Friday, July 28, 2006

RIAA Terror in Brief: 5

In these posts, I intend to sum up the general battle between the RIAA and humanity from news reports I receive through Google News. This is primarily my personal archive, but also gives anyone interested a general, although completely biased, synopsis of the present state of the battlefield.

The legal cannons blast today; another day, another headline.

Lawsuits Are Back
The RIAA has sent their latest dispatch of lawsuits, this time in Rhode Island. Whether this attack against the citizens of the United States will trigger an insurection is unknown, but time will tell.

Fruits and Four-Letter-Acronyms
Apple and the RIAA have expressed tensions with one another. Apple holds control of the online music market. The RIAA's companies don't. Now, all they can do is cry.

KaZaA Dies
Sharman Networks has agreed to make the program a full time legal download service. Although I don't use the crap software, it's a loss for the world of good men.
I was listening to an analyst on the way home, explaining that everytime a filesharing service gets killed, it's like an alien who splatters and reveals 100 more, harder to kill, fragmented beings. Now that there's not one singular target, the RIAA's mission becomes even more impossible than before. Damn good job.

MPAA Sues Millionaire; Oops
The MPAA is now suing a multi-millionaire and attempting to get him to settle out of court. Wrong person. He, Shawn Hogan, plans on showing those morons who's boss, and it looks like he's willing to give them hell.
Go get 'em, tiger.

That's it for today; some news good, some bad. Hopefully, it can only get better.

Thursday, July 27, 2006


I've got a friend whose last name is "Au." Y"au," rly. Here are some potential uses (and crummy puns) based on his name.

aull right!
au man

I've run out of ideas. However, by chances, there will be more possiblities.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Contemplating a Four Dimensional World

I've been reading the book "Flatland" by Edwin A. Abbott. It's about a square in a two dimensional universe (three, if you include time, but the book doesn't, so whatever). It was first published in 1884, so it's considered a classic. It's also awesome.

Anyway, "A. Square," our main character, sees the universe in one-dimension, or as a straight line, despite that he lives in a two-dimensional world.

We live in a three-dimensional world and see in two-dimensions, ignoring depth perception which gives us pseudo-three-dimensional vision by utilizing two perspectives.

In a four-dimensional world, one would see in three-dimensions, a perspective almost incomprehensible to the human mind.

Sunday, July 23, 2006

I Found Baker Street

...although it's not actually called "Baker Street." It's known to its locals as "Bäker Strasse," and it's in Germany.

Gerry Rafferty, I hate you. Why couldn't you pick a street near where I live? Or a street in English?

Damn it.

Friday, July 21, 2006

Is This Really Math? Or Is This Just Crap?

I stumbled upon a website today: . It was a funny name... after all, math + drinking age = João Magueijo?

No, 21 does not refer to the age, but the 21ST CENTURY! Upon this realization, I reminded myself that I should approach this page with an open mind, and crap alarms armed.

The page was impossible to navigate, and unreadable in Firefox because the XML was screwed up. I clicked links and ended up going in circles. Everything is in outline format, which is usually great and easy. This, however, was outline format from hell, because there were ten outlines with no distinct starting position. I had to pick up this thing in pieces... in Internet Explorer...

This is what I managed to get from this mathematical revolution (because of the outlines):
  • This will change mathematics, immediately.
  • Everyone should be accquainted with this... because it's better.
  • It involves substituting common algorithms for mathematical objects.
  • These mathematical objects... are better.
This page so poorly designed--I'm getting crap vibes from it, and worse. He claims this new method is great; all it seems to be is confusing. Essentially, it's avoiding math, and replacing math with variables that represent math, but really have no practical application. What happens when you integrate one of these objects? Does it do anything? No. You've still gotta figure out the integral.

I'm keeping an open mind...

One of the big claims of this... d00d is that this new math will transcend "AXIOMATIC METHOD." AXIOMATIC is a big word. AXIOMATIC sounds archaic and evil. I had heard the term before but couldn't put my finger on its definition. I checked Wikipedia and found out that "An axiom is a sentence or proposition that is taken for granted as true, and serves as a starting point for deducing other truths. In many usages axiom and postulate are used as synonyms."

For example, this is an axiom, stated by Euclid, a dead Greek guy, "Things which are equal to the same thing are also equal to one another." So, that means that if x=2 and b=2, x=b. Ok, duh. According to this guy, he's throwing AXIOMATICISM AWAY. Let's wait a minute and see if 2 is still equal to 2...

I'm really trying to keep an open mind.

Here are 2 ampersands (&& ). Here are 2 more (&& ).
&& = &&
Yea... as best I can tell, 2 still equals 2. The axiom remains in place. The world is saved.

Things descended, soon into even deeper crap--into Crap Lake. I've spent a jolly good bit of time programming; this guys says he can make it easier. (I attempted, at this point, to find the page where I read this on. I can't. It's too big of a goddamn mess to find anything. How did this guy write this much? Why?) He says his form of math uses algorithms as data structures. This makes no sense. If you want to get anything practical out of such a data structure, you would have to recalculate the result over-and-over again, thereby limiting your processing speed, especially for very large or slow algorithms.

Has he written a program before? More than one? Has he ever written one "just because?" I have.

The author of this webpage (whose name I omit, for his own sake) really slid below the "Free Energy Line," where people begin to sound more ignorant than, if you're unfamiliar with them, those total pseudoscientists who claim to pull electricity out of their ass (where they have hidden, a small generator burning bullshit). Pardon the run-on, but to the point, he said this when talking about using his method to create massive libraries of information with his "method:"

"These repositories can also count how often a given person or entity generates new ideas. This can be used as a mean for finding and chosing clever persons for high positions and to make the amounts of job earnings more fair. (I deem that it will decrease World unfairness because the criteria in greater degree than now will be based on inherent objective mind abilities rather than on subjective criteria of education and subjective personal characteristics.)"

Hmm... somebody fucked around in high school and wasn't admitted to college. Oops... but his SAT was so high!

He started an online journal for POST-AXIOMATIC Mathematics. He is the only author published.

He claims that nobody has ever studied formulas, presuming you equate formulas to functions. This guy has. Ooh! and this guy. They invented this branch of mathematics, which deals entirely with functions.

Note: If you don't believe, for some reason, that a formula is a function, take any formula, solve it for the dependent variable, and plug in all values possible for the independent variable. Graph the results. Look! a function!

Open mind... closed.

This guy is painfully, ridiculously wrong. He's using a "theory" that is not actually a "theory" to try to revolutionize mathematics; it doesn't. All it does is navigates around the truly challenging and exciting part of math--to reach the heights of human understanding, wisdom, and ability--at times through the worst misery one can experience (I've been there). Through fancy lettering and jibberish rhetoric, he has attempted to appear intelligent. However, those who can see through his garbage can tell that it is nothing more than weak sauce. Period.

Monday, July 17, 2006

RIAA Terror in Brief: 4

In these posts, I intend to sum up the general battle between the RIAA and humanity from news reports I receive through Google News. This is primarily my personal archive, but also gives anyone interested a general, although completely biased, synopsis of the present state of the battlefield.

A great victory this week! And more!

RIAA Gets Owned on Its Own Battlefield
It appears the RIAA dropped a lawsuit against a mother because they had almost no evidence to prove she was filesharing. Now, they might just have to pay her attorney fees, which is 100% awesome.

British Phonographic Industry Stance: Don't Sue
Instead, they're asking ISPs to cancel people's accounts. I guess that makes them a little more forgiving, but I still don't like them.

Other than the RIAA getting owned, things have been quiet. It's the RIAA's move, we'll see what shit they pull.

And remember, don't support DRM--don't buy from iTunes.

Wormgear and Toothgear: A Physical Implementation of !Converse

The wormgear is a physical representation of:

If A, then B...

...does NOT imply...

If B, then A.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Stay Fascist, San Diego

There is a Swastika shaped building in San Diego. "O rly?" you say...

JA, RLY!,-117.157747&spn=0.002944,0.004426

I first saw this in this YTMND:

Stay classy, San Diego?
No wai! Hitler's in town!

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

RIAA Terror in Brief: 3

In these posts, I intend to sum up the general battle between the RIAA and humanity from news reports I receive through Google News. This is primarily my personal archive, but also gives anyone interested a general, although completely biased, synopsis of the present state of the battlefield.

It's been smooth sailing these last few days. Here's what's up:

Former RIAA President Hates RIAA
Hillary Rosen is a former RIAA executive. Having left the organization, she made a statement leaning towards criticism of the recording industry's actions. More recently, she joined the side of good and is criticising the RIAA's suit against XM radio. I guess she took the rest of the cartel's sense with her:

Nobody Wants to Pay for Music
Many colleges and universities have bought contracts with pay-for-music services to reduce the amount of piracy occuring on their servers. Many colleges and universities also canceled these contracts because nobody wants to pay rip-off prices for music they can get for free and keep after they leave college, something these services won't let them do.

Good Article in Spring 2006 2600
There's a good article about DRM in the Spring 2006 2600--get it soon though, they're probably almost all sold. This is my favorite excerpt from the article, written by "Don:"

There is another reason to buy CDs. It's not a technical one, it's a ideological one. When you hop on a P2P network or an online music store you gram the track you want and then maybe the rest of the album. Or, if you grab the entire album, you cull the tracks you don't want at the moment and delete them. You can do this with a CD as well, putting all your favorite tracks on a mixCD or putting them on repeat, but the rest of the album isn't lost. When you ditch the album for the single you rob yourself of those times when you pull out an old album and let it play past the one song you liked, when you hear the next track and understand it in a way you didn't before, when you hear a song at a party and then later find you had it yourself, taking you back to that moment. When you accept only taking the tracks from the moment a scuttling the rest--a lauded advantage of P2P--you are robbing yourself of the opportunity to rediscover music, your music. You are instead buying to an ideology of music not as art or even culture but as product, as something disposable. That's the music industry's ideology. Don't let it be yours.

A very good point--I myself always listen to the CDs that I have as a whole. Each song is a part of the others, and without one another, the songs just aren't the same.

EFF Gives Entertainment Industry a Quiz
They'll probably fail. The EFF laid down a couple of questions for the entertainment industry to answer. If they even regard their existence, it might cause a change of heart... nah, that's just wishful thinking... too much coffee.

Nothing really negative today... a new possible figure head for the side of good, a new EFF campaign, a DRM-crap failure, and some good literature. Could be worse... could be worse.

And remember, don't support DRM--don't buy from iTunes.

Gravity Generators

Gravity generators are the worst idea ever.

First problem with gravity generators: absolutely no scientific principle yet developed can provide a means for their existence. No, gravitons have been contemplated, but never found. Sorry.

Second problem with gravity generators: How would one distribute the "gravity field" or whatever about the ship evenly and proportionally? You can't, so instead, everything would be pulled towards the gravity field.

Third problem with gravity generators: Throwing out problems one and two, problem three just makes it hillarious. If the gravity generator generates 1 g of acceleration, anything near the ship will be pulled towards it AS IF IT WERE A PLANET. If the ship got near any ships, they'd come careening at each other like... well, two planets running into each other. If the ship got near any planets, the planet and the ship would careen at each other... thereby throwing the planet out of orbit.

Fourth problem with gravity generators: If you can simulate the gravitational field of an entire planet with such ease, it probably isn't that much harder to simulate something significantly larger, such as something the size of Jupiter. Hey, even if that is difficult, why not hook up... say... 400 or so? 400 Terran gravitational fields clumped together between two stars in a binary system. Consider the consequences after a little while... two stars flying at each other with immense speed, ever accelerating as they come closer and closer... then, the greatest force in the universe--the gamma ray explosion, a shockwave of stellar collision traveling at the speed of light, tearing the galaxy apart.

Who needs a Death Star? Is Darth Vader retarded?

Sunday, July 02, 2006

Integral of Position

Here's something to think about...

Let's consider a rocket. It's accelerating at a constant rate (F, for FAST).

a = F

It's a fact that the integral of acceleration, when considering time, is velocity. The constant of integration, in this case, is replaced with S, for SPEED, or the initial velocity of the rocket.
v = Ft + S

...and of course, the integral of velocity is position, and the constant again is replaced with another known letter (B, for beginning or butt or something, this time).

x = (1/2)Ft^2 + St + B

So, suppose I integrate this. What could the unit of this thing be?
? = (1/6)Ft^3 + (1/2)St^2 + Bt + ?
It is something that changes as a result of change in position. What would it be?

acceleration = x/t/t
velocity = x/t
distance = x
? = ?

Consider the pattern. The degree of "t" begins at -2, goes to -1, then to 0. The pattern, therefore implies the development of a time unit with a degree of 1.

? = xt

This wouldn't be meters per second, it would be meterseconds: distance * time.

Does this mysterious unit have any use? Any meaning what-so-ever? Can it be applied practically to any problems? I'll sleep on it.