couple weeks ago the hits were really bad. But just like Chernobyl proves, like can take a whole lot of radiation dose, as long as it's within tolerance limits, and you get breaks to recuperate. Worst is when you get a job where they make you sit in one place or stand in one place, and xray you there too, then when you come home, it's the same thing, and you don't get enough breaks to recuperate, and get things like, swollen gums and loose teeth, stinky breath, tooth cavities, and cancer in your skin and meat that doesn't get fought off by your immune system. One of the reasoning behind it could be to force you into higher housing cost situations, the other to help the health care business every time you show up in the emergency room feeling sick, all aimed at undermining you economically. Because you're not allowed to make it, that's already guaranteed. We'll shoot your tires out on the highway to make you catch a taxi, we'll sell you a remote control car to smack you into an accident on the highway, but you will not make it, to where you accomplish a low cost comfortable living, and an income to basic expense ratio of at least 20x. That's a big no no. Then everyone else would want that for themselves, and the exploitation of everybody stuck in a 1.2-1.5x income to basic expense ratio would stop, and everyone would become free, and go in a thousand different direction doing whatever they feel like, instead of what they are forced to do by their circumstances. It all starts with one bad apple that spoils the bunch.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

Correction: It's not 1!+2!+3!=4!-1, but 1*1!+2*2!+3*3!=4!-1, as in 1*1+2*2+3*6=1+4+18=23, which is 24-1. My memory failed me there, but the point is there is a different way to represent digits that gets full granularity of integers without gaps in it, other than just the geometric progression Indian/Arabic/Mayan method.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

How about if you tried to apply Roman numerals instead of Indian/Arabic binary representation for each digit? Would it get terser, as an overall sum, where you could surpass the Indian/Arabic fixed base geometric progression with the factoradic variable base progression? After all, you only need one character to represent 1000, M, from a lookup table, so you have M, D, C, L, X, V, I, or 7 different values, and a maximum craziness of MMMDCCCLXXXVIII, or 3888 requiring 15 digits within its usual representation space, instead of a uniform 4 for all digits with Indian/Arabic numerals with space to blow to 9999, but 1900 only MCM, 3 digits, so near the focusing points, you get terser, at the cost of more verbose at the extreme of 3888. For one roman numerals require something like 2.9 bit representations for each digit out of 7 possibilities, while Arabic/Indian need 10 digits so like 3.1 bit digits for the same space. And overall, roman numerals are are much busier with more digits, even if less bit per digit, in the space to 3999, than Arabic ones. But right now, I feel too stupid, tired and lazy to keep on thinking like this. Maybe someone can carry on the philosophical discussion, and tell me why I feel like a dog chasing his tail? I keep thinking maybe one day I might catch it :)

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

Well the important thing is, that when doing 168 pin RAM sticks, and looking at the pipe of data coming through them, on each line, if they come through in say decimal representation, with 10 voltage values each, then you can get 10^168-1 values out of it (like you can 0 to 9999 from a 4 digit bicycle lock, not 10,000, or 0-255 from 8 bits, not 256, but with factoradic representation with variable base, the highest allowed digit on the 168th line is 168, as in 1,2,3..A,B,C (you run out after 10 digits plus 26 Roman letters, so you go alpha, beta, gamma, etc, pile on everything you know til you get a 168 base digit), so you'd have a number like gamma x 168!+L x 167!+... +3 x 3! + 2x2! + 1x1!, according to their rules in Wikipedia, which is still fully granular, but much huger number, as 168! > 10^168 by a whole lot, and the situation becomes even more stark when you compare 168! > 2^168, as in binary, the only issue being that each digit must be represented by 168 possible digits, which in binary takes up 256 or 8 bits, with room to spare above 168 to 255, so you divide 168/8=21, so you can really only go up to 21!, which may still be bigger than 10^168, but still get full granularity of integers. But it's not, as 21! = 5.11x10^19 according to google, which is a whole lot less than 2^168-1= 3.74x10^50. So at 168 pins the variable base factoradic representation is not more efficient than the fixed based Indian/Arabic geometric progression. Hmm.

But that gives me the Idea, that you don't have to divide 168 by 8, as for the initial digits you only need less room, and 8 bits are wasted, so you need for 1, 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11.... etc 1/1 bit, 2/2 bits, 2/3 , 3/4, 3/5, 3/6 ,3/7, 4/8,4/9,4/10,4/11,4/12,4/13,4/4/14,4/15, 5/16,5/17,5/18,5/19,5/20,5/21,5/22,5/23,5/24.5/25,5/26,5/27,5/28,5/29,5/30,5/31,6/32,6/33,6/34,etc, and I'm too lazy to calculate how many you need, but if you use binary geometric progression encoding of the factoradic digits, you only need 7 digits to get the numbers under 127, 6 under 64, 5 under 32, 4 under 16, 3 under 8, 2 under 4 and 1 under 2, so (168-127)x8+(127-63)x7+(63-31)x6+ etc = (1097 I got at convertit.com, but I'm stupid because that's not how many digits you get, but instead =) 41/8+64/7+32/6+16/5+8/4+4/3+2/2+1/1 = 1+2*2+3*4+4*8+5*16+6*32 etc, as far as you can go, to stay under 168 available pins on the RAM stick, I make a Microsoft Works spreadsheet that came with my HP Mini Recovery DVD, that looks like this

n 2^n (n+1)*2^n Partial Sum
0 1 1 1
1 2 4 5
2 4 12 17
3 8 32 49
4 16 80 129
5 32 192 321

So it shows that 129 is the highest number under 168, so you need 129 pin to carry all factoradic variable base digits up to the 4 digit ones, now I'm confused, so let's go back, you need 1+2+2+3+3+3+3+4+4+4+4+4+4 eight times, etc.. so I'm going back to make a different spreadsheet,

Numeral Pins Subtotal
1 1 1
2 2 3
3 2 5
4 3 8
5 3 11
6 3 14
7 3 17
8 4 21
9 4 25
10 4 29
11 4 33
12 4 37
13 4 41
14 4 45
15 4 49
16 5 54
17 5 59
18 5 64
19 5 69
20 5 74
21 5 79
22 5 84
23 5 89
24 5 94
25 5 99
26 5 104
27 5 109
28 5 114
29 5 119
30 5 124
31 5 129
32 6 135
33 6 141
34 6 147
35 6 153
36 6 159
37 6 165
38 6 171

So you can get up to 37! with 165 pins, which is 1.38x10^43, which is much less than 2^168-1=3.74x10^50. Hmm. Eventually it's gotta get better with factoradic, which tends to infinity much faster than a fixed base raised to power, such as n^n > a^n over a certain threshold of n. But 165 pins is not past that critical point. Who can find the critical point where factoradic becomes a more efficient way to store numbers, than geometric progression Indian/Arabic binary base representation? Even at the expense of complex logic, but you could get better throughput through a communication pipe, while maintaining full granularity of integers, to huge numbers, something that floating point, or scientific representation cannot achieve. 64 bit operating systems are not there yet, neither would be 165 bit ones. Maybe 1024 bit. Let's calculate the case for 512. I continued the above spreadsheet, and I could drag it to 510 pins at 90 factoradic digits, so now 2^510-1=3.35x10^153, and 90!= 1.48x10^138, so I'm obviously on the wrong track here. Hmm. Oh well, I tried. We don't have anything better than Indian/Arabic for now, do we?

This whole thing should have gone into a blog, but in a blog you don't get ideas thrown at you to reply to, from which you can meander off into various thoughts, unlike on Slashdot.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

Now I went to the Wikipedia page, and it says you're allowed digits only up to the position number at each position in the factoradic, such as
Radix 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Place val 7! 6! 5! 4! 3! 2! 1! 0!
Plcv decl 5040 720 120 24 6 2 1 1
Highest 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
digit allowed

I thought since both 0! and 1! equal 1, you start from 1, not 0, and also that you could go to 5039 in digits at 7!, right before you hit 5040, in a variable base, just like you can go up to 9, right before you hit 10, in digits in a fixed base geometric progression. Or to 23 in digits right before you hit 4!., as in 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E,F(15 of hexa), G, H, I, J,K(icosa),L,M,N(23, of tricosa), so you could have a number like L511 meaning Lx4!+5x3!+1x2!+1x1!. Something is not right here, because the 1x2! and 1x1! only allow 1 as the highest digits, hmm. So anyway the number then is 23x24+5x6+1x2+1x1=552+30+2+1=585, which is much higher than the next up number, 5!=120, so you'd end up with multiple representations for the same number above 121, plus you'd need variable storage space, as you need 120 digits by the next round, and the 26 letters of the alphabet are not enough, so it may not be better after all. The important thing is to try, and keep trying for better. And I'm not smart enough to figure all this out anyway. In any case you can't go up to 9999 in digits when you represent 10000, for the second position at 1x000, but only to 9, or doing so does not cut down on storage costs, by the time you're done representing those digits.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

It's more complicated than what I made it sound, because each position has a variable base as opposed to a fixed base in geometric progression, b, so you could in theory reserve more room than a base for higher numbers. The situation is similar to decimal hex, or binary coded decimal, where your base is F, but you only go up to 9, and lose the available representation space between 10 and 16. With a fixed base, factoradic loses the representation space available for each digit, on the other hand it takes up a fixed amount of memory per digit, so there is various mixes and matches between fixed base geometric, fixed base factoradic, and variable base factoradic, and variable base factoradic might be the most efficient with full granularity encompassing all natural numbers in a range for huge numbers, while fixed based factoradic might be more efficient for intermediate numbers, and fixed base geometric series Indian/Arabic for small numbers.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

I just figured that one out, or more like I just got the divine revelation, even though "they" teased me with the same thing before, in 2009, but mind controlled me not to realize it.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

I just had this idea that in programming, Roman numerals might be more efficient than Arabic/Indian, but only when you can guarantee gaps, or granularity. Such as when dealing with bytes, each being 8bits, or 2^8=256, and wasting space, granularity when you only need to represent 17, which can be done in 2^5=32, but not in 2^4=16. Similar things are FAT cluster sizes, that waste space on clustering, in the name of Roman numeral style efficiency. In this sense, in roman numerals you only represent the centuries by a few characters, such as MM for 2000, MCM for 1900, MDCCC for 1800, MDCC 1700, MD1500, MCD 1400, MCCC for 1300, ..etc. and MC 1100, M 1000, CM 900, DCCC 800, etc. You could cut this down to 3 digits, to lose even more granularity, but your granularity is maximum near the KB or MB levels, right near the cluster size, and instead have options of MM, MCM, MDC, MD, MCD, MC, M, CM, DC, D, CD, which work near the 500 level, and some granularity nearby it, but are inefficient away from the 500 cluster level. If you could get more terse like that, in expression, as in military units one would be M, other D, other D, other L, other X, then V, and the individual soldier, I, so with cutting down to one character or two characters instead of 4 characters required by Indian/Arabic, you could get some bandwidth, terseness of conveyed information, and less parallel lines to carry that bandwidth, to memory for instance. This is illustrated in datatypes, which also lose granularity, but are the equivalents of M, D, C, L, X, V, I, in most typed programming languages. So I'm just adding this thought of how the Roman numerals are stupid to do math calculations, but in certain circumstances they make sense, such as counting available military units.

I just got curious what the letter for 5000 would be, so I looked it up in Wikipedia. There is no such number, and the ancient system is only good for 3999, and there are two methods to get higher numbers, one draw a bar above a number meaning it's multiplied by M, or 1000, so you can represent up to 3,999,000 or almost 4,000,000, and most millionaires could not count their money like that, but then you can keep adding more lines to keep getting higher multiples. The other method, more complicated, but descended from Etruscan tradition that Roman numerals came from, cannot be printed here, because Slashdot eats the funky backward C characters, and you have to read it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

So these are the two known methods of number representation, there is also an option for factoradic, with full granularity, where 1!+2!+3!+...+n!=(n+1)!-1, n!=1x2x3..xn, 1!=1, 2!=2, 3!=1x2x3=6, 4!=1x2x3x4=24, 5!=120, 6!=720, etc, but it's not more efficient than Arabic/Indian, because that uses the rule applied to geometric progressions, of b^0+b^1+b^2+b^3+..+b^n=b^(n+1)-1, and as long as you have your highest base, b, there is no reason at each positional representation not to go all the way up to that highest point. For instance when we say 3528 we mean 8x10^0+2x10^1+5x10^2+3x10^3=8x1+2x10+5x100+3x1000=8+20+500+3000=3528. In factoradic representation you'd only be able to go up to n! at each position, not the full base, such as 3528 being 8x1!+2x2!+5x3!+3x4!=8x1+2x2+5x6+3x24=8+4+30+72=114, a very slow and inefficient way to store numbers, because you could have used each position to store at the highest base available, such as 10 base, implicitly understood, and get much better storage capacity while you still get the full granularity of representation, for each natural number, unlike with chopped roman numerals, or even scientific notation for Indian/Arabic numbers, which we call floating point representation, which is full of holes and cannot represent every single integer to its highest limits. With factoradic you can only go up to n! times the decimal base at each position, while with Indian/Arabic you can go up to base^position, and only for very high numbers do factorials surpass geometric terms, as from the Stirling approximation of factorials, n! ~ constant x sqrt(n) x (n/e)^n, the constant being sqrt(2xPi)=sqrt(2 x 3.1416..) and e=2.71828.. the base of natural logarithms, base x (n/e)^n surpassing base x (base)^n, as in n^n > 10^n for n greater than the base. So maybe factoradics could be used in computing, where you need full granularity that floating point cannot provide, and terseness, such as when describing terabyte and petabyte or huge values, the representation mechanism understood to be factoradic for the values coming through the 168 parrallel lines to a memory stick, instead of binary Indian/Arabic geometric progression. Where am I wrong in this argument?

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

Yeah, I forgot the part where the copperheads advance to 9dans, and destroy the system from within. The situation then becomes similar to the French Revolution, where the 30kyu peasantry rebels against the 9dan monarch and 5 dan nobility, and guillotine their heads. If a 9d copperhead is caught, after getting away with things for a long time, just like the nobles/kings could in France, but eventually there'd be massive flame-wars about it, in a rebellion style, where it becomes obvious you have to roll out the guillotine and have some heads roll. Of course this situation can be abused too, to where someone like Linus or Alan Cox could be ousted, and then it's up in the air whether the rebels are paid by Microsoft, to kill Linux, or there is a true problem with a rotten leadership. Of course it's hard to see Linus intentionally damage Linux, on the other hand he does look like he's the cousin of Bill Gates, and he lives in Oregon too, not too far. So ya never know these things. That's right, I pick on everyone equally without exception, nobody is safe from the terror of my words, even Linus. But if it bothers you, you can ignore, and get on with your life. Nobody forces you to read all this.

2 days ago
top

Linux Kernel Git Repositories Add 2-Factor Authentication

sillybilly Re:Oh no. (49 comments)

Also, computing already follows similar simplicity at the core as life does. Everything in life is A C T G, and everything in computing is 0,1. But we're dealing with the complexity issues arising at higher levels, than 0,1. In particular, the closer you are to 0,1 the simpler and more straight forward, the more "Unix" the procedures should be, and the farther away you are, the more variety, the greater flamboyance, the greater exuberance of rococo, such as menu options, flamboyant colors, and richness of decoration. For instance, a colorful lizard is flamboyant at the user interface, appearance to the external world, but adheres to the principles of all eukaryotes, in how it functions closer to the ACTG level. Similarly, KDE should be flamboyant at the user interface level, or VB Classic/VBA Macros can be flamboyant in what all is implemented in them, at the user interface level, but simple at the vbrun60.dll level. All eukaryotes adhere to the principles of having a cellular unit with a nucleus, mitochondria, etc, and in this trees and grass and lizards and you and I are similar. It does not mean that the principle is a correct one, for instance a totally mindless and dumb prokaryote might evolve that does not have a nucleus, and chew and digest off Alien's face, digest up all trees, all other lifeforms, and in a sense, prevail in the competition to survive by becoming the new top predator. Being a eukaryote means you believe that it's efficient, and stick to it, but that belief is not a guarantee, and you can have raging debates about it, or even might have some human cells where it might make economic sense to be prokaryote instead of eukaryote for some of the specialized cells, but in the meantime everyone sticks to this guiding principle, not because it's correct, or good, but because it is what it is. Similarly, in an aerobic, oxygen atmosphere, for multicellular life other than bugs, which have no blood but a tracheal lung system that penetrates all the way to individual cells and brings oxygen directly, so for multicellular lifeforms that do have blood, hemoglobin based on iron has arisen as the dominant and only standard, being the most efficient life could come up with. There are exceptions with blue blooded molluscs, like octopi, which sometimes live in depths of great oxygen depravation, and at those oxygen concentrations the copper based blue blood is more efficient, but all fish, all reptiles, all birds and mammals have red blood. Red blood might be complex in an of itself, but it became a standard everyone follows because we don't know anything more efficient. In the biotech future there might be artificial synthesis of something more efficient, and human derived artificial people based on them, such as green blood or orange blood, who can win olympics, but for now life is stuck at hemoglobin, which is both complex and efficient, and maximum state of the art. Similarly all vision systems are based on a vitamin A derived molecule, already at the limits of theoretical efficiency, as in 4 photons able to trigger a visual response in the brain, but there might be inventions where a single photon does it - and it may not be the molecule itself, because, in theory, that changes conformation from a single photon, but the overhead circuitry, which, may be damping out and filtering single photon detection on purpose - but once you got single photon detection, you know you can't get any better than that, maybe less expensive molecules to be used. In number systems around the world we use the positional Hindu/Arabic system as opposed to the Roman, and we have nothing better so far, so it's a universal standard.

(By the way the positional system is encoded instinctively into words such as 10, 20, 30, 40, and such things as 31,32, 33,... then 41, 42, 43, so it's weird that the Greeks and Romans could not come up with 4something to represent 40, with zero. But the french have quatre vingt huit for 88, literally meaning 4-20-8, as in 4x20+8, so some number systems don't follow the simple rules that would yield zero, and near 10 english does not either, as in eleven, twelve, instead of oneteen, twoteen, thirteen, fourteen, meaning the dozen, divisible by 2,3,4,6,12, was often preferred to ten, divisible by 2,5,10, especially lacking divisibility by 3,which is often needed as the next level after division by 2.)

So in Unix, you have a eukaryote-like guiding principle - of specialized individualized objects that can be easily separated out from the whole, such as cell nuclei, that do one thing and do it well, - the guiding principle to abstain from complexity and cleverness, near the 0,1 level, or at the compiler level, and add complexity the farther away you are from the core, and closer to the user experience, such as outer appearances of a lizard, compared to molecular processes. In that there might be some hemoglobin-like security features that are complex but most efficient known in the present circumstances, or light sensor like setups, such as good vision octopi and humans both have the exact same eye developed, fairly complex and simple at the same time, but seems to be better than the bug compound eye, which on the other hand has even higher color sensitivity than the human and octopus eye, and it fits well in a circumstance where you have to go from flower to flower 2 feet apart from each other, compared to distance vision to a couple hundred yards required by the human and octopus predators, motion sensitivity topping color acuteness, except for monkeys trying to decide whether to hop branch to branch to pick ripe or unripe banana, which is very color dependent.

In KDE you get, or at least used to get, a flamboyance of features, all based on the ease of use of the qt c++ library. Qt C++ is much easier to program than the Win32 C Api, which is more verbose, but, unfortunately, when it comes to user experience, Win32 runs circles around anything invented yet, except command line Unix. C++ was available for a long time for windows, and you even had experiments such as Microsoft foundation classes, which have been horrible and overly complex to debug, too abstractualized without getting enough bang for the buck, for the complexity at the core assumed for the benefit of ease of use due to abstractualization, and so far simpler ways to ride on top of Win32, such as Delphi 5 and 7 Pascal, or VB Classic (which lacks critical features of multithreadedness for instance) have proven more efficient than C++, and Windows has stuck to a C API core, the developers or guiding leaders, such as Charles Simonyi deliberately not taking on the standard C++ libraries way of doing things, and instead rolling their own, specialized class libraries we call Win32 C Api. To every complexity there is a cost, and a performance hit. KDE Konqueror can never hope to achieve the speed of Windows Explorer of Windows 95 or 2000, for the simplest of simplest computing taks, such as a file copy diagram, even though it has features of automatic skip of files, etc, but it's hopeless in speed, because of the C++ library ease of programmer use, that sacrifices speed of the software. In linux if you have to copy lots of files, you have to drop back to typing in a console, and then you can beat Win32 Windows Explorer, but not by very much. So there is a huge gaping problem at the rococo, at the user interface level in Linux, because they have not achieved harmony, or a balance between complexity and efficiency to the level that Simonyi achieved by avoiding C++. Of course you cold fix up C++ Qt Api to be better than the Win32 C object Api, and still call it C++, you should be agnostic about these things, but you might have head on clashes with the ISO C++ standardization committee on certain issues. Sometimes it almost does not matter if the kernel itself is super good when it comes to an end user, if you lack user friendliness and efficiency. Win32 has both efficiency at the core, and user friendliness efficiency at the flamboyant, rococo user interface end of things, at least like it used to be in Windows XP. I for one want features that overflow me in software, as when I walk through all the standard menu options of Office 97, compared to newer software of recent years, that gives me a single menu, with a single button to click, with a message above saying choose the button you want to click, and my only choice is that single button. I feel cheated under such circumstances. I like freedom, I like options, I like variety, but not at the cost of internal complexity, at the rule, the mechanism level, to where the whole thing collapses internally.

As far as the designers go, you could have a ranking system for programmers, just like you do in the military. Just because someone is an inept new recruit, who has no clue, it does not mean he's useless. To the contrary. But you're not gonna make him an Admiral, or even a platoon leader, he has to start where everyone starts, and advance through the ranks, through established procedures. Then the whole gang functions in unison, utilizing both the incompetent and the competent to their maximum talents. The biggest problem in anything is incompetence, and this includes military, industry, education, and in military they come up with the best they can, and lucky is a military that has leaders like Alexander(never met his match), Hannibal, Scipio(his match), Napoleon, his match being Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington teamed with Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher, Jellicoe, Nimitz, but each of these have to rely on an army of incompetent recruits. You always walk knee deep in incompetence, whether it's military, or software programming, and you have to find a way to make the best of it, how to best use your incompetent people, and have procedures in place where experience enhances competence.

For instance, in Linux you could have a kyu-dan based ranking system, and you don't really have to authenticate any programmers for who they really are, they could contribute anonymously under a certain user name/password that carries a certain rank. Once they abandon that user name and pick a new one, it may be some time before they rise through the rank to their previous level, but that's an easy system that self manages leadership based on competence. Then any piece of code in Linux could have a "touched by highest rank" tag to it. In this sense some BC beginner category, or 30 kyu programmer could submit a piece of code, on some new esoteric hardware device, that nobody has touched yet, then anybody already in the kernel, at say 15 kyu level, can seek out code fragments that have a more negative than 15kyu tag to them, such as written by 20kyu, and automatically get their modifications accepted into the kernel, however ideas to pieces of code touched by 10 kyus would hang around as requires approval at the 10kyu or better level, and not get automatically accepted. The really important features would of course be touched by the 9 dans, who'd trump anybody out there. Above 5 dan in amateur Go you start to notice the appearance of style, while maintaining top efficiency but taking on flair, playfulness, as in becoming a show-off, as in look what I can do, and while I do it, I do it with style, and still maintain the core principles to their max, that amateur coders "just can't touch this", hammer timer. In martial arts, such things arise as the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... drunken monkey sub-style of monkey style Kung Fu, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... to add flair and style while maintaining top efficiency by black belts. There are of course variations such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... Dragon, Mantis, when you have become so good and efficient at what you do, that you have wiggle room to add style with flair. 9d kernel guru's probably each have their own style, and can recognize each other's code simply based on style, and newbies instantly by not only lacking style, but simple retardedness, of not even have assimilated basic principles of efficiency, economy, common sense. Just like in martial arts, in software too it takes lots of discipline and fighting practice to become an expert black belt, and not everyone has the talent for it.

Still, even that ranking system is vulnerable to internal collapse, as in having copperheads, some extremely good programmers such as programmer spies, with an agenda to destroy, advancing through the ranks to 9d levels, then pulling some stunts that bring down the whole system. Supposedly they are big fans of commercial software, or that ideal, or they may even be paid by some commercial software agencies who see Linux and the blocking GPL license eat at their bottom line compared to a BSD public domain license, so Linux is under this constant attack, constant war, which is even stronger than Wikipedia commercial competitor abuse, because in Wikipedia it's easy to fix messups, and even if they are present, everyone using Wikipedia is aware of the contribution process, and the facts being plain wrong issues, and even subtle sabotage issues by the experts. But nothing comes close to Wikipedia in broadness and scope on most topics. Software is much different, because the barrier to entry is humongous, 99,999 out of 100,000 people can't grok the Linux kernel code, as opposed to 99,999 out of 100,000 people knowing how to grok the Wikipedia pages. And in a sense factual plain wrong wikipedia style issues are accepted by the end users who are aware of the contribution process, as long as the overall picture, the overall benefit is positive. For instance if Linux kernel used the VBA Macro/VB 6 Classic style of Basic programming, or even just for the end user interface programming part, such as the very limited scope but very easy to use Gambas is attempting to do, with super efficient translation methods to get tight and efficient code, maybe you could get 9,500 per 100,000 people able to contribute, which is 9500 times greater than 1 out of 100,000 people of the general population. Even Linus constantly says that the kernel is usually not a big deal, he's got that covered with a few colleauges, but the end user interfaces, the games he can play, lack in richness, such as xsoldier that he'd play on an airplane fight. He constantly complains about lack of good application software, and a VB-like, Gambas like programming interface might turn the app-side of Unix into a wikipedia style thing, where anyone can add features, and others quickly review the changes and undo them, for instance. But the barrier to access, the difficulty of groking the code is huge both with the c++ abstractualized complexity that qt is, or even the verbose win32 api style GTK, both of which really suck on performance already, let alone put something like gtk-python on top of them, and you'd end up with a horrible horrible bloat and speed hindrance, compared to what even Gambas or VB for Freebasic can accomplish. VB classic could ride on top of Win32 C Api without much speed penalty, or bloat, compared to the bloat, and library sizes that VB dotnet and C# are. For instance, even Freebasic can sometimes produce the most efficient code on par with C and Pascal in language comparison tests, all leaving Java and Python and C#/VB dotnet in the dust, however there is no easy access, easy to use interface to let developer contribute wikipedia style, in plain English Basic, as opposed to C, or Java, or Python, and the like.

2 days ago

Submissions

sillybilly hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

sillybilly has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>