HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: janssen@parc.xerox.com (Bill Janssen)
Newsgroups: comp.client-server
Subject: Re: Sun RPC time-out question
Date: 31 Dec 92 22:40:58 GMT
Followup-To: comp.client-server
Organization: Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA

Hi, Guido.  Happy New Year!

Get a copy of the book "Power Programming with RPC", by John Bloomer,
published by O'Reilly & Assoc.  ISBN 0-937175-77-3.  It's packed with
information on Sun RPC -- best reference I've seen yet.

Unfortunately, you'll find that what's called Sun TIRPC is really
a family of RPC protocols that share a common XDR and packet layout.
Questions such as the semantics of a call (idempotency, sequencing of
requests), or practical matters such as timeouts with UDP are left up
to the implementation, and thus are really part of the application,
rather than part of the RPC protocol.  Thus your questions need to be
answered on an application-by-application basis.

Bill
--
 Bill Janssen      janssen@parc.xerox.com      (415) 812-4763
 Xerox Palo Alto Research Center      FAX: (415) 812-4777
 3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto, California   94304
From: jjs40@cd.amdahl.com (John Sullivan)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Chordic Keyboards
Date: 22 Dec 92 01:25:55 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

This may be in a FAQ somewhere, but our site doesn't have any record of one.

I'm interested in trying out a chordic (sic?) keyboard for either a Sun or
a PC system.  In case I have the name completely wrong, I'm referring to a
keyboard which is operated in one hand (approx. 5 keys total) by pressing
multiple keys ("chords") at once to generate a unique character.

If someone could provide me with info on suppliers and prices for these
keyboards, I would appreciate it. 

-- 
John Sullivan, Engineer/Computer Development.      Email: jjs40@cd.amdahl.com
Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA.                  Phone: (408)746-4688
From: bathurst@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Bruce Bathurst)
Subject: Re: Summary: Trackball vs. mouse
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: trackball, track ball
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 05:19:25 GMT

Sorry, I forgot to add this.  For editing with a trackball, the touch
typist needs either a keyboard with the "home" positions (f and j keys)
discernable by touch; or a trackball that can be manipulated while
keeping one's fingers on the home keys.  The latter is a tiny trackball
placed just below the center of the space bar.  Most, unfortunately,
aren't designed to attach there.

Bruce (Peripatetic Geologist)
-- 
Department of Geological and Geophysical Sciences
Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544
bathurst@phoenix.princeton.edu bathurst@pucc.bitnet !princeton!phoenix!bathurst
From: bathurst@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Bruce Bathurst)
Subject: Re: Summary: Trackball vs. mouse
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: trackball, track ball
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 05:05:12 GMT

Excuse me if my observations are old stuff--I just dropped in on comp.
human-factors this evening.  The experiences quoted were very
interesting.  I would like to propose, however, that trackballs and mice
serve different purposes, and different people need different pointing
devices:

profession	typing skill	pointing device
----------	------------    ---------------
Secretaries	Touch		Neither
Writers		Handicaped	Trackball
		Two-fingered	Mouse
		Touch		Both

Secretaries format as they type, according to the instructions on
their paper "copy".  For them formatting with control and escape keys
is best, for they needn't remove their eyes from the paper; and
pointing devices of any kind are of questionable value.

Writers view the screen as they type.  My writing is separated into
three stages: composing with minor editing, major editing and revising,
and formatting.  I'm a touch typist.  When composing, I don't look at the
keyboard; the minor edits needed I perform by pressing the first letters
on menu selections, but I could easily use a trackball permanently mounted
on the keyboard.  During major editing I need a pointing device, but one
whose position I know as well as a key's.  Formatting, previewing, and
reformaltting is a totally different activity which I prefer to do moved
away from the desk, with my legs crossed comfortably--a cola in one hand
and a mouse in the other.

Those who look at the keyboard aren't distracted by having to find a
mouse, though handicaped typists with limited movement find trackballs
better or necessary.

The above are just my un-read opinions.  (Fact is, at home I don't use
a word processor.  I compose and edit with a program editor, then add
ASCII formatting codes when I'm done.  A post-processor formats for me.)

Bruce (Gypsy Scholar)



-- 
Department of Geological and Geophysical Sciences
Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544
bathurst@phoenix.princeton.edu bathurst@pucc.bitnet !princeton!phoenix!bathurst
From: dwallach@zonker.cs.berkeley.edu (Dan Wallach)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Chordic Keyboards
Date: 22 Dec 1992 18:00:19 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: zonker.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <d0B5020G2fIs01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> jjs40@cd.amdahl.com (John Sullivan) writes:
>This may be in a FAQ somewhere, but our site doesn't have any record of one.

Sounds like you want the Typing Injuries FAQ, which I post monthly to,
among other places, sci.med, sci.med.occupational, and news.answers (and,
the more I think of it, I should post to comp.human-factors.  Anybody have
any reason why not?).

>I'm interested in trying out a chordic (sic?) keyboard for either a Sun or
>a PC system.  In case I have the name completely wrong, I'm referring to a
>keyboard which is operated in one hand (approx. 5 keys total) by pressing
>multiple keys ("chords") at once to generate a unique character.

There's nothing out there for Sun's.  For PC's, you have a number of choices.
The two most interesting are the Bat (about $500 for two hands) and the
Twiddler (around $200 for one hand, and includes a wacky built-in mouse).

Grab the FAQ for more exciting details.  You'll find it easiest in 
sci.med.occupational (a thankfully low-volume newsgroup).

Dan
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: CTS and Keyboards
From: mgranaas@charlie.usd.edu
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 21:58:41 GMT
Reply-To: mgranaas@charlie.usd.edu
Organization: The University of South Dakota Computer Science Dept.

One reason that some people are more prone to CTS while typing has to
do simply with posture and hand position.  Many secretaries type for years
with few problems, while some computer users go only a few months before
developing CTS or some other problem.  Those with problems are frequently
not holding their hands above the keyboard like they should.  Rather they
rest their wrists on the desk, or type in other awkward positions.  This
is why there is now a market for wrist-rests as advertised in the back
of computer magazines.

I was suffering some pretty bad pain in my left hand from typing, so I
went out and bougth a $20 wrist-rest--hated it.  Then I bought a $4 towel
rolled it up and put it in front of my keyboard.  The pain in my hand
went away after a couple of weeks.  The towel forced me to hold my hands
in the proper typing position.  (If you've already developed a case of
CTS, I don't think this will work.  But if you're worried about it, and
you hold your wrists on or near the table, try it.)  If you've never
learned what proper typing posture is, FIND OUT.  If you know what a 
proper typying posture is, USE IT.  You will save yourself some pain.

Michael Granaas
mgranaas@charlie.usd.edu
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors,comp.ibm.pc.hardware
From: ed@Tekelec.Com (Ed Campbell)
Subject: Re: Replace a PC keyboard with a Stenotype?
Organization: Tekelec Inc
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 22:49:09 GMT

     I did a similar thing, adapting a parallel output keyboard to
a computer that used a crosspoint unit. The most difficult part of
it was developing translation codes in PROM. The keyboard output
was used to address the PROM's. The PROM's were enabled by the
key group scan from the computer. The output of the PROM's were
OR'ed together, then AND'ed with a strobe to avoid repetition
on each scan. I haven't been into the PC keyboard electronics
yet, but the number of pins on the connector suggests a serial
output. This will require the translated output of your interface
to be inserted into a parallel in/serial out register. The serial
clock is most likely generated by the computer, so this is a
complication you probably won't have to deal with.

Ed Campbell
     Email ed@Tekelec.com (maybe)
From: thinman@netcom.com (Technically Sweet)
Subject: Re: Summary: Trackball vs. mouse
Keywords: trackball, track ball
Organization: International Foundation for Internal Freedom
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:00:50 GMT

akm@atlantix.cs.uoregon.edu (Anant Kartik Mithal) writes:

>Two approaches designed with the needs of touch typists are the
>HomeRow Keyboard from HomeRow Inc., and the ThinkPad's joystick.

>The HR keyboard embedds a joystick under the J key. If you type
>normally on the J key, it behaves like a normal key. If you hold it
>down, and push to any direction, it switches to being a pointing
>device, and the cursor scoots around the screen. The F, D and S keys
>are the mouse buttons. Very easy to program a 45 button mouse using
>this approach... Also a pretty ingenous way of dealing with the
>mode-switch problem.

Danger Will Robinson!

This and the IBM joystick sound perfect for inducing repetitive
stress injuries.  Fingers are not designed for wiggling sideways
repetitively.

-- 

Lance Norskog
thinman@netcom.com
Data is not information is not knowledge is not wisdom.
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: dpbsmith@world.std.com (Daniel P. B. Smith)
Subject: Re: Gnu I/F (Self-Destructive?)
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 00:37:52 GMT

I think it's a problem.  I've just recently started to use emacs, and
noticed this independently.  Anything that requires a stretch of the
fingers that seems even the slightest bit "clumsy" or "awkward" is,
IMHO, very dangerous if sustained for long periods of time.

Since keyboards vary ENORMOUSLY in the number and placement of CTRL keys,
the degree of the problem could vary from keyboard to keyboard.

Schumann crippled his hands to the point of being unable to play the
piano by performing exercises he divised himself whose purpose was to
increase the independence of movement of his fingers.

I _will_ say that it makes a big difference just how much force and
travel are required on the keys you press with the pinkies.  The HP2648A,
otherwise an admirable terminal, became a torture device for me simply
because the keys were heavily sprung to a a degree which was perfectly
acceptable for centrally placed keys and inner fingers, but far too great
for keys pressed with an outward-extended pinkie.

-- 
Daniel P. B. Smith
dpbsmith@world.std.com
Newsgroups: comp.theory
From: boerncke@kirk.fmi.uni-passau.de (Frank-Roland Boernke)
Subject: Re: Real Numbers vs. Rational Numbers?
Organization: University of Passau, Germany
Distribution: inet
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 15:13:47 GMT

[... deleted ...]
|> 
|> Calculate PI * PI.
|> Answer: PI*PI.
|> 
|> Since "PI*PI" is a finite representation of PI * PI from which one can
|> algorithmically computer any of its digits in finite time, this counts as a
|> valid answer.
|> 
|> If you don't consider this valid, then neither will you consider this valid:
|> 
|> Calculate: 2 / 5
|> Answer: 2/5.
|> 
|> So then on that account, computers can't even work with fractions.

I think there IS a difference:

For 2/5 you can find a finite numeric representation ( 0.4 )
for PI or PI*PI you cannot!



 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Boerncke                       ,,,   University of Passau - Germany
boerncke@kirk.fmi.uni-passau.de     (.~.)            phone: +49 0851 2267
--------------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo---------------------------
From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Swart and Gismondi Graph Isomorphism algorithm
Date: 1 Jan 1993 17:17:06 +1100
Organization: Australian National University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.23.70
Keywords: Maybe its right

naylor@research.canon.oz.au (William Naylor) writes:

>It would be a very damning comment on the computer science theory 
>establishment if it eventually turns out that the Gismondi&Swart graph-iso
>paper has any merit, and yet is was not accepted for presentation at
>the major theory conferences (STOC, etc.).

Not necessarily.  You make it sound like there is some sinister plot
to suppress results like this.  In order for a paper claiming a
ground-breaking result (like ISOM in P) to be accepted for publication
it is insufficient to merely be correct.  It must (actually _should)
also be readily seen to be correct by an expert who reads it with
the intense skepticism that comes from reading too many faulty
claims in the past.  In my opinion, the Gismondi-Swart paper cannot
yet pass this test, though I eagerly await Mike Robson's revision.

>Will Naylor               net:  naylor@research.canon.oz.au

Brendan.
Newsgroups: comp.theory
From: naylor@research.canon.oz.au (William Naylor)
Subject: Re: Swart and Gismondi Graph Isomorphism algorithm
Keywords: Maybe its right
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 07:30:27 GMT

It would be a very damning comment on the computer science theory 
establishment if it eventually turns out that the Gismondi&Swart graph-iso
paper has any merit, and yet is was not accepted for presentation at
the major theory conferences (STOC, etc.).


-- 
Will Naylor               net:  naylor@research.canon.oz.au
                          mail: Canon Information Systems Research Australia  
phone: (61-2) 805-2921          P.O. Box 313 North Ryde, NSW 2113 
fax:   (61-2) 805-2929          Australia
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: 2 stack PDA and other questions
Date: 26 Dec 1992 18:13:50 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <1992Dec13.162048.14632@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> khmak@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu writes:
>A few days ago someone posted a few questions that I was also curious about
>knowing the answer to.  Here they are:
>
>
>Why is a 2 stack PDA equivalent to a turing machine?

Given stacks A, and B:
"Move left"  =  X = Pop(A); Push(B, X)
"Move right" =  X = Pop(B); Push(A, X)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
From: radzik@cs.cornell.edu (Tomasz Radzik)
Subject: SODA roommate needed
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:43:07 GMT

I need to find a roommate for SODA from Sunday night through 
Tuesday night.
I am a nonsmoking male.

Tomasz Radzik
radzik@cs.cornell.edu
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Real Numbers vs. Rational Numbers?
Date: 21 Dec 92 18:25:45 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

taylor@foraker.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Eric Taylor) wrote:
> boerncke@kirk.fmi.uni-passau.de (Frank-Roland Boernke) writes:
>> Our professor told us, that RAMs are allowed to store REAL numbers too AND
>> they are  still as powerful as an ordinary turing machine. I claimed, this
>> can`t be true, since there isn`t any possibility to work with irrational 
>> numbers in TMs. 
> REAL numbers are always RATIONAL numbers and vice-versa.  The terminology
> "REAL number", I believe, is not a formal one, but one borrowed from
> something like FORTRAN where they are simply meant to represent floating
> point numbers.  Any rational number can be represented by the division of
> 2 integers and are therefore easily handled by a RAM or Turing machine.

I think I'll have that one bronzed.  You'll be a *long*, *long* time living
that one down, pal.  Count yourself lucky that the trained ape who did your
news configuration has preserved you some measure of anonymity by obscuring
your site's identity.

Anyone else tempted to add their own bladderful to this torrent of
misinformation: there is a substantial literature on computing with real
numbers, ultimately going all the way to Brouwer's intuitionism of the
1920s, and you will look less of an idiot than these two if you read some
of it.  For starters you might get a copy of Lecture Notes in Computer
Science 613, "Constructivity in Computer Science", ed. J.P. Myers and M.J.
O'Donnell, Springer-Verlag 1991, and read back from the references in the
Chirimar/Howe, Tucker/Zucker, and Weihrauch papers there.

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
Organization: University of Haifa.
Date: Tuesday, 22 Dec 1992 18:27:47 IST
From: Dan Gordon <RSMA410@HAIFAUVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Automata & Chomsky Hierarchy

In article <1992Dec15.162545.25338@news.unige.ch>, swann@divsun.unige.ch (SWANN
Philip) says:
>
>In Casti's book "Alternative Realities" there's a conjecture
>that Wolfram's classification of Cellular Automata into classes
>can be mapped into Chomsky's Hierarchy of Formal Languages. He
>cites Wolfram on this. Is there any recent work on the subject?

Cellular automata, in the unrestricted sense, have long ago been
proved to be computation universal, i.e., they can simulate any
Turing machine - see A.R. Smith III, "Simple computation-universal
cellular spaces, JACM 18(1971), 339-353.  This means, of course,
that they can also simulate any of the following: finite automata,
pushdown automata, and linear-bounded automata.  So cellular
automata can be "mapped" to the Chomsky hierarchy (if this is the
intended meaning of "mapping into the Chomsky hierarchy").

Wolfram, in "Statistical mechanics of cellular automata," Rev.
Modern Physics 55(1983),601-644, studies so-called _totalistic_
cellular automata.  In these automata, each state is considered
as a non-negative integer, and the state transition function
depends only on the sum of the states of a cell's neighborhood
(the sum includes the cell's own state).  Wolfram conjectured
that these automata are also computation-universal.

This conjecture about totalistic cellular automata was proved
true in: D. Gordon, "On the computational power of totalistic
cellular automata," Math. Systems Theory 20(1987), 43-52.
It is shown there that totalistic cellular automata can simulate
an arbitrary Turing machine in linear time - actually, twice
real time.  Needless to say, I was somewhat surprised to learn
from the above posting that this problem is still regarded by
some as a conjecture.
From: lordSnooty@cup.portal.com (Andrew - Palfreyman)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Optimisation Problem With Groups
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 06:48:13 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

I am interested in finding an efficient algorithm for solving
the following problem:

System
------
A bounded Euclidean 2-D surface with discrete coordinates (0<=x<=XMAX,
0<=y<=YMAX) is assigned numbers z(x,y) at each point. Nothing is known 
_a priori_ about this assignment. The range of z (0<=z<=ZMAX) is far
higher than the total number of points; 
	i.e. XMAX*YMAX / (dx*dy) << ZMAX/dz, where d(i) is the granularity.

Problem
-------
Given a fixed range of z-values RZ (RZ > dz), the problem is:
group contiguous points within the range such that, after covering
every point on the surface, the final grouping minimises the total 
number of groups.

Notes
-----
* "Contiguous" is taken to mean +/- dx or dy of the point under
  consideration, but not both (i.e. no diagonal connections).
* The minimum size of a group is one point.
* Note that RZ is a range = zmax-zmin, and we are free to choose the
  absolute value of one of {zmax, zmin} for any group.
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
| lord snooty @the giant |  Would You Like Space Potatoes With That?       |
| poisoned electric head |              andrew_-_palfreyman@cup.portal.com |
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.theory
From: idury@cs.rice.edu (Ramana Idury)
Subject: Roommate for SODA in Austin
Organization: Rice University, Houston
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 20:05:03 GMT


I am looking for someone to share a room with me at SODA in Austin
from Sunday night through Tuesday night. I am a nonsmoking male.
I already have a reservation.

Please contact me through email.

Ramana Idury

idury@cs.rice.edu
From: jmr@cs.anu.edu.au (Mike Robson)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Swart and Gismondi Graph Isomorphism algorithm
Date: 2 Jan 1993 18:15:39 +1100
Organization: Computer Science Department, ANU, Australia
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: nunki.anu.edu.au
Keywords: Retraction

jmr@cs.anu.edu.au (Mike Robson) writes:

>With their new version of the discredited main theorem, I currently
>believe that their algorithm can be proved correct. I'll post details
>when I've thought them out a bit more and when I have time.


Sorry to everyone. I thought I had seen a simple way to prove their
revised theorem (that any solution to F3 has a subpattern which is
the pattern of a Q vector). My idea was wrong.

I promise not to post any more bright ideas until I have worked out
the details thoroughly.

Mike Robson.

Newsgroups: comp.theory
From: hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (Dan Hoey)
Subject: Re: Real Numbers vs. Rational Numbers?
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 16:24:49 GMT

I wrote:

>One interesting complexity non-result is the open question:

>    Is the travelling salesman problem with cities on an integer
>    lattice in NP?

>The numbers are non only real, but algebraic.  Not only algebraic, but
>constructible!

And djimenez@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Daniel Jimenez) replied:

> Hmm.  I think you mean P, not NP (obviously it's in NP).

No, I meant NP.  And it is sufficiently nonobvious to be a decades-old
open problem.

The hard part about showing this is in NP is the problem of finding
which of two candidate tours is shorter.  In particular, the problem

    Given two sets {a1, ..., an} and {b1, ..., bn} of positive
    integers, determine whether

    sqrt(a1)+sqrt(a2)+...+sqrt(an) > sqrt(b1)+sqrt(b2)+...+sqrt(bn)

is not known to be in NP or co-NP.  If you have any good way of
showing how a NDTM can determine that question in polynomial time, you
should publish it.  You may, if you wish, provide a method that only
works when each of the ai and bi is the sum of two squares.  (If that
helps, the result will be even more amazing.)

> Anyway, it seems like this problem is NP-complete....

It is well known as an NP-hard problem.  In fact, given n points in
the integer lattice, the question of whether there exists a
Hamiltonian circuit of length n--i.e., consisting of unit-length
edges--is known to be NP-complete.  This is how it is shown that
Euclidean TSP is NP-complete.

I don't have it with me, but I believe you will find all of this in
_The_Traveling_Salesman_Problem_, Lawler et. al. (Eds.), Wiley, '85.

Dan Hoey
Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil
Newsgroups: comp.theory.cell-automata