retrac
The first ARPANET link to the United Kingdom required an exception to UK law. The traditional interpretation was that the state telecom monopoly (the General Post Office) had a monopoly on data transport. It was assumed that national governments have an absolute sovereign right to inspect data packets at the border, just like they do mail and parcels. That includes searches and seizures of foreign propaganda, material illegal under domestic law, etc.
> In early 1971 Larry proposed to break the circuit and connect in the NPL network to the ARPAnet. Unfortunately for that plan (but not for me), at this time the British government was trying to get the United Kingdom into the European Economic Community (EEC). The EEC governments, particularly France, were in any case suspicious of U.K. links with the United States. It was therefore politically impossible for NPL to be linked directly to a U.S. defense project. [1]
But the Internet was an experimental network. An exception could be made. Everyone would pretend that they were inside the United States legally speaking. This sort of worked when everyone was an academic restricted by network access policies of their institutions.
> I set up a Governing Committee, with the funding partners on it: Ann Letts represented the BPO, Donald Davies represented the NPL, and I was the Chair. Because of the questionable legality of what we were doing, all proposed users had to be approved individually. I put in security procedures so that all users had to log-in, with a password, on our relay.
[2]
This is related to the protocol wars of the 1980s. The X.25 protocol that was supported by all the established telecoms providers, included mechanisms for packet authority, automatic packet billing, and political boundary packet inspection mechanisms. [3]
X.25 was decried as too centralized, too complex, and too centred around the interests of the established telecoms. (Which it was.) TCP was better for both technical and political reasons. But the Protocol Wars were not a permanent victory. It was a wonderful moment in world history but the underlying tensions have resurfaced.
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224386328_The_early...
[2] http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/research/darpa/internet-history.htm...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet-OSI_Standard_War...
The author has some great in-depth docs about the design, and how they managed to make a fairly lively-seeming simulation fit into a machine with an 8 MHz 8-bit processor.
https://github.com/AntonioND/ucity/blob/master/docs/index.rs...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuius_est_solum,_eius_est_usqu...
Edit: It was 2009.
https://www.cnet.com/home/smart-home/nearly-3-percent-of-ger...
> [...] it substitutes a corrupted symbolic representation of felt life, one defined by machinic precision and optimization [...] that surrounds us increasingly presents a morphology of unfolding that no human being actually inhabits.
In order to make machines significantly easier to use, it has been
proposed (to try) to design machines that we could instruct in our native
tongues. This would, admittedly, make the machines much more complicated,
but, it was argued, by letting the machine carry a larger share of the
burden, life would become easier for us. It sounds sensible provided you
blame the obligation to use a formal symbolism as the source of your dif-
ficulties.
This is a desirable trait when tapering a dose. It reduces hour-to-hour blood level variation which reduces the whole up-down of alternating between euphoria and rebound anxiety. Idea is to target a constant level which is tolerable and slowly lower it.
The article implies this (a Valium taper is mentioned) but I don't think it outright states it so I'll say that for anyone who is addicted to a fast-acting one like Xanax or Klonopin - a switch to Valium might help.
My taper was nearly one year. Ten years off now.
I'm reminded of the software for the Gemini spacecraft. Does it still exist? We don't have any assembly or machine code. But much like today in the '60s the designers of the flight software, considered the assembly output to be an intermediate stage - a kind of temporary mapping from the real program. The real program was designed in "Math Flow 7" - a visual flowchart language for expressing logic. We still have the charts. Does that mean we still have the software? Is the set of charts the software?
Am I the only one who bothered to download the torrent and check?
So much intellectual laziness, if I may be blunt. All of you who replied to me. The link was there. I didn't have time last night. But I do now. And the torrent appears to be genuine.
Journalists have reached the same conclusion, and the AfD spokesperson seems to have admitted at least some of them are genuine.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-news-hackers-release-afd-party...
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/germanys-far-right-...
I've wondered how much DSP can be fit into the open source PineBuds which have little ARM microcontrollers in them. They can do active noise cancelling so presumably some HA-like features are possible.
https://pine64.com/product/pinebuds-pro-open-firmware-capabl...
Legally impossible to advertise or sell as hearing aids but surely it would be useful to some people.
If someone has profound high frequency deafness, no amount of amplification will help. High frequencies carry a lot of the information about consonants and are how we distinguish "t" from "s" etc.
So modern hearing aids do frequency remapping. A low frequency signal is produced within the range of hearing when those high frequency inputs are detected. The sharp 2500 and 6000 Hz peaks of an aspirated "t" become a sort of raspy tone at 1500 Hz, for example.
This is why they say you need to wear your hearing aids for at least some weeks before you notice a benefit. You're relearning language with the extra DSP sounds added. If you grow up with and wear hearing aids most of the time, your brain will be fully adapted to the DSP-speech.
Which is proprietary to the manufacturer. Every manufacturer uses a different algorithm. There's several ways to remap - the classic time vs. frequency multiplexing question. This (along with different noise reduction algorithms) explains why hearing aids from two different manufacturers can sound so very different.
I am being quasi-conspiratorial about it being an intentional lock-in. But one does wonder. In practice the method used by the hearing aids you grew up with is probably the only method you can make full use of.
Not to knock the technology. It's quasi-miraculous for some types of partial deafness. With plain amplification even at 95 dB my WRS is like 60%, while with hearing aids set at much lower 80 dB output average I get 100%.
Lots of information (albeit from the audiologist's perspective) about frequency lowering here: https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/fitting-guide-frequ...
There's been one person who was implanted, who had their natural hearing return for unknown reasons. So they can hear both cochlear, and quite well naturally in the same ear.
This let researchers at Arizona State University ask basically: what sounds most like the cochlear input? The various samples involving their research about 15 years ago are probably your best bet for what it sounds like.
Some people with musical training before retain the ability to hear arbitrary melodies with perfect pitch. Some do not.
There is basically no polyphony.
Here in Canada (where we supposedly like restorative justice and giving people second chances) the penalty for murder is life in prison.
The non-parole period (the amount that must be served) is set by the judge at sentencing and ranges from a minimum of 10 years for second-degree murder. (The longest period is never: indefinite incarceration until proven to be safe around others -- mostly reserved for serial killers.)
That is to say: the absolute shortest sentence you can get in Canada for murder is ten years.
In America I believe it's often many decades if not the death penalty, no?
Even Norway - renowned for the progressive humanity of its legal system - mandates at least 8 years jail for murder.
In just about any country anywhere 10 years for murder is, objectively, a relatively light sentence for murder.
Not at all sure what the sentencing for murder has to do with firearms, really. Other than firearms being an effective way to murder. Most murders in my country are beatings and stabbings, probably since firearms are not as widely available. Does that prevent a few? Probably. Still seems non sequitur.
David Wheeler (of subroutine fame) figured out the most sensible thing to put in the tiny ROM was a paper tape loader and mini-assembler that loaded the rest of itself from paper tape. So at switch-on the machine would start reading the tape input and run. Programs could be written on the teletype with mnemonics and relative addresses in octal.
It seems a little strange that more advanced later machines like the original PDP-11 from 1970, couldn't "autostart" from ROM like that. You had to toggle in a bootloader.
I think that was because core memory was non-volatile. (EDSAC didn't use core; it had a refreshing DRAM-like delay line memory.) With core, you only had to toggle the bootloader into once and, provided your software didn't accidentally overwrite it, it was still there after a power cycle. So re-toggling in the boot loader was not really that common, despite how much lore surrounds it.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/teen-accused-foi-...
https://www.theregister.com/security/2018/05/07/hacking-char...
https://globalnews.ca/news/7590375/ns-foipop-website-back-on...
But putting a useful transmission on air is expensive. Commercial long-distance shortwave transmitters are megawatt-class. That seems to be the biggest barrier. It turns out to be much cheaper and easier to provide an unreliable 10 kHz channel between A and B through almost any other means.
That said: it's clear there's an uptick in data transmission on shortwave over the last ~decade or so. Get a broadband SDR receiver and look at the spectrum waterfall. Here's a capture live from an SDR in New Zealand: https://i.imgur.com/NfFBO34.png
Between 8250 and 8300 kHz and slightly more faintly centred at 8200, and also at 8150 see the 50 kHz wide spectrum bands of /// rising diagonal lines?
That is a 50 kHz wide channel. Which is broadband in the context of HF when voice band is 3 kHz. It's some kind of spread-spectrum chirp modulation. I've seen broadband OFDM on air as well at extremely low baud like 1 baud but presumably many channels and possible frequencies.
Throughput depends entirely on the levels of error correction etc. but the Shannon limit for a 50 kHz channel at low noise is like ~200 kbps. Well beyond sending some weather reports and teletype data.
Who? Probably military. Spread spectrum techniques are illegal in Canada and the US at least, on HF, for both amateur and commercial users.
People talked like that before WW I. There hasn't been a major war in Europe since 1870 almost half a century and trade is such a large war would bankrupt all the major powers and so would never happen. The Great Illusion was published in 1909 and was positively received at the time:
> In The Great Illusion, Angell's primary thesis was, in the words of historian James Joll, that "the economic cost of war was so great that no one could possibly hope to gain by starting a war the consequences of which would be so disastrous."[4][5] For that reason, a general European war was very unlikely to start, and if it did, it would not last long.[6] He argued that war was economically and socially irrational[7] and that war between industrial countries was futile because conquest did not pay.
I ran into it more than once back in the day when I used Mac OS X as my primary OS.
More generally -- case sensitivity is a conceptual nightmare in the Unicode era. Should Cyrillic or Greek be case-insensitive as well? Etc. Do you really want the full complexity of Unicode string handling in your file system?
I would suggest treating file names like raw bytes. On modern Linux, anything but NUL is valid.
We're really not.
https://buttondown.com/maiht3k/archive/how-to-talk-about-ai-...
May I ask how you collected the data? Usenet is not fully archived anywhere. No one has a complete set.
I am aware of:
* the NewNews disc series on CD from '91 - '93 which has a substantial text feed for the big groups during that era (most of these are on IA.org, but some are not!)
* The Dejanews archives via Google up to c. 2013. Also up on IA.org These are lacking large amounts of early posts, and are highly spotty before about 1994 (when Dejanews started).
* The Utzoo tapes over at https://archive.org/details/utzoo-wiseman-usenet-archive cover a part of '81 - '91 but only from one host. "Far parts" of Usenet over in Japan or Europe are barely covered.
* Some groups preserve per-newsgroup histories scattered all over and tending to drop offline over the years
* fj.* is well-archived but it's Japanese
The chart speaks for itself I think as to coverage: https://i.imgur.com/WCQm4od.png
I got so desperate as to go scanning zip and tar files on old ftp sites for anything with a Usenet header. That scored a few hundred thousand articles mostly from the 90s.
The big spike in the early 90s is from those CDs archives in the months where I had access. It gives an idea for how limited those Giganews/Google and other surviving archives are.
I figure less than 50% early text Usenet survives, unless someone has vast hordes of data that they are not disclosing.
As for the Utzoo archives - they're legally encumbered and some of the posters sue anyone who hosts them. (They're not available from the IA - taken down.)
You have a takedown page but the legal and copyright issues were one of the main back-burner items keeping me from making my archive live. Some of the more eccentric Usenet personalities are still alive.
Same with privacy issues. I notice you have full text search. I was reluctant to do that for privacy reasons.
I discovered very early on how to index by email but that felt quite invasive. I took that out, and built a graph of all the X-refs: which turned out to be more interesting (walking the discussion trees) and somewhat more privacy preserving in that you can explore but not search.
I was also thinking of an AI-based content warning filter, because I have a "random post" button and it is sometimes wild what that lands on.