Computers:

From Beginner to Master: A Computer Programmer's Reading Course (by Ted Walther)
Functional Programming For The Rest of Us
Subtyping versus Subclassing (by me) What is a Type? (nobody knows)
Fundamental Theorems of Randomness (better summarized by me, add Liskov Substitution Principle with Linsky on substitutivity and referring [2], Coase's Theorem, and Russell's Paradox)
Artificial Intelligence : Human Language

Shelby wrote:Get:

* Baseline Shield from eazsolution.com
* Adblock Plus Firefox addon, With EasyList+EasyPrivacy filters

The baseline makes sure even Flash LSO objects don't persist between baseline restores (i.e. reboot) and the AdBlock filters most of the stuff. Blocked 15 out of 40 resource hogs on Yahoo Finance! Yahoo Finance loads nearly instantly now, even over my slow connection.

Browsing is so much incredibly faster and no viruses can every persist past a reboot!

You really should switch to Firefox 3.x, then following addons:

* Adblock Plus, With EasyList+EasyPrivacy filters - filters most ads before they load, speeding up browsing, reduces errors/crashes, uncluttering the webpage, then you can restore them from "ASP" stop sign icon

* Flashblock - replaces every Flash video/animation even ads, with a button to click if you want to load&display them

* Split Browser - allows you to split the browser window (horiz or vertical) with a drag-able bar (vertical or horiz) so you can see 2 or more webpages simultaneously side-by-side, which is especially productive in a large 19% wide screen. Works with the multiple tabs (pages open) of Firefox.

* Image Zoom - I don't use this too much, but you can right click on images, then roll the mouse wheel to zoom in/out on them in fine increments.

* Multiple Tab Handler - enables group operations of multiple tabs (pages open), and it integrates well with Split Browser.

Also advisable to add the Rollback product, which is same as Baseline Shield, much better than Deep Freeze or Norton and others, because of the ability to recover even if OS won't start and the faster performance of restores.

See also my architectural comments about BitTorrent free loading and opportunity cost minimization.

This post continues from this one.

Something I wrote in email on Sat, April 26, 2008 3:13 am:

In short, the technological architectural problem must be solved in the context of the economic problem (see bold text below).

Deterministic vs Random P2P Topology
>From what I remember off the top of my head from my prior research, the
deterministic P2P topologies
assign
each peer a segment of the resource locator hash key. Within a
segment, peers communicate with each other to make sure sufficient
redundancy is maintained. Deterministic topologies are more deterministic
in terms of performance, but anonymity & resistance to attack is weak.

The random (non-deterministic) P2P topologies (e.g. BitTorrent?)
randomly
poll peers (outside their local portion of the global DHT), then the
segmentation of the resource locator hash key builds statistically over
time, as requested resources statistically gravitate to peers closer to
their requests over time. Statistical topologies have stronger anonymity
and resistance to attack, but are
less
deterministic (more statistical) in terms of performance.

It seems in both cases, we only need a resource locator hash key that is
statistically uniformly distributed? Thus taking the MD5 hash of a URL is
sufficient? Thus the URL is the superset of the URL, by applying MD5 when
P2P request is desired.

So as I wrote before dash, my design is already generalized enough and the
market demand will be created for the P2P storage. Then all someone has
to do is write a plugin for the browser which redirects a URL to an MD5
hash locator in a P2P topology. See the URL access and superset P2P
access (by taking the MD5 has of the URL) can operate in parallel. The
client can try either and take the first one that returns the resource.
There is no chicken & egg problem because URLs can build out the market,
then anyone can supplement with P2P parallelism. The P2P parallelism
provides the advantage of more robust performance and will allow users to
publish persistant data to the P2P network, thus avoiding the need to
maintain a URL location permanently. One could simply plugin existing
P2P networks like BitTorrent, so there is certainly no chicken or Egg
problem as the networks already exist.

This above successfully addresses and deals with the following prior posts:

shelby;34847 wrote:dash, I have an engineering conceptual question that I
would like to ask you to help me solve.

URL (Universal Resource Locator) references a specific host (IP via DNS),
then a path within that host to a resource.

What would be the ideal structure for a resource locator which references
a resource that is distributed across a P2P network? I understand a MD5
hash can uniquely identify a resource, but it contains no optimization
hints on locating the resource. How would a transient P2P storage work
and how should the resource locator thus be optimally encoded?

I say "transient", because the most efficient energy design would be one
that cache's resources at clients that are on, with sufficient redundancy
or even deterministic redundancy, that there is always at least a few
machines on the network which are on and have a copy of (chunks of) the
resource. Rather than requiring the distribution of new web appliances,
the market will be most efficient if leverages existing PCs via new
software. Software paradigms are always more energy efficient (spread
faster), than adding hardware paradigm shifts. Remember that bandwidth is
not free, so we must increase efficiency by using underutilized (wasted)
resources.

I am currently using URLs in my design, and I want to contemplate how to
decentralize the resource locator. I think this is last key design
concept I need to conquer. The market will create the demand. This
superior resource locator should be a superset of URL, so URLs can be used
to build the market size, then P2P can be phased automatically via a more
efficient program that gets distributed as this design spreads out.

Any way, what should the topology of the resource locator be? I think we
should look at bittorrent?

shelby;33839 wrote:dash my 3rd form of storage will be creating a market
for such generic (low cost), distributed (P2P caching) network storage
appliances.

shelby;33826 wrote:dash, you don't understand. I said the semantics are
the storage-- the whole concept of monopoly of storage disappears... It
is such an extreme paradigm shift, that you are not seeing it. I do not
require clients to be on. I do not want to explain it to you further at
this time. Thanks for your feedback.

The remaining problem for P2P is the
prior
post I made about monetizing the sharing incentive (which was
spawned conceptually from probably one of the most important & wisest
concepts Jason Hommel ever said to me "you can not make something free,
which is not free"). I will continue to ponder this one (as
Bill Cohen
the creator of BitTorrent does), maybe others can offer their input?

Apparently
BitTorrent uses the self-motivation of the download client for improved
performance as the monetization and motivation for sharing upload
bandwidth. That problem is independent of the design decision I
need to make now for my project described in this thread for
de-centralizing APIs via semantics, as long as I support URLs then I am
fully generalized to any future P2P topology, because a URL can be used as
a hash key and all P2P topologies operate on hash keys.







====================
Economic challenge of P2P is monetizing the sharing incentive of upload
bandwidth
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Canceling the open protocol P2P project
From: "Shelby Moore"
Date: Sat, January 6, 2007 10:03 pm
To: "Jason_Hommel"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am leaving open the possibility of a non-open P2P file streaming method
as discussed further below.

There is no mainstream, legal demand for the open protocol P2P file
delivery network. The robustness of P2P is not something in current
demand, as the advertising and subscription revenue models are able to
fulfill 80% (measured economically, i.e. who cares about asia when they
are economically irrelevant on the internet) of the robustness needs.

The one demand case I can think of is where someone wants to broadcast
video (or other large file type) where bandwidth costs are excessive to
the business model of the site, but doesn't want the viewer (downloader)
to have to stop and pay (or wants them to pay less than the bandwidth
cost). This was the original case that lead me to P2P idea. An open P2P
protocol really doesn't help much, because we have make users pay for each
other's upload bandwidth, else free loading could destroy the network.
Try to monetize this via a form of micropayments, with semi-automated
transactional cost, seems cumbersome for this instant gratification demand
case.

Originally I was envisioning broadcasting internet TV for example.

I am trying to think if there is any way to prevent free loading in less
open P2P protocol, so that upload bandwidth could be shared reciprocally
without needing to introduce monetization. The key seems to be the use of
source website has a hub, to police the sharing of bandwidth among the
viewer's peers, but the problem is that we have no way to verify that the
peer actually sent the bandwidth, as we can't trust the receiving peer
hasn't lied about not receiving the bandwidth. The receiving peer has no
incentive to lie (the bandwidth trade is free and receiving peer needs the
data), except to be malicious. The sending peer has an incentive to lie
in order to conserve upload bandwidth (it already has the data). And I
now realize that we have same problem in monetization case, how can we
know which of the two peers is a liar, when they disagree about whether
bandwidth was transferred between them? I do not remember how I planned
to solve this, if ever I had a solution in mind. I think I had planned to
throttle down those peers which were consistently failing and randomly
rotate peer matchups, thus liars would statistically throttle out of the
network. I could apply this same technique to the policed, free bandwidth
trading case, where liars (or those with saturated bandwidth) lose
download speed.

But this policed idea is only applicable to peers which are viewing
(downloading) simultaneously, as once the download has completed, then the
the peer has what it wants and could stop cooperating. The only stick we
have to control the peer in this free, policed case, is the peer's desire
to get the rest of the file. So this would only be viable when there are
many simultaneous viewers (downloads).

Since this would be real-time (simultaneous), then the another potential
problem is how to fan-out (fork out, think of a tree with the source as
the trunk and peers as branches) fast enough that there isn't a huge
latency between the trunk source and the outer branch peers. The only way
to solve is to have trunk proximate peers send more uploads than they
download, so that fan-out grows geometrically efficient. However, this
places a larger bandwidth cost to the viewer, which may not be preferrable
to paying for the content. Latency is probably not a big issue for file
downloads, only for viewing live video.

This policed, free P2P would probably be best implemented by installing a
webserver on the viewer's computer which would do all the P2P
communication, and thus once installed, would be seamless to a standard
webbrowsing experience. For example, user clicks a link to download a
file, this link will refer to "localhost..." which will invoke the local
webserver to download the file via policed P2P protocol and then pass it
through to the webbrowser. So from user's perspective, it is just like
clicking a normal link. The only extra thing the user needs to do, is to
install the P2P application once (which will install a local webserver on
their computer and configure it with P2P scripts, probably written using
PHP). This seems workable.

The current testing I am doing with XAMAPP local webserver

I was correct before, except I conflated the word "extended" with "eliminated" in my mind:

http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1277#comment-51723

The most robust solution to Tim Sweeney's problem is to rethink what a "class" should be:

http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2009-November/068432.html

Theorems included at above link.

This is my final email to you all on the matter of OOP sets.

New concise guide I am creating:

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Functional_Programming_Essence.html

I was able to condense Category theory and implementation of Monads to one screen:

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Functional_Programming_Essence.html#Monads

Overall, I think I have a unique method for comparing and condensing the explanation of the transistion from imperative to pure functional. What you think?

It is a work-in-progress, so corrections, feedback, and flames are welcome. I will do the OOP section next and incorporate the explanations from these posts:

http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2009-November/068440.html
(data vs. Module)
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2009-November/068432.html
(interface vs. virtual)

P.S. The link will not change if you want to link to it now. If you mirror it, please update your mirrors periodically. There is no copyright claimed, I don't believe in copyrights any more. I intend to publish everything as PUBLIC DOMAIN (i.e. no license at all, because licenses impact composability). If I want to charge, I will put functionality behind an unpublished interface (i.e. Module).

P.P.S. I only started learning functional programming about a week ago.

> My DLink router is accessible via:
> http://192.168.0.1
>
> I tried setting an admin password, but doesn't seem
> to block access. How can I block that IP address at low level in Windows
> (i.e. isn't there a file in SYSTEM folder where you can resign IPs or
> something)? I can then block access to that file after I edit it by
> creating a new Windows user login that doesn't have access to that file.

%windir%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts does not work. Thanks for the tip to use IPSec in policy editor.

Here is exactly how to do it (already tested in IE and FF):

1. Start -> Run secpol.msc
2. In left pane, right-click "IP Security Policies On Local Computer"
3. Choose All Tasks -> Import Policies...
4. Select the attached file
5. In right pane, right-click "Block DLink Router", choose Assign

Here is how I created that policies configuration:

1. Start -> Run secpol.msc
2. In left pane, right-click "IP Security Policies On Local Computer"
3. Choose Manage IP filter lists and filter actions...
4. In dialog box under "Manage IP Filters" tab, click Add button at bottom
4a. Type "DLink Router" in Name, and "http://192.168.0.1" in Description
4b. Check "Use Add Wizard", click Add button
4c. In Add Wizard, Source = "My IP", Dest = "192.168.0.1"
4d. In Add Wizard, Protocol = "TCP" (else DNS blocked for all domains)
5. In dialog box under "Manage IP Filters" tab, click Add button at bottom
5a. Type "Block" in Name, choose Block radio button
6. Click Ok to dismiss dialog box
7. In left pane, again right-click "IP Security Policies On Local Computer"
8. Choose Create IP Security Policy...
9. Type "Block DLink Router" for Name and description as 4a, uncheck "Active default response rule"
10. In dialog box after Wizard (editing the new rule), do not check the rule just created by that Wizard, but add a new rule and select the IP filter and action created above, and check it to active it.
11. In right pane, right-click "Block DLink Router", choose Assign
12. In left pane, right-click "IP Security Policies On Local Computer"
13. Choose All Tasks -> Import Policies...
14. Save to the attached file

One of the key creators of Haskell, accepted my idea and marked it as a "feature request". I was very happy to see that my idea was not shot down too early. If you read the sub-links on that page, you will see I think it is one of the key changes needed to move pure functional programming to the mainstream, and as mainstream I assert has potential to leap computer utility forward by an order-of-magnitude (perhaps similar in magnitude to what the internet did to computers in 1995).

I have plan to usurp Twitter by sticking a proxy between them and the developing world:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/16/twitters-internal-strategy-laid-bare-to-be-the-pulse-of-the-planet/

Fairwell to the gold community. I hope to do a lot of good with education as part of my plan.


Keep at least 10% of your net worth in gold&silver, as the we move 3+ billion into the workforce, with some similarities (and some big differences, increasing taxes!) to when we moved 300+ million boomers into workforce in 1970s.

==========================
Crumbling wall of censorship

Understand how the world is being changed by peer-to-peer (P2P) spread of information, and you will get some clue as to why I think I tapping into something HUGE:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/lindorff2.1.1.html

One thing I learned from living and working as a journalist and journalism teacher in China back in the 1990s is that the Chinese people, with their long experience of living in a totalitarian dictatorship in which all media are owned and tightly controlled by the state and the ruling Communist Party, are acutely aware that they are being lied to and that the truth is being hidden from them. Accordingly, they have learned to read between the lines, to pick up subtle hints in news articles which honest journalists have learned how to slip into their carefully controlled reports. They have also developed a sophisticated private system of person-to-person reporting called xiaodao xiaoxi or, literally, “back-alley news.” This system used to be word-of-mouth between neighbors and friends. As telephones became ubiquitous, it was done by phone, allowing transmission over long distances quickly. Now there is the internet, which, while it is systematically controlled via what has become known as China’s “Great Firewall” – effectively all of China is like a vast corporate “intranet” which blocks access to outside websites – still allows the flow of email. This is nearly impossible to monitor, particularly when the messages are not bulk mailed to large numbers of addressees.

So in China, reports of corruption, of local rebellions or strikes, of internal struggles within the government or party, or of important news about the outside world that the government wants to keep at bay, manage to circulate widely inside China despite a huge state censorship apparatus.

This alternative highly-personal news network works because the Chinese people know they are being lied to and kept in the dark, and they want to break through that official shroud of secrecy and control.

In the US, in contrast, we have a public that for the most part is blissfully unaware of the extent to which our news is being censored, filtered and controlled. Like the President (who knows better), we boast of our “free press,” and our open society, and indeed, as a journalist, I am free to write what I want to write.

=======================
Information can not be owned:

http://mises.org/daily/3864

This is why I think I have the correct business model. I am not going to explain it in detail, because I want "first to market" advantage, but my plans should become obvious soon, if I am successful.

Apologies if this is quite egotistical, but it is just to demonstrate that most IQ tests are in fact wrong.

Better answers (from me):

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11#why-are-manhole-covers-round-5

Man hole covers are round mainly so they can't fall in the hole, but assuming they are quite heavy this also enables them to be rolled. However this could be a disadvantage if risk of theft is a major factor, in which case the ideal shape is an equilateral triangle or the letter 8, or more generally any N shapes attached together where the maximum of the minimum grouped dimension (i.e. the "width") is greater than maximum dimension of any of the individual shapes.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11#you-are-given-2-eggs-13

This is a minimum path optimization question, i.e. finding the shortest distance one needs to travel. The more general answer (if you really want to impress Google), is that if you are given M eggs to break for N floors, then the answer will always be that maximum drops = ((Mth root of N) minus 1) times M = N (inv key)(x^y key) M (equals key) (minus key) 1 (equals key) (multiply key) M. For 2 eggs the 2nd root means square root, for 3 eggs cube root. The reason that the Mth root or N is the shortest path is because it gives you the set with M members that are the smallest numbers that can be multiplied together that result in N. For example, with 1000 floors and 3 eggs, you get cube root of 1000 is 10, so first you drop in 1000/10 = 100 increments, so that is at most 10 drops. Then you drop in increments of 10, then finally increments of 1.

However, note that someone actually deduced a shorter path, and another person derived the generalized equation for 2 eggs and N floors, and another alluded to the M and N generalized form.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11#how-many-times-a-day-does-a-clocks-hands-overlap-7

The answer given was incorrect, because only included the hour and minute hands, and did not account for a military clock. The more general and correct answer that for the minute and hour hands, then answer = 24 minus (24 divided by number of hours on the clock). For example, for a military clock (13th - 23rd hour on the clock), then the answer = 24 - (24/24) = 23. Also add the minute and second hands, answer = 24 x 60 - 1. Also add the hour and second hands, answer = 24 x 60 - 1.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11#explain-the-significance-of-dead-beef-8

The correct answer is that it depends on the context of the field of inquiry. To jump to the conclusion that "bad beef" is the magic hexadecimal file marker (I haven't seen that for 20 years and certainly I don't have the long-term sparse memory recall to have clued in on that), is myopically presumptuous without further qualification. Btw, this is the sort of question that I was marked incorrect on IQ tests, but for which I feel the IQ test examiner was wrong.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11/you-need-to-check-that-your-friend-bob-has-your-correct-phone-number-10

The answer given was incorrect, and someone else derived the same correct answer that I thought of, which is the phone number is the encryption key, e.g. send the MD5 hash of the phone number, ask Bob to reply whether it matches.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11/in-a-country-in-which-people-only-want-boys-3

The answer given was incorrect, and someone point out that interestingly a preference for boys will actually lead to more girls in the population! Those with slightly higher probability of reproducing girls, will produce more girls until they produce a boy, but those with slightly higher probability of producing boys, will stop producing boys on their first one. Interesting Biblical rule, that you can not go against God's plan without reaping what you sow. Someone noted the humorous irony.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11#you-are-shrunk-to-the-height-of-a-nickel-15

I was impressed with someone's answer to the blender question. I was thinking that since our mass was less than a piece of paper, that we had no chance of staying in a set position, nor controlling direction blown, unless we could possibly avoid the air vortex and centrifugal force in the center of the blade (but the spinning would probably kill us), so I was thinking to go to the base of the blade axis and find a rubber gasket to bite and make handles to hold on to. In theory, by the same cube root law, our strength to mass ratio would be orders-of-magnitude increased.

http://www.businessinsider.com/answers-to-15-google-interview-questions-that-will-make-you-feel-stupid-2009-11#youre-the-captain-of-a-pirate-ship-11

The answer given above is incorrect. If you offer all the booty to 51% of the crew, one of them might get motivated to vote against your proposal because they have nothing to lose if your proposal wins (and they might want to try their luck at another proposal that offers them more). Contemplate that deeply! Whereas, the correct answer is to propose that anyone who votes NO will not share in the booty. TADA!

Again this is Biblical natural law at play, wherein you can't conspire against society without reaping what you sow. I also demonstrates why socialism spreads in a democracy-- the group has to force inclusion through equality, but we know equality is a world of no-contrast (nothing with exist).

Read this:

http://goldwetrust.up-with.com/economics-f4/inflation-or-deflation-t9-285.htm#2391

Then this:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north786.html

And if they try to shut down the internet, we will simply go around them:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/green-p3.1.1.html

Imagine if my internet cafes are separated by a distance of less than 6.2 miles each, I can simply network them using a high gain, directional antenna and a standard wireless router (if I had 1000 net cafes networked together, with a huge cache of the internet, many of the services would still be functional):

http://www.amazon.com/2-4GHz-Square-Parabolic-Antenna-24dBi/dp/B000V0ONTI

It turns out that my ability to cut the cost of internet usage in netcafes to 1/2 to 1/4 of current costs, is most ideally matched to a global economy that goes into depression, because in a depression people still need to communicate, and my cost advantage is ignored when people have a lot of disposeable income (who cares if the internet is 10 cents per hour instead of 40 cents).

It also turns out that my cost advantages are rendered irrelevant when the area has high commercial space rental rates, as I can only effect the cost of the computer hardware amortization with my technology. Thus I am most ideally positioned for depression squalor areas, where rentals are near 0.

You may want to read this article about another downwave of global depression being imminent:

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_08/maund120609.html

Being in highly illiquid investments (e.g. real estates and paper financial instruments) is very risky in this yoyo global economy.

Every dog has his day. Tables are turning on those who made their fortunes in the regime of irredeemable debt financial ponzi (the fiat) system.

Everything (except items manufactured by China) that was purchaseable with loans (i.e. college education, real estate, etc) is way overpriced due the ability to borrow way beyond means to purchase them. In short, mis-allocation. None of these activities are economic.

If you have a link to a video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxIN79n4jVo

Simply add the time at the end, that you want the video to start playing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxIN79n4jVo#t=3m8s

The above link will start playing at 3:08 (3 mins and 8 secs).

Apparently you can do similarly to target a page in a PDF file:

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/317/317300.html

http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html

Shelby wrote:I will not support your socialism! If you sold the rights to something, then you no longer control it period!

MySQL can live on in a fork if there is sufficient demand. If there is not sufficient demand to support the development, then it deserves to die.

Let the market decide. Keep the govt and socialism out of it.

I will not sign your petition and I urge others not to, even though I use and depend on MySQL and want it to remain free if possible.