What keeps me up at night is the realization that soon
you'll be able to build custom virii
(biological) in your own home as easily as you can do with computer virii right now.
And that the script kiddies out there currently are putting out new major
virii weekly. We cant just reboot our bodies after a crash like we do with Exchange.
We are so dead.
I agree with Dacta
about galleon and mozilla. They should have started with the renderer and then just
worked up around that, making real releases of the features one at a time as
they became complete.
I have to read 'The Making of the Atomic Bomb' as suggested by
Searching for other places such as forums using peer review or trust metrics to control the content/noise ratio I've actually found several places that have done so far beyond what I would have expected. I see these sorts of practices absolutely necessary in the future as the internet becomes more and more bloated.
"P.S. They say they sell buffalo meat there, but I think it's actually
just a lot of bull."
- Rich Morin on firstname.lastname@example.org
"Some people like buffalo, but I wouldn't want to buysome. (Weak, I know...)"
- Quinn Weaver, followup
a nice savage game of hunt the grumpus.
* dngor rolls 1d12, save vs. intelligence.
Limpidity #45: Alien Abductions
"Could this be the end of the Samurai Pizza Cats, or could it just be a good place
to put a commercial"
More suggestions are always welcome I've recently purchased
Programming Pearls, Cathedral & The Bazzar and several others.
There dont' seem to be any good places for complex & organized
discussions about the current issues of software licenses and
licensing. This concerns me greatly because I think these issues
are whats going to shape a large part of the future of computers,
business and otherwise. For instance its obvious that the future
of business is going to be in implimentation and not in protocol.
But there are so many companies trying every which way they can to
keep the old checks in place so that they can continue to make
money of the protocols they have been for 50 years. That its actually
starting to hurt others. I was thinking of starting by setting up
or locating a bulletin board to be dedicated to this kind of
discussion. And then follow this up by working on a system in which
people can develope licenses and documents in groups just as source
code is developed. Obviously there are alot of issues here though.
And these kinds of things have been done to death in the past But
what I'd try to focus on is the discussion rather than the actual
changing of the work in progress.
"System for the Collaborative Development of Low Volitility Documents"
Using peer review to engage the evolution of such documents might
allow us some better understanding of the future we're about to
face in Intellectual Property.
The system would be a repository for such documents as well as a
complex way of orienting a bulletin board type system such that
messages can be directed towards the document as a whole or almost
any specific part of the document, regardless of how large or small
that might be. The difficulties are in how to arrange in an intuitive
manner such a cross referencing situation.
I guess I'd use angryprogrammer.com
I'm using barkingweasel.org for my own site. Frikkin network
solutions won't expire the registration for barkignweasel.com
regardless of how uninterested the original owner is in renewing
it. So I can't snatch it up for myself. Bastards!
Looking into zope for a solution.
I'm still baffled by the paradox that is Pacific Bell. In what
other industry can there exist a company, which every one of its
customer hates profusely. Every single one!
I didn't get to bed until 8am. Why do computers have to be so damned
Have to look more into functional languages like haskel and caml.
Also have to learn objective c serious and look into sather. I'm
extremely interested in low level programming languages with the
high level features of memory management.
Need to get GTKtalog running on a machine so I can make indexes of
all these damned burnt cd's laying around. I can never find anything.
Wish it would run on freebsd well. I got it to compile and start,
but I had to hack the code heavily and it would still need some
code to drive the cdrom. Should still be remedial but time consuming.
Also to really make full use of it I'll have to come up with some
way to have it recursively work on particular files. Decompressing
files and working on those contents as if it was a directory and
then repeating the process on any compress files in found. (i.e.
treating compressed files as directories with a great deal of meta
Gnustep is such a great thing. And they've made such great progres.
I'm boggled by the fact that I don't hear anyone talk about it or
anyone use it.
Looking at the FAQ for sather, another interesting looking language
I haven't had the time to get much into yet I started to ponder
how we're defining languages now. There are some umteen million
(gives or take a few) languages now. There seems to be several
different parts to what a language is, and syntax just one of them.
Not only that but the other parts seem to be completely independent
of the design of the syntax. This would leave me to believe that
theoretically you could redesign languages so that the syntax was
personal. Or specifically that it should be possible for one to
describe what 'features' of syntax he/she prefers and thus design
ones own 'look' of a language. Example syntax features would be
the much debated tab based block definition vs curly bracket ( or
some other identifier ) based block delimiting. If taken far enough
one could specify a syntax as strict as python or java or as loose
and maliable as perl, or for that matter any variation in between.
A further stretch of the imagination takes us to this point. Lets
saw we have language syntax features that we consider as shorcuts,
simplifications or some such. That could theoretically be broken
down into longer but much more explicit code. (btw, such features
seem to be the core of perl syntax design) Then if we could define
the algorithms that would expand uses of these features to the
longer but more explicit code, we would have a basis to result any
particular use of these features down to a common denominator.
This makes no sense so let me try to explain this again. Shortcut
operators. Those funky pipes and ampersands that let us do pseudo
boolean execution of statements but let us get away with only
executing the second statement (or third or forth etc) if the first
one returned what we were expecting it to. These are extremely
simple (and short) version of what we could write logically with
a group of if then's. But we have this shortcut for the soul reason
that we use them often. Lets say you were to enjoy using this
particular feature. So you set in your language prefs or at the
top of your source (or Make) file your code will use this syntactic
sugar. Then someone else comes along who thinks this complexifies
code making it hard to understand and prefers not to use these
handy operators. Rather than forcing him/her to deal with your
travesty of what real programming should be he can merely specify
a small command that will go through his/her copy of the source
and expand those handy dandy pipe dreams into something that is
not quite so short and simple but that he/she can understand more
readily and won't find an eye-sore. Take this and apply it to what
makes up most popular language syntax and you have a programming
language that can look like almost any other type of language you
want it to. Allowing each individual programmer to program in the
way he or she decides best, but that can still be devolved into
some common denominator language specification that everyone can
understand. The volume of default arguments in perl alone that
could be exposed is particularly horrifying.
Well, I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but thats not
going to stop me from considering it further.
Something I'm sure about is the fact that this kind of slicing and
dicing of bits could not be done with the actual non syntactical
language features such as memory managment, typing, garbage
collection, and objects withall the different and harried ways of
implementing and manipulating them. But! And thats a might big
but you have there Mr Stillwell. If one could manage to do so with
a few core language features then one would have an interesting
candidate for a self optimizing languages. This goes even further
though add that pseudo native binary, pseudo intrepreter idea that
seems to be really popular nowdays and you could end up with a
language that not only is all things to all people but actually go
through being every stage in the gambit from extremely high level
(prototyping and such) to very low level ( effectively c ) all in
the development cycle of one project. Thereby simplifying development
as you start with an interpreted extre featured and rather easy to
debug (yet slow) interpreted language while your still prototyping
and nailing down what your trying to write in the first place and
then slowly make your way down (still in the same code base) to a
low level no frills c end result. Heck at that point if you'd
already nailed down your features you could keep track of the
transitions in a new wave version of cvs and go back up in the
train of revisions to something more high level when you need to
add a new feature or something like that. Doing horizontal code
changes early in the life of the code long after the code is even
Anyways, thats enough theoretical language design. heres some
My wondering why I let my hair grow long.
The Perl Filesystem
I've actually started submitting diary entries.
Lets home I can come up with something to put here.
I setup webdav on barkingweasel.org and angryprogrammer.com.
The idea is if its easier to post content there, then I might
actually get around to making some.
I also wrote up this quick little script to let me post
my advogato diary from the command line. Lets hope it work. =)
New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.
Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.
If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!