I just passed my last class. I will soon have a degree. After SO MANY DAMN YEARS, I get a damn piece of paper.

Double blind survey of around 30 fairly well randomized women of various ages of various pictures of me led me to a score of about 2/10 on plentyoffish.com, I lost some of the numbers, so no mean/mode/etc unfortunately.

I always considered myself ugly, although with my recent loss of weight I figured I'd be approaching average by now...
guess not.

Although who knows how hot you have to be to not be ugly at pof standards.

But still, you can't argue with empirical data. Maybe the side burns have got to go(although there's always the risk that out of the 30 women who did rank me, one did rank me as hot, and she may have liked them and maybe, just maybe, she's the one I'd be happiest with anyway, and by cutting them off I'd be cutting my chances with her, etc etc).

Also, I like the sean kennedy idea, of embracing your ugliness, accenting it, and building it into something meaningful. Got a deformity, accentuate it. Got a scar? Make it more visible, etc etc. So it's not like this fact is going to bring me down or anything. I've been knowingly ugly for most of my life, I can live the rest of my life this way.

It'd be nice to be able to find someone to love, and be able to keep them easier though, if my charisma roll were a little higher...

Over at my LJ, I describe today's job interview, and how I might have botched part of it. What would you do in such a situation?

Start with a 1d edge between two nodes. An abstract version of a cable between two network points. We know by Claude Shannon's results that Bitrate = Bandwidth*log10(1+S:N). Keep that one in mind.

But what if we started with a plane, instead of an edge? A wall, instead of a cable? Then we could split the plane indefinitely...oh but we can't do that! Planck distance starts becoming an issue. So ~1/1.6E-35 or 6.3E34 edges/m is the largest possible amount of cables per metre, and ~4E69 cables per square metre cross section area.

But just as information may be transmitted in waves through an approximately 1d medium, they can be sent through that cross sectional area; just each of the 4E69 cables carrying signal, that's all right? It'd be like a wave coming into a port; as long as you split the harbour into fine enough paratitions, you can transmit independently, and get data independently.

What if went a step further? And started transmitting information through volumes. Perhaps a point particle in the middle of a sphere transmitting information to or from the entire surface of that sphere. Or...backwards in time or something! Then we're talking 2.5E104/m3...but there's also planck time to consider, so the smallest resolution is pretty much defined at 2E43 Hz...and there can't really be any more than 1 bit per time in this context(a single bit is hard enough to imagine)...so we're up to 5E147 bits per cubic metre....but why would we stop there? Let's use the entire observable universe.. 8.8E26 being used this way; bingo, 4.4E174 bits per universe.

4.4E174 bits = 1 log ( 1 + S/N ) log24.4E174 = 1 + S:N log2 4.4 + log2 10E174 -1 = S:N 2.1+578+1 ~= 581 = S:N

Or if we account for time as another spacelike dimension...the age of the universe...4.4E174*4E17 ...or 1.8E192 bits per universe log2 1.8E192 = S:N + 1 ~192log2 10 + log2(1.8) -1 = S:N ~638 S:N for not only the universe, but using the entire history of the universe as some kind of space-time anteanae. Assuming this were all possible, of course.

So if your S:N is over 638dB for anything, either I screwed up or you did. How could you get that certain of anything? Actually, even if I screwed up, I'm probably not off by more than a few dB!

But what about

• the curvature of the universe? Does this help direct information?
• the unobservable universe? Are we, and everything we can detect down to the big bang skin at the edge of the observable universe merely a bubble in something unimaginably larger?
• what about moral propositions?
• what about the concept of S:N? If it isn't absolutely meaningful this analysis falls suspect immediately
• math/logic?
• certainty of your own existence? Maybe it's just information that must travel, must be communicated. This would solve math issues, too as reflexive statements and other axiomatic information might be self-provable, and hence would not be affected by S:N. Information about the material universe.

Other interesting things come from this too, you can measure how powerful a transmission medium is by how close it approximates this. my modem is what, -599dB from perfection? You can also measure how much information is stored within any given thing in terms of dB depending how large it is, too. I wonder if there's a way to put mass-energy into this somehow? Oh looks like there's a planck energy. But for how that'll fit in, I'll have to give some thought, and really, I should make sure what I have now is approximately correct first, anyway :)

Also, /., why don't you like my preformatted sections? Your treatment of <pre> makes baby dinojesus cry.

A random chat with m2tm, for your enjoyment

(11:29:38 PM) tmg1: http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/7da5i/police_raids_reveal_baby_farms/c06cqxb &lt-- required reading :D
(11:33:10 PM) m2tm: haha, holy shit
(11:36:23 PM) tmg1: check out the cuil levels 6 & 7 comments :D
(11:38:46 PM) m2tm: haha, I like this too:
(11:38:51 PM) m2tm: Hypothesis: As Cuils increase, so does the likelihood your are actually a character in a David Lynch film.
(11:44:42 PM) tmg1: Hahahaha
(11:44:53 PM) tmg1: your are
(11:44:59 PM) tmg1: heh
(11:45:22 PM) m2tm: OMIGOSH
(11:45:27 PM) m2tm: It all makes sense!
(11:46:11 PM) tmg1: Hypothesis: Cuils are relative. You and I can be at different cuil levels only in relation to one another, as conscious beings
(11:48:02 PM) tmg1: Or maybe that's only true with Real cuils
(11:48:04 PM) tmg1: grn
(11:50:19 PM) m2tm: Nope, you are mistaken in questioning your point.
(11:50:23 PM) m2tm: Everything is relative.
(11:50:25 PM) m2tm: EVERYTHING.

Also, I'd imagine a Bayesian could be defined as someone who wants to minimize their apparent cuil-level between other bayesians and themselves. There could also be an 'absolute' cuil level, a level of reality compared to some standard point (say, Douglas Hofstadter or kevin bacon). Unfortunately this only works in the earlier cuils though since at later cuils even this might be used as an abstraction away from reality(this sort of thing making cuil theory somewhat of a difficult thing to define terms in).

Unfortunately, the cuil theory website has a TOS that I can't agree to(certainly while considering deviations from reality), so I won't be able to participate on their wiki.

In the meanwhile, when did /. break HTML(code/pre is don't work) AND 'plain old text'(can't see &ltpre&gt?

Probably the only Linux and FLOSS based company local to Regina, Canada, Open Systems Canada ltd, has gone out of business. I never actually required their help (can't afford it as a poor student, and our needs are constantly being met without serious incident at work)--- but it's still harrowing that now there is no longer anywhere to turn in city, for those really big problems that you need paid tech support with. I guess the waters of the rising global economic crisis are finally reaching the point where it's noticeable here in lavishly wealthy tarsand country. We will miss ye.

reddit is carrying a post right now wherein PLoS and Nature are inviting the world to help with their peer review process. Which gets me to thinking: what all out there is there for people who have spare time/etc to help out with Science?

• Folding@Home / BOINC / FoldIt
• PLoS peer review moderation, and for that matter, slashdot/reddit moderation in science topics
• Astronomy peer helping/birdwatching
• (edit) the Dijkstra archive needs transcription help

I might expand/add to this list later.

I tried to post this earlier but for various obvious reasons it didn't work. Two of my debian boxes got Linux.RST.b. I probably wasn't very vigilant, and one of those two systems has been up since before etch became stable, so there's been lots of chances for an attacker to get in, either via trojan or brute force password detection(both of which Linux.RST.b utilize), but still -- It's no longer enough to be merely running linux. You need to actively have a security apparatus, even on linux.

Unless you want your computer to not boot properly/run slower than molasses. I can't even say 'like a windows machine' because...quite frankly it's no longer true.

Yes, windows users, I admit it, I failed at keeping my supposedly secure system from viruses.

So I installed QQ awhile back, because I'm a musician and it's in my best interest to be available 24/7 to my fans, or prospective customers or whatever. QQ is like ICQ, only it's just used in china/by chinese expats/etc. This person randomly sent me a message awhile back, but I was afk. Finally, today we connected:

(04:27:25 AM) Hey... :
(04:27:42 AM) Hey...: hi
(04:32:02 AM) 469273075: hello?
(04:31:37 AM) Hey...: goodevening
(04:34:32 AM) 469273075: who is this?
(04:33:54 AM) Hey...: who is this ?
(04:35:26 AM) 469273075: this is jeff. you are?
(04:35:46 AM) Hey...: this is Amy..
(04:36:35 AM) Hey...: what do you do ?
(04:38:13 AM) 469273075: Have we met?
(04:38:26 AM) 469273075: I just got a new job as a programmer
(04:38:46 AM) 469273075: you?
(04:37:47 AM) Hey...: congratulation..
(04:38:52 AM) 469273075: thanks
(04:38:00 AM) Hey...: i am a student
(04:38:23 AM) Hey...: your english is not bad
(04:39:38 AM) 469273075: uh thanks
(04:39:46 AM) 469273075: what kind of student?
(04:39:34 AM) Hey...: senior
(04:40:54 AM) 469273075: senior what
(04:41:02 AM) 469273075: highschool?
(04:41:16 AM) 469273075: where are you by the way
(04:40:15 AM) Hey...: yes
(04:41:35 AM) 469273075: ?
(04:41:43 AM) 469273075: i am in Canada
(04:40:56 AM) Hey...: stupid
(04:42:01 AM) 469273075: ?
(04:41:11 AM) Hey...: i am not a stupid
(04:42:26 AM) 469273075: ??
(04:41:45 AM) Hey...: Canada?i from Mars
(04:42:56 AM) 469273075: seriously I'm in Canada
(04:43:02 AM) 469273075: I'm a born Canadian citizen
(04:43:51 AM) 469273075: themusicgod1.livejournal.com/profile
(04:43:57 AM) 469273075: http://themusicgod1.livejournal.com/profile rather

(QQ disconnects)

(04:45:32 AM) 469273075: did you get that last line? : )
(04:42:29 AM) Hey...: show me the evidence
(04:44:41 AM) Hey...: no
(04:46:44 AM) 469273075: hmm
(04:46:46 AM) 469273075: well
(04:45:43 AM) Hey...: are you really a Canadian
(04:46:49 AM) 469273075: yes : )
(04:45:58 AM) Hey...: o my god
(04:47:09 AM) 469273075: my federal riding is Wascana, its elected member of parliament is Ralph Goodale
(04:47:23 AM) 469273075: I worked at the NDP campaign office during the past month
(04:46:54 AM) Hey...: what is NDP
(04:48:18 AM) 469273075: we just got about 7 inches of snow (17 cm) about two weeks ago but it melted
(04:48:47 AM) 469273075: it's a political party, a lot similar to your CCP than prime minister harper's conservative party(which is currently in power in Canada)
(04:49:04 AM) 469273075: *'a lot more similar to your CCP' rather
(04:49:23 AM) 469273075: but it's an interesting question, having to prove my canadianness ;)
(04:50:46 AM) 469273075: It's kind of like being asked to prove that I'm a human being and not a robot
(04:50:50 AM) 469273075: it's a hard thing to do
(04:51:55 AM) 469273075: sorry I must have been typing too fast and got disconnected
(04:52:00 AM) 469273075: : )
(04:52:38 AM) 469273075: so where are you?
(04:52:50 AM) 469273075: and what would convince you that I am indeed from Canada?
(04:48:50 AM) Hey...: i am not very understand
(04:48:54 AM) Hey...: this
(04:51:24 AM) Hey...: that's all right
(04:53:23 AM) 469273075: no problem
(04:53:39 AM) 469273075: I can try to be more clear whenever you wish
(04:53:30 AM) Hey...: thank you, my english is poor ...
(04:54:47 AM) 469273075: no problem
(04:56:03 AM) 469273075: I probably should know some chinese but I don't : (
(04:55:04 AM) Hey...: why do you use QQ to communicate
(04:56:18 AM) 469273075: because how else would you have found me ? : )
(04:56:07 AM) Hey...: your words are too small to be seen

(I make font bigger)

(04:58:27 AM) 469273075: Hmm I have a similar problem with chinese font sometimes
is this better?
(04:59:17 AM) 469273075: If I wasn't on QQ you would never have found me : )
(04:59:33 AM) Hey...: i just plus you by chance
(05:00:46 AM) 469273075: exactly
(04:59:57 AM) Hey...: i think you are chiness
(05:01:03 AM) 469273075: nope
(05:00:09 AM) Hey...: by misetake
(05:01:19 AM) 469273075: no problem : )
(05:01:25 AM) 469273075: so you are in china somewhere?
(05:01:40 AM) Hey...: yes ,but is the QQ used so widely in the world?
(05:02:48 AM) 469273075: not really
(05:02:42 AM) Hey...: are you in china now?
(05:03:48 AM) 469273075: no
(05:03:52 AM) 469273075: I have never been outside of Canada
(05:04:04 AM) 469273075: I might have been to america once when I was a baby, but that's about it
(05:03:27 AM) Hey...: o .../fdmy god~~~
(05:03:38 AM) Hey...: ha ha
(05:04:57 AM) 469273075: : )
(05:06:02 AM) 469273075: when I was very young, I was in a french school
(05:06:23 AM) 469273075: and we would make candy by dripping maple syrup in fresh snow
(05:06:38 AM) 469273075: and not the fake american maple syrup either, real quebec maple syrup
(05:07:28 AM) 469273075: the snow would be moist, sticky snow -- it would be early in the winter just like it is now
(05:06:29 AM) Hey...: well ..that sonds funny
(05:08:39 AM) Hey...: can you talk with me in chinese?
(05:09:54 AM) 469273075: I am willing to try but I do not know chinese : (
(05:10:13 AM) 469273075: wa bo doung : (
(05:09:15 AM) Hey...: what a pity
(05:11:06 AM) Hey...: Look! you know a little chinese ....
(05:12:21 AM) 469273075: :
(05:12:23 AM) 469273075: : )
(05:12:05 AM) Hey...: BYE BYE !I MUSE
(05:13:21 AM) 469273075: talk to you later perhaps
(05:13:06 AM) Hey...: ur 88!!~~~

It's a good question; how does one prove that they are, in fact, Canadian? I know the Canadian Government is having a little trouble, having turned away thousands of citizens from the polls in the last election. If our own government has a hard time being convinced, you know that there's at least some doubt there. So what is it? Is it our innate knowledge of how to make love in a canoe? Is it our almost encyclopedic knowledge of things related to winter? Cultural references? If so I'm probably a lot less Canadian than I am "Internet". Is it that we speak english in a certain way? Not only does writing make it hard to show this, but in the age of the internet l33tsp34k has blurred this boundary as well. How does one do it?
 

Homeland Security apparently audited 250 Open Source projects, including Samba, Linux and OpenSSL (50MLoc in total). They are going to announce their findings in a "webinar" on the 21st of May, 2008. Topics covered will be code quality, and common errors.

What would be the term for the (proper?) set of all Internet-connected hardware, users(perhaps with the software they use?)?

I'm not sure I've encountered such a term, but it really does seem like there is a need for one, to differentiate the hardware & protocols from the actual used, living "internet".

Slashdot finally got RSS working on their journals. In related news, I applied to be on Saskblogs' blogroll.

Maybe I should try to spend more time on slashdot to cut my reddit habbit. What do you think?

The quality of discussion is around the same as it was a year ago. One thing that has changed is that the moderation system no longer functions as I expect;

• Highlight thresholds do not work. I set to 5, and I was seeing '4' rated comments. This isn't a big deal, but when there are 5x as many 4 rated comments as 5 rated comments, this is a dealbreaker--reading discussion threads is suddenly not worth the effort, and that's the only reason I'm here.
• If a comment is both rated troll and insightful, it only gets the insightful positive adjustment, not the troll. You'd think that it'd get both.
• No 'set default comment to score:N instead of score:1' option. I'm fairly close to this effect by giving(I know, this is outright absurd) a negative adjustment to positive karma, and a negative adjustment to 80-85% of new users(ie, everyone who's joined after me).

The whole point of having comment options is to filter the noise out. It's not working very well, anymore, guys.

I've been trying to say something similar for a long time, but I think I've finally found the words;

When something occurs, the greater the ratio between the total incentive to lie, and the total incentive to tell the truth for the witness, the greater the margin for error in one's opinion, if one believes their account, must be.

Unless one is nearby when something happens, one has to get their information from a trusted third party. And they in turn must get their information from a trusted third party, and so on, until eventually a witness is obtained. This witness may be a scientist(for example, researching global climate change), an eye-witness(as in someone present during the assassination of Bhutto), or anyone that has an immediate, personal, experience. How much trust one has in the chain between themself and the event must determine how much trust that one puts in one's belief in the account.

In addition, there is also the matter of how accurate one's trust conforms to how trustworthy the people between themself and the event in question actually is, and how trustworthy this assessment is, and how trustworthy this last assessment is, ad infinitum. This concern must too expand one's margin for error on any specific belief.

Although hopefully the margin of error on meta-inquiry converges, meaning that one can have an accurate estimate of some state of affairs, it is often not necessary, and it's entirely possible to survive a long time, just 'playing your cards randomly' so to speak, and not really having any kind of accurate conception about the world around you. Amoeba are often more or less fine with their lack of knowledge, and you could be too.

I was thinking today, that I am guilty of in the past using statistics wrong. More specifically, I accepted "weirder stuff has happened" as a valid reason why I could at least give the time of day to something. The fact is, that it's not at all a reason to do anything. Here's an example

Let's say, Politician X has a .0001% chance of doing something so incredibly stupid that only one in a million people in the same position given freedom to do that action would do it(logical necessity). Suppose then, that Politician Y has a .001% chance of doing something that only one in one hundred thousand people, given freedom to do that action, would do it(again, logical necessity). My reasoning would go as follows;

X did action(X,t,P)
P < P2
:. action(Y,t+k,P2) is reasonable

However, as you can see when it's put in syllogistic form, there is a lot of missing conditions necessary.

Let's make a simpler example. Let's say you are flipping coins, and you flip a properly weighted coin 20 times in a row and it turns up heads. At this point, I could come up to you and bet you 20$ that sometime during the next 100 flips, there will be 10 flips in a row that are all heads. The problem is, there probably won't. The chances of 10 heads in a row in any 10 flips is 2^-10, so in 100 flips, well, you don't have to do the math to know full well that it's not that likely; it's a stacked game. So why is it that when dealing with world events, that it's different?

One possible reason is that sometimes the actor is the same. Just like, when you are not sure whether or not the dice is loaded, and you get 10 6's in a row, you can start to imagine that the dice is loaded, In other words, expressing this statement (stranger things have happened) does not express anything about the odds of the event, it expresses an opinion about the characters in question, but doing so in an obfuscated way that avoids criticism. Is it true that Politician X is an idiot of epic proportions? Does he have a hidden agenda? Perhaps; but does it follow that because X has a hidden agenda that Y does? What if Politicians X1 through X50 all do stupid things(such as claiming to be for family values and then getting caught with his hands in the underage male prostitute cookie jar). Can we start to infer something about the group in general? At what point? Obviously there's no perfect answers, but it's worth pointing out, lest any of you fall into this pattern of reasoning. I'll try to avoid it from now on.

This post has been inspired by Overcoming Bias, and I wouldn't be surprised if they have an article on it already.