Unfortunately the Thor Script that made this digest doesn't collect the
date of the email posts. But the followup show some dates.
RLD-VIC Digest for 03 Oct 1999
Topics for Conference RLD-VIC:
1. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Robert L Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
2. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
3. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Robert L Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
4. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
5. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Robert L Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
6. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
7. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Robert L. Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
8. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
9. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Robert L. Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
10. RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
by Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert L Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
To: threeseas@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
Hi Tim,
I mentioned before that if you wanted technical help (meaning programming
help) with the VIC, I would be happy to help. I guess I didn't (don't)
even need to ask if you want help, seeing that you have been making
appeals for community support for quite some time.
Before I continue here, please try to read this message in a positive
light. It seems like I have a knack for writing in a manner offensive to
you, perhaps because I am on one extreme with a paradigm of honesty and
you are on the other extreme with a paradigm of distrust as a result of
your experience. Please accept that I am only trying to be nice and
helpful; I have no ulterior motives.
At any rate, a while back I decided to take a second look at the details
of the nine commands that you have on your web site. I printed them out
and took some time to really look at the details and understand them. To
be honest, I agree with you that there is nothing really difficult about
the project, and it turns me off how people (so called experts) have
slanderously misrepresented the VIC project in the news groups.
I even coded a portion of AI over a few evenings, and if you want it I
would be happy to e-mail you the program and source. The problem I found
is that I soon lost interest in finishing what I started, just like a
single burning coal dies out when separated from the rest.
Now I am sure you could easily spy out all sorts of deception or whatever
you want between the lines of this message----but if you want a developer
from the Amiga community to work on the VIC, here is one.
-Robert
--------
From: "Timothy Rue"
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
Date: 18 Sep 99 22:48:41 -0500
The Virtual Interaction Configuration has always been an open Project.
Certainly Simpler then the Linux Kernel but with a GPL.
But the so called experts honestly cannot handle it. Certainly not because
it's to difficult for them but that they vested interest elsewhere that
participating in the evolution of the VIC would naturally be a conflict
for them.
The Virtual Interaction Configuration is a Valid Amiga Project.
Simpler than the Linux Kernal but potentially bigger than the linux/gnu
combination in that it can include such work in it's automation and
mapping abilities.
It's an genuinely Open Project, not some psuedo open project.
It is the starting point for more the just a software production project.
But a starting point that cannot be skipped or hidden behind closed doors.
People, Software and Hardware are the elements of this tool we call a
computer. But it not only starts with people but people can intentionally
stall it and pursue doing what they can to stop it.
But the VIC is what it is, and it will prevail, naturally.
Someday people will accept and use the VIC as a natural and expected part
of computing, as they accept and use the reality of the earth being round,
not flat.
But in times of change, as so many have watched, there are those who have
been exposing themselves for their deceptions of how they can manipulate
abstraction. Done so in order to distract, confuse and continue intent to
keep blind so many about the reality of abstraction usage, so to how false
power over what so many really can do with this tool of computers.
The deceptions will end, as even now the cycle of deception is becomming
clearer and clearer.
The truth and honesty of abstraction usage:
KNMVIC.html
---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
*~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue@mindspring.com >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------<
Search email/name @ http://www.dejanews.com for other puzzle parts/posts.
Addressing the Dishonest @ http://www.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=380083062
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
To: rld1@cec.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
On 21-Sep-99 10:48:18 Robert L Dickinson wrote:
RLD> Hi Tim,
Hi Robert.
Do excuse my babeling on and on below.
RLD> I mentioned before that if you wanted technical help (meaning
RLD> programming help) with the VIC, I would be happy to help. I
RLD> guess I didn't (don't) even need to ask if you want help, seeing
RLD> that you have been making appeals for community support for
RLD> quite some time.
Correct. The VIC as an open project, usenet is a tool to make use of in
communications and automatically documenting credit where credit is due.
I can't stop help any more than I can stop the negitivity of others towards
the VIC and/or myself. I leave (or actually it just is whether I like it
or not) the choice to others to do what they do, productive or otherwise.
RLD> Before I continue here, please try to read this message in a
RLD> positive light. It seems like I have a knack for writing in a
RLD> manner offensive to you, perhaps because I am on one extreme
RLD> with a paradigm of honesty and you are on the other extreme with
RLD> a paradigm of distrust as a result of your experience. Please
RLD> accept that I am only trying to be nice and helpful; I have no
RLD> ulterior motives.
When I first presented this project (After Commodore) to the community I
was given a hard time. I even presented it to the Amiga Atlanta user group
(of which I was one of the first year members and then absent for ten year
- but back now). Of the member of Amiga Atlanta there are a few I would
think would be interested, but that is not the case.
Instead I find myself with wonderment and odd observation about the people
who claim themselves to be Amiga supporters and the general attitude.
RLD> At any rate, a while back I decided to take a second look at the
RLD> details of the nine commands that you have on your web site. I
RLD> printed them out and took some time to really look at the
RLD> details and understand them. To be honest, I agree with you
RLD> that there is nothing really difficult about the project, and it
RLD> turns me off how people (so called experts) have slanderously
RLD> misrepresented the VIC project in the news groups.
Correct, there really is nothing difficult about it, only programming that
anyone with a couple years of professional programming experience would
find simple and...
[side bar]
Even Carl Sassenrath had his comments to make about the VIC (which seemed
to be a summary of what the collection of what claims others were making -
or maybe others where getting their ideas from some focused party?) But
it was like compairing apples to oranges. The VIC is not about reinventing
another programming language. No need to do such things that I can simple
use the works of others for (i.e. Rebol may very well make for a good
language to use in autocoding with the VIC tool.)
[end side bar]
RLD> I even coded a portion of AI over a few evenings, and if you
RLD> want it I would be happy to e-mail you the program and source.
RLD> The problem I found is that I soon lost interest in finishing
RLD> what I started, just like a single burning coal dies out when
RLD> separated from the rest.
....even boring to do.
In Building Theatrical sets and Trade Show booth, most of what is done is
boring, but it's when it all gets pulled together then something exciting
happens.
In other words, I do understand how it is easy to lose interest,
especially alone. I'm sure there are others who have also done something
with coding the VIC but have kept it to themselves, maybe due peer
pressure of what is found in the community online.
It's simple enough to be boring to code (for the most part) for someone
experienced but also simple enough that (once far enough along) should be
easy enough that others less experienced can get excited about and
participate in one way or another. Once far enought along, the momentum
will pick up, as developing an auto coding environment is going to be more
exciting for the experienced programming than the user wanting to use it
for tying applications together or any number of user field specific
automations (outside the field of programming).
On the other side of the coin, I've never lost interest in the VIC but
have found limitation of one thing or another to be in my way. Either
the time to really focus in coding, or the lack of specific knowledge,
or.....
I can build kitchen cabinet faster and better than someone never or even
sometimes doing it, because I've done enough of it on a continious basis.
And this is enough to tell me other professions are the same way.
I honestly originally sat down to use the VIC by putting utility shell
applications together. Only they would work right for one reason or
another. I didn't set down to create the VIC, But to use it! To my
supprise it's now over ten years later and I've ot people telling me I'm
not smart enough to be a user, so buy more products (hypocracy).
RLD> Now I am sure you could easily spy out all sorts of deception or
RLD> whatever you want between the lines of this message----but if
RLD> you want a developer from the Amiga community to work on the
RLD> VIC, here is one.
I'm really no more suspisious (sp?) than what my personal experience and
the supporting evidence of the industry geed (openly admited and even
written about - I'm currently reading "The Plot to Get Bill Gates - cause
me mom sent it to me - and boy of boy is it exposing of dishonest trickery
intentions.)
RLD> -Robert
Anyway, it really is an open project. All I can do is keep it from being
IP owned and keep it focused on the target goal (so as to not allow others
to change it into something it's not, so to avoid false claims about what
it is and what it is not.)
If I really was the SOB so many want to present me as, then I'd say screw
everyone and I'd be pursuing Patents on it and then I'd make everyone kiss
my ass, just like Bill Gates, but alot worse. Sometimes I gotta stop and
wonder/recall why I don't. I don't want to become that which has cause me
so much wrongful constraints.
I'm interested in having anything anyone has done with coding the VIC and
would probably post it to my web pages (if it's within the scope of What
the VIC is and about).
There is something I've been realizing more and more. And that is that
many in the computer industry really are not aware of their own actions
and attitudes. Being that what they think and do they fail to realize they
are claiming expertise, in part, over an area that we are all experts at
inherently. Everybody thinks and everybody really does do a small finite
set of action in doing anything (and there are more non-programmers and
non-computer professionals doing these things than otherwise).
It really is like telling some that they are not the only ones who can
talk, when they believe they are of a special elite class of only those
who have been specially trained and accepted to talk. Cannot accept an
outsider because it screws up their self image but can sure as hell try
and make claim to anything an outsider does say, because it's the mental
logic of the process of elimination. If an outsider cannot talk, then we
special elite must have said it and therefore we must own it.....Insanity
of self supporting dependancy of the "expert" elite class master race
mentality. An elite class that only exist in the minds of those
participating in it being an elite class.
And that is something of a sum-up of why the hard time I've been being
given.
Real Life example:
I had gone to a Delphi conference years ago. The subject matter of the
examples they where using was boring as hell, but what they where doing
was interesting (otherwise I'd not gone). At one point the speaker said to
the audience, in regards to the ease of programming in delphi, was that
this wasn't for bla bla bla (shit workers) to know about, that you are not
going to have to worry about carpenters programming in delphi because of
it's ease to do so.
Maybe I sould have stood up and pointed out that I was a carpenter and was
looking at delphi for writting a company specific cabinet cad program,
rather than asking and hoping for some programmer to do it, take my first
born for payment and then do it wrong by telling me he didn't understand
what I was saying to him in carpenter speak. While I can then expect him
to slap IP rights to what I had to teach him.......Because I'm not
supposed to be able to talk. I'm an outsider.
On the other side of the coin, the dumb dowing is only keeping everybody
dumb, especially the computer industry professionals. What other reason is
there for contined blundering with the Amiga? I really don't believ in the
so called "bad luck" of dark force cuses. Coinsidence only happen so much,
after three times there is damn good reason to suspect intentional efforts.
And it's way past three in the case of the Amiga.
---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
*~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue@mindspring.com >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------<
Search email/name @ http://www.dejanews.com for other puzzle parts/posts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert L Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
To: threeseas@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
On 22 Sep 1999, Timothy Rue wrote:
8<
> RLD> The problem I found is that I soon lost interest in finishing
> RLD> what I started, just like a single burning coal dies out when
> RLD> separated from the rest.
>
> ....even boring to do.
>
> In Building Theatrical sets and Trade Show booth, most of what is done is
> boring, but it's when it all gets pulled together then something exciting
> happens.
Yes, the end result makes it all worth while. Keeping the final goal in
mind will help keep the development active. Tim, this is where you can be
of much help, because you have the best understanding of the goal.
> In other words, I do understand how it is easy to lose interest,
> especially alone. I'm sure there are others who have also done something
> with coding the VIC but have kept it to themselves, maybe due peer
> pressure of what is found in the community online.
Certainly due to all the havoc that is raised online, it would be no
wonder that people would keep quiet even if they did significant
development. That's why I often resort to e-mail rather than usenet.
8<
> On the other side of the coin, I've never lost interest in the VIC but
> have found limitation of one thing or another to be in my way. Either
> the time to really focus in coding, or the lack of specific knowledge,
> or.....
I suspect that your clearer vision of the VIC also helps keep you from
losing interest. I don't entirely see the connection between my
development efforts and how it ultimately brings out the VIC, and that is
partly why I lose interest. By having you involved in the development,
I think there will be much more success.
8<
> Anyway, it really is an open project. All I can do is keep it from being
> IP owned and keep it focused on the target goal (so as to not allow others
> to change it into something it's not, so to avoid false claims about what
> it is and what it is not.)
That's exactly what is needed.
8<
> I'm interested in having anything anyone has done with coding the VIC and
> would probably post it to my web pages (if it's within the scope of What
> the VIC is and about).
I reassembled my source last night and tried to get back into it. I think
it would be a good thing for me to do a little clean-up and documentation
before making it publicly available. I'll plan on e-mailing you a
presentable version sometime this weekend.
8<
I have been noticing the same thing about insider/outsider mentality. I
never studied computer science in school or associated with CS students
very much because they always seemed stuck-up, like they were the elite.
I hope it hasn't been rubbing off on me now that I work in this field. I
am confident in my programming skills, but I hope I don't act like I am
elite because of it. It took time, and lots of it, just like your
carpentry skills had to take time to develop. There is no difference.
-Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
To: rld1@cec.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
[The following has been edited to leave the party I'm responding to with
the choice of making themselves known. I felt my response contained more
information than this party needs to read but such information that others
may find worth considering.]
On 23-Sep-99 13:08:53 +++> wrote:
+++> On 22 Sep 1999, Timothy Rue wrote:
+++> 8<
>> +++> The problem I found is that I soon lost interest in finishing
>> +++> what I started, just like a single burning coal dies out when
>> +++> separated from the rest.
>>
>> ....even boring to do.
>>
>> In Building Theatrical sets and Trade Show booth, most of what is
>> done is boring, but it's when it all gets pulled together then
>> something exciting happens.
+++> Yes, the end result makes it all worth while. Keeping the final
+++> goal in mind will help keep the development active. Tim, this
+++> is where you can be of much help, because you have the best
+++> understanding of the goal.
Yes, and it's certainly not been easy. Though over time it does seem to be
getting easier overall.
There is more than the VIC itself.
Perhaps the way for me to explain is to use Russia moving from communisism
(a totalatairian government and socialism economic system) to Capitalism
and Democracy.
People have been "programmed" all their life to perform in certain ways to
just survive and maybe get some of what they want out of life. This
programming is indirect, a set of rules to follow or else..., so people
gear themselves into habits so to stay within the rules without really
having to try to. They make it second nature to do things certain ways.
Now a major change comes along, due to little choice otherwise, to
continue to survive. This change requires deprogramming, the undoing of
the habits or what has become "second nature".
Now at the beginning of this Russian change, you might have gone to Russia
and tried to explain to some in a small town the concepts and practices of
starting and running a capitalistic small business. And you probably get
all sorts of confusion and questions as to how the government is connected
and who in the government do they go to to get things to sell....etc.. Or
maybe where do they go to get money to buy with (rather than barter/trade)
And you haven't even touched on the concept of stock markets.
---
On the other side of the coin, stock markets have alot to do with
suppressing cutting edge streamlined computer technology. For when you
streamline and even make 100% compatability then you create a need to sell
less, so to do alot more with less.
Investors main focus is increasing their money, even if genuine technology
advancement is a concern to them at all.
You might say the current mindset is "it's not right unless it's wrong"
because this is the only way to insure continued sales in upgrades.
Here is an example:
Cable Modem Service is being advertised here in Atlanta as being faster
than 28.8 (hyped to be 1.5 meg a second to your computer.)
Standard call up Mindspring service is typically traffic jammed to 28.8 or
less so buying a 56k modem is overkill. So there is the technical and
theory of what can be and then there is the actual reality of it.
Lets' say I dump both earthlink and mindspring (which cost me in total
about $33+ a month)[***BTW they just merged]. This equals:
Earthlink gives me 6megs of web space, mindspring 5 megs.
Unlimited access on earthlink vs. 20hrs on mindspring.
Mindspring newsgroup feed is far better than earthlinks, what seems to be
a bit random in selection and timing of tapping off the mainline.
Earthlink connection is far more unstable comparied to mindspring, but I
suspect it is because earthlink doesn't follow the 80% rule that
Mindspring does. When reaching 80% capacity, upgrade and add capacity.
NOW THE INTERNET is not just one big parrallel processing computer, it is
servers, many many servers. NO MATTER HOW YOU CONNECT, be it phone modem,
cable modem, satellite modem, string and cans, THE SPEED you will achieve
will be the speed of the slowest link in the path to what data you want.
So for $50 a month + $50 installation and I need an Eithernet T-10 Amiga
card too, I can have what is hyped to be unlimited internet access
(actually you are always connected - it's cable TV lines). Being connected
like this you will get mail as soon as that part of the net to give it to
you, does. Plus 10megs of web space, 5 email addesess/aliases.
$33 = 11megs unlimited access at 28.8 (tying up a phone line)
$50 = 10megs unlimited access at hyped 1.5meg a sec. (also freeing the
phone line)
If I was paying for a second phone line then I could dump it and that
would make the price of cable worth while.
But then why am I spending $33+ between two ISPs a month anyway?
Mindspring is supposed to be a "Blue Ribbon Free Speach" Supporter.
But the reason why I have Earthlink is because Mindspring had ban me from
posting to Usenet due the cost to them of dealing with the number of
unsupported complaints and hacking of their system by those who oppose me.
Like I said, the mindset is "It's not right unless it's wrong." and with
this the vultures can feed off the free lunches so many help to supply in
slaughtering who ever they can and certainly anyone who wants to really
move forward. A stock market incentive.
Full Circle:
A change of mindset is in order. It's not easy to do or cause to happen.
Especially when you have so many programmed second nature to a very wide
scope.
But it does start with the simple and small, the VIC. Recognizing the
reality of the small finite set of actions we do in anything we do and
then making these actions available to the user in a condusive way within
a computer environment.
http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/KNMVIC.html
>> In other words, I do understand how it is easy to lose interest,
>> especially alone. I'm sure there are others who have also done
>> something with coding the VIC but have kept it to themselves, maybe
>> due peer pressure of what is found in the community online.
+++> Certainly due to all the havoc that is raised online, it would
+++> be no wonder that people would keep quiet even if they did
+++> significant development. That's why I often resort to e-mail
+++> rather than usenet.
I understand this, but then there is a matter of establishing public proof
and exposure so to help cause needed change, rather than allowing the very
real cycle of spy vs. spy to continue to mislead those who need valid
technology. Spy vs. Spy acts only exist to support Spys, nothing else. You
might consider it as a taxing of what could be, making what is, less than
what it could be. Taxed by the "spys game" for far more than even they
realize or get out of it.
+++> 8<
>> On the other side of the coin, I've never lost interest in the VIC
>> but have found limitation of one thing or another to be in my way.
>> Either the time to really focus in coding, or the lack of specific
>> knowledge, or.....
+++> I suspect that your clearer vision of the VIC also helps keep
+++> you from losing interest. I don't entirely see the connection
+++> between my development efforts and how it ultimately brings out
+++> the VIC, and that is partly why I lose interest. By having you
+++> involved in the development, I think there will be much more
+++> success.
Sometimes I can be distracted from it, as I have over the years due work.
At times enough to cause me to forget about it, but it always seems to
present itself to me in moving forward, as if to persistantly remind me.
There are some things I've done to help keep me inspired. Listening to
choice music is one. But the movie "The Matrix" I've found both extreamly
inspiring and sometimes to the point of distraction. The Depth and Width
of the parrallels in scripting and metaphors to my own efforts, usenet
communications and personal life can be somewhat mental overload for me on
one hand. On the other hand it provides metaphors that can help me to
communicate to others the goal or big picture of what see and know. For
example, I could have used a scene from the movie to explain the above
mentioned programming second nature problem.
The movie is one of the things that has had something of a quieting effect
on me. This in combination with timeline communications from myself in
usenet and communications from others and these with other discoveries/
revelations of recent, regarding religious writtings. For Example:
Isa. 63:1-6 of the Bible in parrallel to Revelation 19:11-16.
Mind you that I'm not promoting religion here but simply making note of
what is written in this particularly old book. While trying to understand
the overall of all these things in terms of what can be expected in the
evolutional development and direction of conscious (high level abstraction
use) life and society of.
Perhaps a direction to take, so to give common focus and inspiration to
many, is to consider life a stage and "The Matrix" as a metaphor for the
real world script that's "here and now" being written by everyone.
When Neo began training, Tank flipped thru data disk/cards saying
something about training supposed to be starting with "operations" but
that was boring shit, and then went to Jujitsu kung fu excitement.
Later in the movie Trinity learned how to fly the helicopter via. data
file.
But in the real world of the VIC, these things cannot happen until the
"operations" of the VIC are done. For the operations of the VIC are the
gears and bearing that allow such data and potential data to be created
and/or accessed.
The excitement is in interactively accessing the data, but you need to
have the boring "operations" available and in use to do this interactive
accessing of the data.
+++> 8<
>> Anyway, it really is an open project. All I can do is keep it from
>> being IP owned and keep it focused on the target goal (so as to not
>> allow others to change it into something it's not, so to avoid
>> false claims about what it is and what it is not.)
+++> That's exactly what is needed.
+++> 8<
>> I'm interested in having anything anyone has done with coding the
>> VIC and would probably post it to my web pages (if it's within the
>> scope of What the VIC is and about).
+++> I reassembled my source last night and tried to get back into
+++> it. I think it would be a good thing for me to do a little
+++> clean-up and documentation before making it publicly available.
+++> I'll plan on e-mailing you a presentable version sometime this
+++> weekend.
+++> 8<
+++> I have been noticing the same thing about insider/outsider
+++> mentality. I never studied computer science in school or
+++> associated with CS students very much because they always seemed
+++> stuck-up, like they were the elite. I hope it hasn't been
+++> rubbing off on me now that I work in this field. I am confident
+++> in my programming skills, but I hope I don't act like I am elite
+++> because of it. It took time, and lots of it, just like your
+++> carpentry skills had to take time to develop. There is no
+++> difference.
Exactly, re: "time to develop"! And this puts me in a better position
to create the data in the area/field of which I have developed/experienced.
Just as everyone has their specific field(s)/area(s)/personal perspective
of data they can generate.
Such "DATA" made available thru a common human action set of the VIC
operations command set makes such data sets combinable.
Many people of different talents came together to produce the movie "The
Matrix." And even more later came in to produce from this work, the web
site, the jam packed DVD, etc..
There is plenty of room for everyone, only there are those who are in need
of deprogramming so not to be accessible by agent smiths, which seems to
have been rather strong in overtaking people in the newsgroups. So much so
that I may now have some degree of "shell shock" difficulty in seeing and
accepting any genuine help. With this in mind I can say again that I
cannot stop anyone from moving forwards with the VIC, but what I can do is
stop or prevent wrongful abuse of it or its use to abuse others. At the
very worse, this should be viewed is a good thing, as insurance that it
won't be used abusively. Where negitivity from me should be considered a
real warning and reminder to not do wrong here.
---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
*~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue@mindspring.com >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------<
Search email/name @ http://www.dejanews.com for other puzzle parts/posts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert L Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
To: threeseas@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
From rld1@cec.wustl.edu Mon, 27 Sep 1999 08:35:54 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Robert L Dickinson"
To: "Timothy Rue"
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
Date: 27 Sep 1999 13:35:54 GMT
Content-type: multipart/mixed; [edited]
> +++> I reassembled my source last night and tried to get back into
> +++> it. I think it would be a good thing for me to do a little
> +++> clean-up and documentation before making it publicly available.
> +++> I'll plan on e-mailing you a presentable version sometime this
> +++> weekend.
Alas, one of my favorite aspects of software programming is that I have
the freedom to change and mold the software any way I like----but
sometimes that get's me into trouble. After reviewing my original
undocumented code, I convinced myself that it could be done better and in
a more organized fashion. So, like a fool, I rewrote it.
And besides that, people no doubt will wonder why in the world I code in
assembly in this day and age of "platform independence", not to mention
that I've re-invented several wheels again. Answers to these wonders
exist, but anyway, lets talk about what this code does.
GENERAL:
To sum it up, right now it does basically nothing, but in a very nice way.
I have organized all re-usable code into "vic.library", which is accessed
by "AI" as well as the other future commands. In fact, it is intended
that any other application is free to access these common routines
directly from "vic.library" as well, or by calling the "AI" and other
future commands.
SETUP:
To install it, simply put "vic.library" in "LIBS:", then you are ready to
run "AI" as a command from wherever you want. Test my error detection by
running "AI" before putting "vic.library" in "LIBS:". No special version
of the Amiga operating system or hardware is required.
TESTING:
To test the current functionality, run "AI" with various arguments. This
will demonstrate the common error reporting window. The only recognized
argument at this time is "-n ", but several errors can be seen. Try
each of the following commands:
AI
AI -unk
AI -n
AI -n name
AI -n name -n
Obviously the successful error message is there for debugging only and
will be gone in the future.
OK, so thats where it stands right now. Nothing very exciting, and
certainly nothing that hasn't been seen in zillions of programs before.
But anyway, this is only the starting point. All suggestions are welcome,
of course.
-Robert
AI and vic.library source
AI binary
vic.library binary
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
To: rld1@cec.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
On 27-Sep-99 08:35:54 Robert L Dickinson wrote:
>> +++> I reassembled my source last night and tried to get back into
>> +++> it. I think it would be a good thing for me to do a little
>> +++> clean-up and documentation before making it publicly
>> available.
>> +++> I'll plan on e-mailing you a presentable version sometime
>> this
>> +++> weekend.
RLD> Alas, one of my favorite aspects of software programming is that
RLD> I have the freedom to change and mold the software any way I
RLD> like----but sometimes that get's me into trouble. After
RLD> reviewing my original undocumented code, I convinced myself that
RLD> it could be done better and in a more organized fashion. So,
RLD> like a fool, I rewrote it.
:)
RLD> And besides that, people no doubt will wonder why in the world I
RLD> code in assembly in this day and age of "platform independence",
RLD> not to mention that I've re-invented several wheels again.
RLD> Answers to these wonders exist, but anyway, lets talk about what
RLD> this code does.
[snip]
Robert,
Sorry for not responding sooner. Some sort of human virus got to me.
I'm still recovering from the buildup and ultimate day of hell of it.
I don't speak Assembly so I gotta make out what I can of the source.
I'd like to post your message w/source and binaries to my web site.
Doing so will make it known who you are to anyone who dls the archive,
So I'd like to get an "ok" from you, though I feel you intend it.
I did install the vic.library and tried AI. I also read what I could of
the source and tried to understand as much as I could. I think I
understand where a function starts (which tells me what the included
functions are at this time.)
It made me smile.
I like the idea of a library for common functions. Being in assembly and
in a library, does this have the same effect as "pure code"?
Like you said, it's just a start. Now I need to review the AI docs I wrote
and consider any directions or suggestions I might give. Of course
anything you think of doing next, don't wait for me.
I know there is a good bit to the AI Doc/specs.
http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/AI.html
and an AREXX framework for AI
http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/CPIAC.html
Robert, understand that I don't yet know what all you are looking at
regarding AI, so if you are looking at the above that good.
My gut feeling is that you are on track. The VIC and it's commands pretty
much just deal with accessing and manipulating data in arrays or list (or
what ever you call such a collection of data parts in assembly) thru
reading and writing from/to files (internal and external), where the
non-vic data it comes across in it's processing is simply passed along to
where ever the VIC is told to pass it.
It's in it's versatility (the configuration of it's common functionality)
of doing this that we'll get "virtual" and with this allow dynamic
automation to be mapped out and happen .
AI is intended to set up a vic command environmet, where the other
commands won't be available until this happens. I know the arexx IQ
command doesn't follow this but it was ment to be a stand alone (as it is
perhaps the central or likely most to be used command).
Thanks,
Tim
---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
*~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue@mindspring.com >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------<
Search email/name @ http://www.dejanews.com for other puzzle parts/posts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert L. Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
To: threeseas@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
On 29 Sep 1999, Timothy Rue wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Robert,
>
> Sorry for not responding sooner. Some sort of human virus got to me.
> I'm still recovering from the buildup and ultimate day of hell of it.
Sorry to hear you were not well, it really makes life a misery until the
body rids itself of the problem. I hope your full recovery is fast.
> I don't speak Assembly so I gotta make out what I can of the source.
Sorry about that, I'll try to make sure the code documentation is as
useful as possible. Assembly is a lot like BASIC, in that program flow is
handled by a lot of GOTOs (Bcc (branch on condition code) instructions in
Assembly). Normal programs start at the beginning of the file, but in the
case of the library, it is loaded differently and initialized by calling a
specific routine, _LibInit in my code.
If you have suggestions on how to improve the documentation or
understandability of the code, please tell me and I'll try to improve it.
It is important that the source is easy to understand.
> I'd like to post your message w/source and binaries to my web site.
> Doing so will make it known who you are to anyone who dls the archive,
> So I'd like to get an "ok" from you, though I feel you intend it.
You have the OK. I am not trying to hide myself. If you publish my
e-mail address, please publish this one, not my work e-mail address.
Anyone is welcome to e-mail me with suggestions etc..
> I did install the vic.library and tried AI. I also read what I could of
> the source and tried to understand as much as I could. I think I
> understand where a function starts (which tells me what the included
> functions are at this time.)
Perhaps a little intro to the source is in order:
As you likely noticed, I name functions starting with an "_" and with
initial caps, like "_DoThisFunction". Functions end with the RTS (return
from subroutine) instruction.
I name variables starting with an "_" and in all lower case, like
"_thisvariable". Often I use a structure or category prefix, and
sometimes a trailing number, like "_errallocmem0" (which indicates an
error string related to _AllocMem).
For branches (GOTOs) I label code locations with the capital letters of
the function they are in (converted to lower case) followed by a type of
label, and ended with a number. For example, "dtfloop0" would label a
spot in the code where a later Bcc instruction will branch to, causing a
loop (in function _DoThisFunction, hence the dtf). The label "dtfdone0"
would mark the exit point of the previously mentioned loop. A label like
"dtffail0" would indicate a point to jump to upon failure of something. A
label like "dtfskip0" or "dtfpass0" indicate where a block of code can be
skipped/passed over by a branch instruction.
Please let me know what things are unclear, so I can clarify them. Do you
think it would be a good idea to prepare an "introduction to the source"
document that explains the basics of Assembly language and formatting of
the source? Or are the in-code comments enough?
> It made me smile.
:)
> I like the idea of a library for common functions. Being in assembly and
> in a library, does this have the same effect as "pure code"?
The library has that effect, since it is only loaded once, but the AI
program is not pure. It will be loaded again every time it is run. Maybe
it would be a good idea to make it pure, especially if it is going to be
called many times, and simultaneously. Let me think about that, it might
be good to make AI and the other commands pure.
> Like you said, it's just a start. Now I need to review the AI docs I wrote
> and consider any directions or suggestions I might give. Of course
> anything you think of doing next, don't wait for me.
I am currently working on handling the VIC numbering. I need a little
clarification on if/how numbers are reused. If I start four VICs (say
Test#0, Test#1, Test#2, and Test#3) and then quit Test#1, which number
will be assigned to the next Test VIC? #1 or #4? This could be critical
since commands that don't specify a number go to the highest numbered VIC
of that name.
> I know there is a good bit to the AI Doc/specs.
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/AI.html
This is the one I have been looking at.
> and an AREXX framework for AI
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/CPIAC.html
This one is new to me, I printed it out for review.
> Robert, understand that I don't yet know what all you are looking at
> regarding AI, so if you are looking at the above that good.
8<
I'll try to have another version to you after this weekend that handles
the VIC numbering and allows the list of VICs to be displayed.
Until then, I hope you are feeling better and maybe you could clarify the
numbering question above (which might be critical later on).
Have a nice day,
-Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
To: rld1@cec.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
On 30-Sep-99 11:32:25 Robert L. Dickinson wrote:
RLD> On 29 Sep 1999, Timothy Rue wrote:
>> I don't speak Assembly so I gotta make out what I can of the
>> source.
RLD> Sorry about that, I'll try to make sure the code documentation
RLD> is as useful as possible. Assembly is a lot like BASIC, in that
RLD> program flow is handled by a lot of GOTOs (Bcc (branch on
RLD> condition code) instructions in Assembly). Normal programs start
RLD> at the beginning of the file, but in the case of the library, it
RLD> is loaded differently and initialized by calling a specific
RLD> routine, _LibInit in my code.
RLD> If you have suggestions on how to improve the documentation or
RLD> understandability of the code, please tell me and I'll try to
RLD> improve it. It is important that the source is easy to
RLD> understand.
Perhaps just your way of doing things (as you have done here). Sorta a
translation for those who program in assembly and other who want to follow
in a skipping over the surface manner.
In fact I was thinking of taking your words here (related to how "you" do
things in assembly and add it as an intro to the source you already sent.
>> I'd like to post your message w/source and binaries to my web site.
>> Doing so will make it known who you are to anyone who dls the
>> archive, So I'd like to get an "ok" from you, though I feel you
>> intend it.
RLD> You have the OK. I am not trying to hide myself. If you
RLD> publish my e-mail address, please publish this one, not my work
RLD> e-mail address. Anyone is welcome to e-mail me with suggestions
RLD> etc..
to be clear - rld1@cec.wustl.edu is NOT work?
>> I did install the vic.library and tried AI. I also read what I
>> could of the source and tried to understand as much as I could. I
>> think I understand where a function starts (which tells me what the
>> included functions are at this time.)
RLD> Perhaps a little intro to the source is in order:
RLD> As you likely noticed, I name functions starting with an "_" and
RLD> with initial caps, like "_DoThisFunction". Functions end with
RLD> the RTS (return from subroutine) instruction.
RLD> I name variables starting with an "_" and in all lower case,
RLD> like "_thisvariable". Often I use a structure or category
RLD> prefix, and sometimes a trailing number, like "_errallocmem0"
RLD> (which indicates an error string related to _AllocMem).
RLD> For branches (GOTOs) I label code locations with the capital
RLD> letters of the function they are in (converted to lower case)
RLD> followed by a type of label, and ended with a number. For
RLD> example, "dtfloop0" would label a spot in the code where a later
RLD> Bcc instruction will branch to, causing a loop (in function
RLD> _DoThisFunction, hence the dtf). The label "dtfdone0" would
RLD> mark the exit point of the previously mentioned loop. A label
RLD> like "dtffail0" would indicate a point to jump to upon failure
RLD> of something. A label like "dtfskip0" or "dtfpass0" indicate
RLD> where a block of code can be skipped/passed over by a branch
RLD> instruction.
RLD> Please let me know what things are unclear, so I can clarify
RLD> them. Do you think it would be a good idea to prepare an
RLD> "introduction to the source" document that explains the basics
RLD> of Assembly language and formatting of the source? Or are the
RLD> in-code comments enough?
An intro to assembly.....Hmmmm... If you feel like it. But I suspect most
anyone wanting to just skim over the source (not knowing assembly) would
only need your comments and way of doing things. That is if you think
Assembly is something one would be better at taking a course in.
I leave this to you to decide. For me I think the ability to skim over is
good enough, and if there is something needing to go more in detail to
communicate, then some sort of psuedo code might be easier than me
learning (in what little spare and random time I have - next week is back
to 10-12 hour work days) assembly.
*** somehow I get the feeling I should have learned assembly. :)
>> It made me smile.
RLD> :)
>> I like the idea of a library for common functions. Being in
>> assembly and in a library, does this have the same effect as "pure
>> code"?
RLD> The library has that effect, since it is only loaded once, but
RLD> the AI program is not pure. It will be loaded again every time
RLD> it is run. Maybe it would be a good idea to make it pure,
RLD> especially if it is going to be called many times, and
RLD> simultaneously. Let me think about that, it might be good to
RLD> make AI and the other commands pure.
>> Like you said, it's just a start. Now I need to review the AI docs
>> I wrote and consider any directions or suggestions I might give. Of
>> course anything you think of doing next, don't wait for me.
RLD> I am currently working on handling the VIC numbering. I need a
RLD> little clarification on if/how numbers are reused. If I start
RLD> four VICs (say Test#0, Test#1, Test#2, and Test#3) and then quit
RLD> Test#1, which number will be assigned to the next Test VIC? #1
RLD> or #4? This could be critical since commands that don't specify
RLD> a number go to the highest numbered VIC of that name.
It would be #4, the next one. This is one example of having more than one
way to do something. Because here the approach is one of forward moving
(as opposed to forward/backwards chaining), as is the way "Time" is
forward only moving. However, I do believe there is a way around this if
one wanted to force it to be #1. I need to look at this in what I wrote
and get my head geared back into this issue. But for now assume it to be
the highest one by auto default.
>> I know there is a good bit to the AI Doc/specs.
>>
>> http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/AI.html
RLD> This is the one I have been looking at.
>> and an AREXX framework for AI
>>
>> http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/CPIAC.html
RLD> This one is new to me, I printed it out for review.
>> Robert, understand that I don't yet know what all you are looking
>> at regarding AI, so if you are looking at the above that good.
RLD> 8<
RLD> I'll try to have another version to you after this weekend that
RLD> handles the VIC numbering and allows the list of VICs to be
RLD> displayed.
RLD> Until then, I hope you are feeling better and maybe you could
RLD> clarify the numbering question above (which might be critical
RLD> later on).
Come to the conclusion that it is/was some flu that is going around and I
hope to take extra steps this weekend to make sure I flush it out my
system (sounds like I'm talking computers - :)
Thanks for the thoughts on this bug.
RLD> Have a nice day,
RLD> -Robert
I'll make effort to gear my head into more depth in answering your
questions this weekend. I'll try to consider general perspectives or
principles to hold to regarding the programming side of creating the VIC.
And I want to say Thanks Robert for your interest and help.
Tim.
---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
*~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue@mindspring.com >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------<
Search email/name @ http://www.dejanews.com for other puzzle parts/posts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert L. Dickinson (rld1@cec.wustl.edu)
To: threeseas@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
On 1 Oct 1999, Timothy Rue wrote:
> On 30-Sep-99 11:32:25 Robert L. Dickinson wrote:
>
> RLD> If you have suggestions on how to improve the documentation or
> RLD> understandability of the code, please tell me and I'll try to
> RLD> improve it. It is important that the source is easy to
> RLD> understand.
>
> Perhaps just your way of doing things (as you have done here). Sorta a
> translation for those who program in assembly and other who want to follow
> in a skipping over the surface manner.
>
> In fact I was thinking of taking your words here (related to how "you" do
> things in assembly and add it as an intro to the source you already sent.
Good idea, feel free to do so.
> >> I'd like to post your message w/source and binaries to my web site.
> >> Doing so will make it known who you are to anyone who dls the
> >> archive, So I'd like to get an "ok" from you, though I feel you
> >> intend it.
>
> RLD> You have the OK. I am not trying to hide myself. If you
> RLD> publish my e-mail address, please publish this one, not my work
> RLD> e-mail address. Anyone is welcome to e-mail me with suggestions
> RLD> etc..
>
> to be clear - rld1@cec.wustl.edu is NOT work?
Correct, rld1@cec.wustl.edu is not my work address, and it is the one that
I would prefer to be published.
Just to be clear about things, let's designate this subject "RE: The
unchanging and "REAL" Open direction." as fair game for publication. That
would make it easier to keep track of (or maybe we can come up with a new
subject line that denotes freely publishable communication). In any case,
feel free to publish whatever parts you deem appropriate from the e-mails
I've sent under the above subject line.
8< (stuff about naming conventions)
> RLD> Please let me know what things are unclear, so I can clarify
> RLD> them. Do you think it would be a good idea to prepare an
> RLD> "introduction to the source" document that explains the basics
> RLD> of Assembly language and formatting of the source? Or are the
> RLD> in-code comments enough?
>
> An intro to assembly.....Hmmmm... If you feel like it. But I suspect most
> anyone wanting to just skim over the source (not knowing assembly) would
> only need your comments and way of doing things. That is if you think
> Assembly is something one would be better at taking a course in.
>
> I leave this to you to decide. For me I think the ability to skim over is
> good enough, and if there is something needing to go more in detail to
> communicate, then some sort of psuedo code might be easier than me
> learning (in what little spare and random time I have - next week is back
> to 10-12 hour work days) assembly.
We can just play it by ear----if the in-code comments suffice, let's just
keep it at that. There is no point in trying to make every reader of the
code proficient in Assembly just so they can understand what the code
does.
> *** somehow I get the feeling I should have learned assembly. :)
:) Human memory is like cache, whereas books are like disk storage. If
you don't use Assembly a lot, no point in storing it in "cache"!
> RLD> I am currently working on handling the VIC numbering. I need a
> RLD> little clarification on if/how numbers are reused. If I start
> RLD> four VICs (say Test#0, Test#1, Test#2, and Test#3) and then quit
> RLD> Test#1, which number will be assigned to the next Test VIC? #1
> RLD> or #4? This could be critical since commands that don't specify
> RLD> a number go to the highest numbered VIC of that name.
>
> It would be #4, the next one. This is one example of having more than one
> way to do something. Because here the approach is one of forward moving
> (as opposed to forward/backwards chaining), as is the way "Time" is
> forward only moving. However, I do believe there is a way around this if
> one wanted to force it to be #1. I need to look at this in what I wrote
> and get my head geared back into this issue. But for now assume it to be
> the highest one by auto default.
It makes sense to follow the forward direction of time. Thanks for the
clarification. BTW, changing it later shouldn't be a problem if we find
the need to do so.
8< (links to AI docs)
> RLD> I'll try to have another version to you after this weekend that
> RLD> handles the VIC numbering and allows the list of VICs to be
> RLD> displayed.
Hopefully by Monday.
> RLD> Until then, I hope you are feeling better and maybe you could
> RLD> clarify the numbering question above (which might be critical
> RLD> later on).
>
> Come to the conclusion that it is/was some flu that is going around and I
> hope to take extra steps this weekend to make sure I flush it out my
> system (sounds like I'm talking computers - :)
>
> Thanks for the thoughts on this bug.
>
> RLD> Have a nice day,
> RLD> -Robert
>
> I'll make effort to gear my head into more depth in answering your
> questions this weekend. I'll try to consider general perspectives or
> principles to hold to regarding the programming side of creating the VIC.
>
> And I want to say Thanks Robert for your interest and help.
It's my pleasure, Tim. Thank you for the direction, support and
motivation.
-Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message Nr. 10
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Rue (threeseas@earthlink.net)
To: rld1@cec.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction.
Robert, my rant in csam today has almost nothing to do with you.
What I mean is that with my wanting to post what you and I have
communicated and what you have done, to csam, I find myself at odds I
never would have expected.
A little background so that you might know, if your don't already.
My initial web pages went up Nov. 1st 1996 and contained the VIC related
pages marked as being last updated Nov. 3rd.
In the same month Carl Sassenrath communicated being at odds with Viscorp
and left to do what he then called Lava (what became Rebol). Later in that
month Arise or Second Wind announced itself.
Even Amiga Germany began it's web counter in that month and year (later
the start date was removed)
With this began much wrong being done against me.
That was November of 1996 and it's now comming up on three years later.
All we have had is alot of false starts, what amounts to nothing more than
distractions added to the promotion of negativity towards myself and the
VIC open project. There has been alot of angles pursued to do this
distraction and whatever that walks a path against the VIC.
This is not the first time I have gotten really angry in csam. There have
been nites that I've been so angry at the industry in general that I
couldn't sleep.
Anyway, I just wanted you to know that my rant today has nothing directly
to do with you or your efforts.
On 02-Oct-99 20:41:13 Robert L. Dickinson wrote:
RLD> On 1 Oct 1999, Timothy Rue wrote:
>> On 30-Sep-99 11:32:25 Robert L. Dickinson
>> wrote:
[snip]
RLD> Just to be clear about things, let's designate this subject "RE:
RLD> The unchanging and "REAL" Open direction." as fair game for
RLD> publication. That would make it easier to keep track of (or
RLD> maybe we can come up with a new subject line that denotes
RLD> freely publishable communication). In any case, feel free to
RLD> publish whatever parts you deem appropriate from the e-mails
RLD> I've sent under the above subject line.
This subject line is fine and for any other subject line, maybe starting
it with "[GPL]" would work?
[snip]
RLD> We can just play it by ear----if the in-code comments suffice,
RLD> let's just keep it at that. There is no point in trying to make
RLD> every reader of the code proficient in Assembly just so they can
RLD> understand what the code does.
>> *** somehow I get the feeling I should have learned assembly. :)
RLD> :) Human memory is like cache, whereas books are like disk
RLD> storage. If you don't use Assembly a lot, no point in storing
RLD> it in "cache"!
Bingo! The directories and files created in using the VIC(s) is more
like a cache (metaphorically speaking) and the user/developer created
applications (and what not) vicabularies are more like a book.
Where the cache is a work space that pulls from the bookshelf as needed
and maybe even makes a copy to manipulate and change in cache, as needed.
>> RLD> I am currently working on handling the VIC numbering. I need
>> a RLD> little clarification on if/how numbers are reused. If I
>> start RLD> four VICs (say Test#0, Test#1, Test#2, and Test#3) and
>> then quit RLD> Test#1, which number will be assigned to the next
>> Test VIC? #1 RLD> or #4? This could be critical since commands
>> that don't specify RLD> a number go to the highest numbered VIC of
>> that name.
>>
>> It would be #4, the next one. This is one example of having more
>> than one way to do something. Because here the approach is one of
>> forward moving
>> (as opposed to forward/backwards chaining), as is the way "Time" is
>> forward only moving. However, I do believe there is a way around
>> this if one wanted to force it to be #1. I need to look at this in
>> what I wrote and get my head geared back into this issue. But for
>> now assume it to be the highest one by auto default.
RLD> It makes sense to follow the forward direction of time. Thanks
RLD> for the clarification. BTW, changing it later shouldn't be a
RLD> problem if we find the need to do so.
note that in the removal of all vics of a name, the name numbers will again
start at 0 and count up. It's in the AI doc that a new vic name will be
automatically numbered one higher than the highest existing number vic of
that name.
Robert, there was some deep and wide thought put into the VIC. I took many
things and cross field (user professional field) probability into account.
The basics of the nine commands and their integration or teamwork benefit
with each other is one thing. Going into the details of how all this is
done is another. But most important is that *the details are really just*
*the logical conclusion of each command in light of the whole and the*
*user access and versatility objective.*
As you probably realize, there is really nothing in the way of parts that
is anything new. That it is the sum total or configuration that lends to
something the user hasn't had available to them before in the environment
of computers. Of which the Amiga is even still today perhaps the best
in sum total environment for applying the VIC (with it's standard third
primary user interface of the side door arexx "port" in applications.)
I cannot even claim the configuration is new, being that I believe all of
us ultimately use this configuration mentally. But most are so subjective
of our very heavy use of it that it's hard to see.
In the Movie Matrix, reflections where used alot, reflections of Neo
looking at himself. As I have done to see the VIC (there is valid reason
why I might much easier see this configuration than others - the problem
of subjectivity and effects PostTramatic Stress Disorder can have to
cause a higher level of objectivity). No patting myself on the back here,
I paid a hard price and still it takes effort to turn a curse into a
blessing. I know that the effects of PTSD in my case can make other
preceive me as someone more negative than I am, especially if they try to
get close, chum up, to me outside an established objective.
RLD> 8< (links to AI docs)
>> RLD> I'll try to have another version to you after this weekend
>> that RLD> handles the VIC numbering and allows the list of VICs to
>> be RLD> displayed.
RLD> Hopefully by Monday.
Thanks.
>> And I want to say Thanks Robert for your interest and help.
RLD> It's my pleasure, Tim. Thank you for the direction, support and
RLD> motivation.
:) maybe you can consider my rant today in csam as my not wanting to "feed
you to wolves" on one hand, while the other hand is fully supporting
establishing public date time stamped credit due you. I'm gonna do
something though, to post to my web page the thread so far and at least a
mention in csa.programmer (probably the source code message from you with
links to the binary. being csa.programmer has been rather slow there is
not logical excuse for complaint. :) And logic is what it's all about.)
Tim
PS. Thanks for focusing on "gears and bearings" rather than trying to
figure out a specific way or use of the VIC. The objective of versatility
without complexity (via. minimal command set for maximum versatility) is
where specific uses will inherently be covered/possible to figure out
later (by those who need to figure it out for what they need to do.)
---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
*~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue@mindspring.com >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------<
Search email/name @ http://www.dejanews.com for other puzzle parts/posts.