That's the description of the license on the software from
http://www.fractint.org/ (requires a FAT32 partition under Windows XP, BTW.
You might need another hard drive or a partition resizer to save anything
from it).
The following text is probably not as cogent or understandable as just
getting the software, opening a DOS window, and entering DEMO or FRACTINT,
then pressing F1 when you want to know what the other keys do. Like so many
things in your computer, it is not necessary to know a lot of nitty gritty
details about how it works to make it work, and it helps. One of the first
lessons I had to learn, because I like inversions, is that you cannot invert
an inversion.
You might chafe at just about everything going through keys, and if you ever
get good at Advanced Paint by Number, then you will appreciate speed from
that interface.
I think that there is a copyright on the default parameters for internally
defined fractal types (most of them are complications of [Benoit
Mandelbrot]'s z=z^2 +c assignment, where zed and "c" are complex numbers on
the cartesian plane such that real components *start* at a value of x and
imajinary components *start* at a value of y. In other words, both starting
points vary according to which part of the plane your screen is mapped to.
Fractint lets you zoom, pan, and skew; it _could_ let you apply two kinds of
skew and a trapezoid, and currently, all fractal mappings are defined with
three points. The loop is applied to all of those starting points, mapped to
a screen. Then there is a boundary condition that determines when you expect
the point to approach infinity. Fractint colours pixels according to how
many times it took the the loop to reach that boundary condition
(iterations). There are about six other ways to colour the point, and my
favourite is the arctangent it makes with the orijin (makes nice gray
scales). Many of my fractals do *not* start on the cartesian plane; I start
many of my loops with a function. FWIW, there are two massive qualifications
on [fractal] saying in effect "I do not see all those rules!". I am inclined
to ignore it, because it seems to encourage taking another look to
understand them.
There is one rule for me concerning fractals: Simple rules with _relatively_
complex results. [fractal] is more informative than [chaos theory], which
contains a rule about topological mixing that I do not understand, despite
the internal pointer.
To answer the question in the subject, I would say yes. The reason for the
copyright is so that contributors (at least fifty) would get paid in the
event of a rich distributor of either output or the software itself. Last
time I checked (about four years ago), Jason Osuch was CEO and concentrating
on an
X-windows version.
It does sound, too.
_______
http://edmc.net/~brewhaha/Fractal_Gallery.HTM
My latest Netflix confirmation e-mail had this:
Get personalized recommendations from our wide selection in Drama.
The more movies you rate, the better your recommendations will be.
My first thought was that they were going to start suggesting areas
of Wikipedia internal politics for me to get involved in. "You
showed an interest in the debate over the BADSITES policy in the
past. Our recommendation engine indicates that it is likely you
would be interested in the SPAM-BLACKLIST debates going on now."
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
~~ Open Knowledge Conference (OKCon) 2009 ~~
* where: Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, UCL, London, UK
* when: 28th March 2009, 1030-1830
* home: <http://www.okfn.org/okcon/>
* programme: <http://www.okfn.org/okcon/programme>
* register: <http://www.okfn.org/okcon/register/>
* call for proposals: <http://www.okfn.org/okcon/cfp/>
* last year: <http://www.okfn.org/okcon/2008/>
The Open Knowledge Conference (OKCon) is back for its fourth installment
bringing together individuals and groups from across the open knowledge
spectrum for a day of talks, discussions and workshops.
This year the event will feature dedicated sessions on 'open knowledge
and development' and 'open data and the semantic web'. In addition we
are reserving a substantial part of the event for the 'Open Space'-
sessions, workshops and discussions proposed either via the call for
proposals or on the day.
Interested in giving a paper? Have a project to talk about? Want to run
a workshop or session? Please see the call for proposals:
<http://www.okfn.org/okcon/cfp/>
Want to get involved in putting the event together or otherwise helping
out? Contact us at info [at] okfn [dot] org or add your name to the
OKCon wiki page:
<http://okfn.org/wiki/okcon/2009/>
Last but not least: we encourage early registration as space is limited:
<http://www.okfn.org/okcon/register/>
On 16 Feb 2009 at 10:30, Alvaro Garc?a wrote:
> Do you frequently get *confirmation* e-mails? How many times do you
> sign up?
Confirmations of DVDs being sent or received, which are generated
very frequently in the course of use of a Netflix account.
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
Indefinite blocks (until the editor bows to random authority) for
"incivility" are overboard.
Esp. in light of the fact that the vast majority of admins take no time to
determine the cause of the incivility.
Many cases of "incivility" are in-my-mind completely justified.
Indefinite blocks do nothing but inflame the situation.
Will Johnson
In a message dated 2/15/2009 11:50:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
scream(a)datascreamer.com writes:
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 19:32:55 +0000, Patton 123 <pattonabc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Well after the recent lengthy discussion and civility etc on this
> list, and this
>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminshi…
2FBackslash_Forwardslash&diff=270554330&oldid=270553832>comment,
> I've been thinking about a solution for incivility. Wouldn't a 3RR-like
> system be good? Users get a warning for a personal attack, and if they do
> it
> again a short block. There's obviously the problem that different people
> regard different things as personal attacks, but it's food for
thought....
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
No, I don't think so. Short 3RR blocks for incivility would be punitive
since the logic would be "For incivility you get a 24H block as
punishment". I would posit that a warning to the editor would suffice,
then based on the asshattedness of the editor, a preventative block.
Unblock as soon as they assert that they will not repeat the offense.
(this message will be PGP signed on request)
Jon
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
**************Need a job? Find an employment agency near you.
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusye…)
What is the current status of the Flagged Revisions trial/associated
proposals? Seems like it spread over various pages, particularly splintering
after Jimmy made his announcement on his talkpage. The time frame he set out
for people to propose alternatives has passed, hasn't it? I know he has been
away (India, Switzerland, the Dominican), but has there been further action
that I've just missed?
If Jimmy gets so busy that he's unable to move this forward himself, was
there a different mechanism set up for acting on the results of the poll?
(Which, perhaps, might be judged as rejected by some or many people...).
Nathan
--
Your donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia Foundation
today: http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Friends,
I'm going into the field for the next three weeks. This means that I
won't have internet for about four weeks. I've been particularly
inactive for the past two weeks, in preparation for the field I've not
had much time. I've brought everything I'm involved with on the
foundation and on local projects to a orderly pause as far as my
involvement goes. I expect to return sometime in late March.
Very best,
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkmZoyoACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtXFrwCfW3EumwljQm0jzKUWsQB4obwe
AgMAn2cUVICrsHa7zeinTCaebSJl9E7B
=i5Za
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I would include biography as well.
We are heavily weighted toward moderns, who are also, not coincidentally,
the easiest to research using Google.
That will change as more people get more familiar with using Google Books
instead to research the biographies of people who have been more forgotten as
time passes. We probably have 50,000 biographies of people who lived in the
past 100 years, but only say 500 biographies of people who lived in the 18th
century when we should, by population count, have perhaps ten times that number
if we're truly trying to represent the knowledge which actually exists in
all print sources.
Even just to take an example, some noble houses of Great Britain, like the
Dukes of Portland, or the Earls of Dundonald, we don't have a complete set of
articles, one on each one. Even though such biographies do actually exist in
print.
In a message dated 2/16/2009 11:56:48 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
george.herbert(a)gmail.com writes:
There are
whole fields of engineering and science that we have barely scratched the
surface of at the moment.
**************Need a job? Find an employment agency near you.
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusye…)