Also, due to one of the fundamental laws of nature (Murphy), my internet connection for my machine back at home died. So it has a new IP address (if it's up at all), that I don't know... I guess I'll have to call my family (a reasonable thing to do, when you arrive overseas ;) to investigate...
Parted hacking: ported GPT support to 1.5.x (net change of -1000 LOC!), and wrote MIPS support.
Sister's engagement party: lots of fun, but I got a bit drunk (and felt a bit ill for 1/2 hour) :( Her boyfriend/fiancee ROCKS, and his GNU/Linux brainwashing is progressing well :)
Latest ponderings:
In other news, uni is fun this semester. There is a subject called "Frontiers of Computer Science" that involves a few lecturers having a rant on their latest obsession. Very fun :) This code optimization stuff is so cute! Too many interesting things to do!
It looks like I'm going to .mx from 6th-9th dec, then to .br until end of feb.
Spent the day doing data recovery (someone else's data ;) Waste of time really. Just, I need to figure out how to do it on someone else's time ;) Seriously, data recovery is an interesting problem... I probably want a logical language like Mercury (good excuse to get into task-academic-crap!)
All my friends are running away overseas! Come to think of it, I want to run away to Brazil too...
Which raises the question in general: should free software hackers write more technical docs / papers (i.e. targetted at hackers)? I think yes... reading over mail archives is often rather difficult, unless you already know a lot about the particular area. And even if you do, it's a lot of effort. Also, I think writing technical docs for hackers will make it easier for the newbie-hackers to see how different hackers think about problems.
So, I've decided it's a good idea, so, now I need to waste some more time to do it ;-)
Also, had a conversation with pfh about AI. "Godel, Escher, Bach" / "Metamagical Themas" promotes the idea that creativity is the ability to find something that is relevant (which is rather loosely defined). This sounds about right to me. For example, thinking up a joke in conversation, or just coming up with a new idea. But there seems to be a difference between this, and, say reading, where you have to come up with the relevent meaning from text. But perhaps it is the same thing... (they're both HARD problems from a computational point of view)
Open question: is finding a relevant object the same as pattern matching? Or is pattern matching the equivalent of determining if something is relevant, given the object and context?
Also, methinks good music composition (i.e. good by my standards ;-) is AI complete. Good musicians come up with material that is "new", in the sense that you don't get bored of it, because it sounds like something you've heard before. Yet, it's still similar (eg: same instruments, similar tone, etc.) to what came before. (Here's a paradox: good music must be different, yet it must be the same). Anyway, I think coming up with new things is linked to finding something that is relevant (as I waved my hands about, above).
FOAF updates: Trust rankings are now exported, making the data available to other users and websites. An external FOAF URI has been added, allowing users to link to an additional FOAF file.
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!