Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in astgtciv's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Saturday, January 30th, 2010
8:16 pm	Maryland DMV/MVA: Requesting the rules Today I was at the DMV (called MVA here in Maryland) to get a driver's license.   It was our second trip.   I presented six different proofs-of-address, but they only accepted one and required two, so no license.   They claimed my utility bill wasn't a utility bill.   (It didn't show "activity", just my initial deposit.)   They didn't accept another letter from the utility company (not bill or anything else).   The copy of my rental contract that I had with me had a typo, and they said they could only cared about the first page of the rental contract, so it being correct in the rest of the contract wouldn't matter.   They wouldn't accept an addendum to the contract, because it lists the purpose as name change and is just an addendum, anyway.   I presented two pieces of mail from two different federal government agencies (from two very different return addresses).   I was told that the two proofs could not be from the same bullet point on their list.   (The text on the actual list is, "may not be from the same business, company or agency".)   I have sent an e-mail to the Maryland DMV/MVA customer service address requesting a copy of the actual rules, given that the listed rules are obviously incomplete. Current Music: None (3 Comments |Comment on this)
Sunday, January 3rd, 2010
12:19 pm	Being Invisible Update: Not enough credit history to see credit history       So, long ago I wrote of being invisible, with respect to credit reports.   Since then, I've gotten a credit card (which is a story unto itself, told briefly below), so I have a credit history.   On my TODO list for a while has been checking my credit history at one of the three credit report aggregators.   I know I've checked at least one (and probably all three) before, but can't remember which and when.   So, I started with the first.   It said it couldn't identify me.   I tried the second.   It just said error, try again later.   The third was most specific, saying there wasn't enough in my credit history for it to identify me and to call in.   So, I did so.   After pulling up my account, the first question I was asked was for a previous address.   I confirmed that they list the address that I've lived in since 1986 as my current address.   The representative implied that there wasn't actually any other address listed.   (Which makes the question weird.)   He then says there isn't even enough information there to identify me over the phone, so I should fax them ID + a utility bill.   I ask about e-mailing, but he says no [1].   (Fax? Who uses obsolete faxes?)   Now, I have never had a utility bill in my name, at any address.   I'm currently awaiting their response to a faxed copy of my ID.       Credit card: after much procrastination, I finally applied for a credit card (late spring/early summer of 2009).   I applied through my bank, and got a call saying they couldn't give me a card, because I had no credit history.   I pointed out that I had a account with the bank with a great deal of money in it, but was told that it was a VISA rule.   Oh, well.   Unexpectedly, I later got a notification that the person I talked with had made a special request to someone higher up and gotten an exception. [1] So, before faxing sensitive information to a phone number, I did a quick search on it.   One of the first hits I got was this discussion, which has both the fax number and an e-mail address to send a scanned image to.   So the representative was wrong on that. Edit:Minor formatting Current Mood: Amused/Annoyed Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Saturday, January 2nd, 2010
11:21 am	Continued: Internet: Good news/Bad news       So, I decided to make another try and tried Comcast's live chat.   I was told to go into the local Comcast office, which was closed at the time (too late at night) and the next day (yesterday, due to the holiday).   Problematically, I was told I'd need authorization from the previous account holder, details to be determined by the local office.   I went in this morning and found a rather long line.   The woman I talked with understood the issue very quickly, but took a long time to do whatever setup they required.   She never asked for proof of address or who the previous account/connection holder was.   (However, part of that may have been because my account was already in the system, listed as "Pending".)   She said I'd still have to call in and give them my modem serial number, otherwise it would stop working.   After calling and the message saying that the wait time would be ~30 minutes, I tried the live chat again.   It took a while (and I'm very suspicious that they have a combination of AI and human doing the responses), but it appears to have worked.       Note one: I wonder about their architecture, such that I could plug the cable modem in and have it immediately work, but I have to tell them the serial number (and MAC address) manually.   I can guess that they have it set to allow an unrecognized modem to work on a valid port for a limited duration for ease of setup.   But why can they not pull the information they need from it as plugged in?   Is it just confirmation?   And do they actually need the serial number if it is my equipment, or just the MAC address?       Note two: I got the impression that the live chat is done with each human doing many chats at once, with some type of chatbot for support.   However, it could just be done with aliases/triggers, like are common in text-based MUDs. Current Mood: Accomplished Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Thursday, December 31st, 2009
6:32 pm	Internet: Good news/Bad news       I've just moved, and so I'm dealing with fun things like utilities.   Good news: I currently have real internet access (high-speed cable through Comcast).   Bad news: they want to turn it off and then wait a few days to send somebody to turn it back on.       Unfortunately, I made the mistake of calling before I'd tested things fully, and so I got an appointment for them sending somebody out to turn on things on.   I tried asking the representative if they could do it remotely, but she said no.   Except, then I found that it was actually still turned on!   There was a problem with the DNS, but I got OpenDNS set up (logging into a server I knew the IP of).   So I call them back to cancel the appointment.   The new representative (after first being sent to billing) said they still had to send somebody out to make sure everything was working.   When I told her that was unnecessary, she insisted that they still had to send somebody out, because my current service was going to be turned off today or tomorrow (end of the month; makes sense).   Easy enough to deal with: cancel the turning off the service and just transfer it to my name (which I actually had originally asked).   She said no, basically saying the turn-off couldn't be cancelled.   I also asked about setting up my account over the telephone, and was told the representative would handle the paperwork when he came.   Except, that means I have to be here; they gave me 3 hour windows for the appointment, so unless the person is early, it will mess up my workday.   I don't know if that will be a problem or not yet.       So, currently I'm debating calling again.   I know that such places often keep notes on callers (mine says I already have an appointment for internet installation; the automated system told me as soon as I called, and the (2nd) representative told me again), but I really don't believe them when they say they have to send somebody out.   And I expect them to charge a full activation fee, for wasting their time and mine. Edit:   Fixed timestamp. Current Mood: annoyed Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Saturday, December 12th, 2009
6:18 pm	School Update While I don't yet have the paper in hand (they mail it), I did walk across the stage.   So, I guess I'm officially Dr. Astgtciv now. Current Mood: Accomplished! Current Music: None (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Friday, December 4th, 2009
7:24 am	Quote of the Day: Defender of Medicare The Senate bill would impose "draconian cuts" on Medicare, says Senator John McCain, who proposed much deeper cuts just last year as part of his presidential campaign. — Paul Krugman Current Mood: Normal Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Friday, November 20th, 2009
8:42 pm	Bush v Gore, Jay Bookman's blog, 2000 vs 2008 After the Supreme Court ruled in "Bush v. Gore", the official count of ballots in Florida ended.   But the actual counting didn't.   The Associated Press and other news organizations sponsored a more complete recount.   The results showed that Gore received more votes.   Seriously.   Now, did you know that?   Did you know and forget?   Did you never hear it in the first place? ( Read more... ) Current Mood: Normal Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Sunday, November 8th, 2009
8:23 am	Research vs classes at NCSU and Georgia Tech *** Draft: feedback welcomed *** Open letter to Georgia Tech       I recently spent some time talking with a Computer Science professor at NC State University.   We contrasted the requirements for graduate students in her department with the requirements here at Georgia Tech's ECE department.   Three things stood out strongly to me.   First, they are only required to take 6 classes (18 hours).   By contrast, Georgia Tech's ECE department requires 43 hours.   Second, they do not have any type of comprehensive examine equivalent to our prelim exam.   The professor told me they used to, but the faculty voted against it, arguing that their graduate assistants were taking too much time studying for it; the faculty wanted them to use that time researching.   Third, the professor promised a (high school student) that she could get him his PhD in just 1 year, under the condition that he did research and wrote papers while he was an undergraduate.   I don't know if NCSU policy would normally forbid such a short PhD, but there are no time periods listed on their requirements.   Contrast that with a clearly specified 2 year minimum here.       For verification, I checked for the requirements on NCSU's website.   It says: Ph.D. students normally complete 72 semester hours of post-baccalaureate course work. They must also complete at least two courses from each of the two core areas with at least a 3.5 GPA and two 700-level CSC courses, individualized in-depth written and oral preliminary examinations, and a public defense of their dissertation describing substantial, original, and independent scholarly work. -- Source       Indeed, it only lists 6 courses required.   The 72 semester hour requirement includes research hours (see the requirements for a MS degree for confirmation of that).   Notice that both the written and oral prelim exams are "individualized in-depth": i.e. individualized to be about the student's research topic and research done so far.   Now, 72 semester hours would require 4 semesters, assuming a max of 21 hours per semester. However, three semesters is only 9 hours short, so maybe it would be possible to graduate in a single year given a full-credit summer and carrying over enough graduate credit from an undergraduate.       So, Georgia Tech, I would like to say thank you for your sanity on this issue.   I'm sorry that NCSU has apparently fallen into the mistaken belief that research alone is an academic education.   It is not.   As a grad student here, I've taken 52 hours of classes.   With my graduation imminent, I wish that I'd taken more.   I learned a great deal during my research; I also learned a great deal while working as a teaching assistant.   But neither is a replacement for proper classes, with the forced breadth of topic.   A very important technique used in my PhD thesis came from a non-ECE class, taken to fulfill the PhD's minor requirement.   There is no minor requirement listed for CmpSci at NCSU.       Georgia Tech is a major research institute.   But, I'm glad that it has not allowed its research focus to override its primary focus: education. Current Mood: Normal Current Music: None (6 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, November 2nd, 2009
9:56 pm	Legal jargon When reading a legal contract, which is worse: 1. Words that you don't know what they mean? 2. Words that you know, but which are not used in way that you recognize? On the other hand, now if "purtenance" comes up in Balderdash, I'll be prepared. Current Mood: amused Current Music: None (3 Comments |Comment on this)
Tuesday, August 18th, 2009
8:35 pm	Science in the Media: CR diets and long life       As an example of why I don't trust the media on science reporting, here is an article that is much better than usual, but still fails:  Tests Begin on Drugs That May Slow Aging. It may be the ultimate free lunch — how to reap all the advantages of a calorically restricted diet *, including freedom from disease and an extended healthy life span, without eating one fewer calorie. Just take a drug that tricks the body into thinking it's on such a diet.       (A calorie restricted diet means one where the caloric intake is significantly below the normal (healthy) baseline. Think 1600 calories instead of 2000.)       From this opening paragraph, I expected it to be a bad article.   Why?   Because there are no proven advantages of a calorically restricted diet in humans!   This issue is raised in the article, starting at the end of the 15th paragraph (so people who stop reading before then will miss it entirely).   And even then, I'm not happy with how it is presented, although my problem is with the feel more than the specifics.   The issue of calorie restriction in humans is very much one where we don't know the answer, because there is no good evidence in humans (either direction, that I'm aware of), and the best evidence in primates is both bad and ambiguous.   The article notes that the answer is unknown, but then presents the debate on calorie restriction in general, which is in terms of animal research, with a lot of discussion of compounds and genes.   As is common, the pro-side in this case has strong financial reasons to believe that calorie restriction (and drugs that mimic it) works in humans.   Financial conflicts of the skeptic side are not as apparent from the article.       Another complaint:  the article mentions rapamycin, which has recently caught attention for providing a dramatic increase in lifespan in mice, even when it was given late in life.   Quite impressive.   However, the article fails to mention that rapamycin is already a prescription drug for humans; specifically, it is an immunosuppressant used to prevent rejection of transplanted organs.   Oops.   Taking an immunosuppressant long term doesn't sound like a good idea.       Oh, so I called this a much better than usual example.   So what is a worse than usual example?   "In the week when the NHS is under attack from all sides in the US, The Guardian gave free advertising to Nuffield, for their unpublished published 'report', which nobody even read, in exchange for 370 words of content." Current Mood: Normal Current Music: Misc (Comment on this)
Thursday, July 16th, 2009
9:18 pm	Why Java is Sometimes Evil       Virtually all of my programming for research is done in Java.   With a good programming environment (I use Eclipse), it is easy to program, with a huge standard library.   Cryptography, networking, database stuff, and much more is all standard.       For my own projects, I tend to use C.   One reason is habit, one reason is the types of things I work on don't always work (well) in Java (for example, coding doing bit manipulation and requiring unsigned integers), and one reason is to avoid evil bugs like the following. public static void testJava(int num, int max) {     Random rand = new Random(); // Random number generator     List<Integer> list1 = new ArrayList<Integer>(num);     Integer last = rand.nextInt(); // Random initial value     /* Fill the array with random Integers */     for (int j = 0; j < num; j++) list1.add(rand.nextInt(max));     /* Walk through the list, comparing each element to the last */     for (Integer i : list1) {         if (last != i && last.equals(i)) System.out.println("Missed!");         last = i;     } }       When called with a modest value for "num" (~50,000 is sufficient) and "max" >= 129, this will produce a few "Missed!" messages.   With "max" <= 128, it never produces any, even with "num" set much larger.   If the behavior was consistent, it would either produce "num" such messages (which a simple change to the program will indeed do) or no messages (if "==" and ".equals" acted the same).   The "Missed!" messages are produced because the JVM is caching the creation of Integers, with a cache of size 128.   In general, this is a good thing, because it improves performance.   However, as the above example shows, it also introduces very erratic behavior in the case of bugs.   (The bug is that two Integers should never be compared using "==".)   In particular, the problem completely disappears if the number of unique Integers generated doesn't exceed the cache size (128), so the problem cannot be replicated with small test cases. Current Mood: Normal Current Music: Chess (Comment on this)
Sunday, June 28th, 2009
10:53 pm	Management Scenario + Statistics       Consider this scenario: you are a middle manager at a large corporation.   You are in charge of a major report that has been years in the making.   The report can suggest one of two options: Big Changes or Status Quo.   It is generally expected that the verdict will be Big Changes, because other corporations (with larger budgets) have done similar projects and gotten that result.   (And, indeed, your group used their reports as a source of data and references for your project.)   As can be expected, the report was controversial before it was even started, because big changes always are. ( Read much more plus graphs ) Edit:  Oh, And it gets worse.   It turns out the comment plagerized heavily. Edit2: Fixed hyperlink. Current Mood: Normal Current Music: Chess + Talking (Comment on this)
Friday, June 26th, 2009
5:24 pm	Quote of the Day: Demand Equal Representation for.... "We should, in particular, have several Congressional committees, plus a Cabinet-level department, representing Americans who play World of Warcraft, who outnumber American farmers."       — Paul Krugman Current Mood: amused Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Sunday, May 31st, 2009
10:33 pm	Being invisible part 2... and 3.       Long ago I wrote about not having any credit history.   Well, I still don't.       Wednesday, I had an interview/visit in Maryland.   Due to the location, renting a car was pretty much a requirement.   I knew that car rental places preferred credit cards to debit cards, but I'd read that most places took debit cards now.   However, it turns out to be more complicated....       So, I ended up first making a reservation with Hertz.   Because I specifically read their policy on debit cards, which said it depends on the site, I did the reservation by phone.   The rep I talked with had to go ask for help when I said I had no credit history.   And all she could tell me was that they *could not* say whether I would be accepted until I was there, in person.   She suggested that I go to a local Hertz place and ask them to do the background check (except, doing said check would lower my credit score if I had one, so that I might pass the test the first time, then fail it in Maryland).   She literally told me that they take the debit card and stick it in a machine, and the machine says yes or no.   Oh, and that the machine is powered by Experian.   (I also talked with a rep from the Atlanta airport Hertz rental place; she was less helpful.)       So, with a "maybe" which I expected was a "no", I spent some time reading other car rental places' policies.   I sent questions to Budget (which never answered) and Enterprise (which didn't answer until late Thursday afternoon).   Fortunately, I came across one that had a single policy (Budget and Enterprise say policy varies by site) which didn't require a credit check.   Congratulations to Alamo for getting my business.   (I'm less happy with them for it ending up costing me more than expected.   Yes, I'm getting reimbursed so it isn't actually costing me, but it still annoys me on principle.)       I've been putting off getting a credit card for a while.   So, I ended up finally submitting an application for a Visa branded card through my bank on Monday.   Today, I got a call from them saying that my application was rejected, because Visa apparently has a strict 'no credit history, no card' policy.   (Or, at least that is the policy with respect Visa's deal with my bank.)   I specifically asked about my rather significant savings at the bank, and was told that it didn't matter, because all Visa cared about was the credit score.   (The rep suggested having a parent co-sign for the card.)       Follow-up:  I got an e-mail from the rep handling my credit card application saying that he had appealed to upper management (which upper management was not specified), and they had accepted due to my and my parent's relationship with the bank.   So credit scores don't entirely rule the world, yet.       (However, other databases cause trouble too.) Current Mood: Normal Current Music: None (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Saturday, May 16th, 2009
11:36 pm	"Star Trek" movie -- better writers needed       I went and saw the Star Trek film Tuesday afternoon.   I thought it was fairly good, but I was distracted by a lot of the stupid Hollywood stuff.   It wasn't until later that I put a more proper name on it:  the movie was badly written.   (I'm guessing the director deserves some blame too.) ( Read more, including spoilers ) Current Mood: Normal Current Music: None (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Friday, April 24th, 2009
10:46 pm	Anti-Global Warming Experts Knew Global Warming was Scientifically Undeniable       For the global warming deniers, it has now been revealed that the experts working for an anti-global warming group (funded by fossil fuel industries) reported that, "The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied," back in 1995.   The tobacco industry knew its product caused cancer, but publicly denied it.   The fossil fuel producing/using industries knew CO2 caused global warming, but publicly denied it. Current Mood: Normal Current Music: Godspell (Comment on this)
Thursday, April 9th, 2009
6:22 pm	2nd Followup to: Economic/business question       Back during the summer, I posted an economic/business scenario question about a company trying to stir up competition among its distributors.   In particular, the company was giving the least favorable conditions to its biggest distributor and more favorable conditions to smaller distributors.   I later revealed the company to be the music industry and the biggest distributor to be Apple.       Well, the music industry succeeded.   Example: "The major record labels... were able to get what they wanted by letting Apple competitors sell music without digital rights management....   The good news from this is that since the music industry used DRM-free music as a weapon against Apple, now all of the major on-line music distributors (Apple, Amazon, and Walmart are listed as the biggest three) sell DRM free music.   The bad news is that all three also use discriminatory pricing, which Apple had fought hard against. Current Mood: Normal Current Music: None (Comment on this)
Wednesday, February 11th, 2009
8:42 pm	Followup to: Security Policy: TVUUC Shooting       Some time back, I wrote about the shooting at TVUUC (protected entry).   In that entry, I noted that I wanted to read the killer's manifesto.   I now have.   It is available from the Knoxville News Sentinel.       I'm not in a mood for a long description/analysis, so instead I'll just refer you all to an analysis of the document and shooter.   To summarize:  the shooter is a right-wing domestic terrorist. Current Mood: Normal Current Music: Mixed Musicals (Comment on this)
Tuesday, January 20th, 2009
5:49 pm	Less abstract update to "Abstract Research Update"       Some time back, I wrote about a research paper that I was writing to submit to a conference.   Short version:  we decided late whether to submit a paper at all, and then we waited longer before deciding what research we would write the paper on.   Fortunately, the deadline for the paper was extended (by six days), or I would have been *way* less happy with the paper that we submitted.   We've now gotten the reviews.       The paper was rejected, but it wasn't a strong rejection.   There were four reviews; two scored the paper as weakly reject, one scored it as weakly accept, and one scored it as probable accept.   (I don't have a description of the full rating scale, sorry.)   I'd been very worried about prior art:  none of the reviewers cited any.   None of the reviewers found any problems with the system (but I don't know if any of them really tried).   As I expected, there were complaints that the problem being address was too simple or artificial.   There were also complaints that we had not really done much in the way of proving security, but just did hand waving.   Both are valid points, which we were already aware of.   (We knew it wasn't a strong paper.)       Overall, I'm happy with it.   While being published would certainly be better, the reviews are good enough for me to improve the work as part of my thesis.   (Additionally, I'm feeling good about research at the moment, since I had a very productive research day today.) Current Mood: Normal Current Music: Jekyll and Hyde (Comment on this)
Friday, January 16th, 2009
5:49 pm	New Old Phone Saga; Update 1       Note: this entry was written in multiple pieces at different times; the paragraphs are in the order that they were written.       Back near the beginning of December, radiationme found a cellphone.   However, the phone didn't have a SIM card, and refused to do anything.   After talking with him during the winter break, I asked him to mail it to me, since I have a GSM phone with SIM card.   The phone (a Samsung Sync SGH-A707) accepted my SIM card, but had no phonebook entries (except for those on my SIM card), no call or SMS history, or anything else I could use to identify the original owner.   It did, however, have a lot of pictures and music files.   (Fun psychology game:  guess about the owner of the phone based on the pictures in it.)   The phone has significant scratching, including major scratches on the camera lens (it was found on/along the road, so not too surprising).       I'm not a fan of "finders keepers", but playing with this phone for less than a minute told me that I really wanted to replace my current phone asap—I've researched new phones several times in the past ~year, but was put off by the mediocre ratings given to essentially all mid and low level phones (my current phone doesn't rate significantly lower than the rest of the pack).   But, before doing anything else with the phone, I figured I should get a charger for it.   Phone chargers and data cables are usually unreasonably expensive, but I found a website with very low priced knock-off cables/chargers, so I ordered a set (under $10 including shipping!).   I feel guilty about keeping the phone (lots of pictures and music == somebody who liked and used this phone a lot), but don't have any way to locate the owner, unless somebody knows a mixed-race couple with a young boy in Lafayette, IN (my best guess of the owner) who lost an SGH-A707 around the beginning of December.   Additionally, why would the SIM card be missing?   To me, that implies that the phone was not in use when it was lost/dropped.   (Note, Jan. 16th: re-checking radiationme's e-mail, it says the battery and battery cover were separated from the phone.)       So, along with a data cable, in order to talk with the phone, one needs software.   I've now played around with two different programs:  Samsung's official software, and BitPim (open source; doesn't officially support this phone, but I found instructions for getting around that).   I've now made a back-up of the entire contents of the phone (including ring-tones, system images, games, and system files that Samsung's software won't download ;-) ).   Oh, and the data cable charges the phone, even though it doesn't say that it does (and the official data cable comes in non-charging (expensive) and charging (extra-expensive) varieties).   I've now switched my SIM card to the new phone, deleted the images and music (they are backed up on my computer), and I'll be using it as my phone.       *Sigh*   In looking at products, I try to go for better quality, even when the improvement in quality isn't enough to justify the cost.   But, like most people I'm guessing, cost more often wins.   The wall-plug charger of the set I got for the phone (data-cable, wall charger, and car charger) isn't working.   Looking at the head, it looks like the pins got pushed back so they can't make contact (but that is just a guess).   It might have worked the first time; I'm not sure.   Anyway, since the data-cable charges it, it isn't a problem for now.   (The head of the car charger looks fine.   The three components are actually three different brands.)   Amusingly, the box of the wall charger lists a 5 year warranty.   Going to its website (Cellet), I found that the warranty is only valid if bought from an authorized distributor.   And, anyway, considering that I got the three items for a fraction of the retail cost of just the charger, I doubt they'll honor the warranty.   (The site I got the items from lists the cost of just the wall charger as less than one tenth of its retail price.)   (I may hack together a new wall charger by combining the car charger and wall charger.)       *Sigh*   So, now, after using the phone full-time for most of the week, I've now found that it does have some identifiable data from the previous owner.   It has a 'most recent' list of numbers that SMS messages were sent to (no names, since they aren't in the phone's address book).   I sent an SMS to the top two numbers this morning and got a reply from one, who self-identified as the owner of the phone.   I'm currently waiting for an e-mail back from them. Edited (Jan 22, 2009): Update 1.   So, I never got another response from the person.   Not by e-mail and not by SMS.   I sent them another text Monday morning.   No response. Current Mood: normal Current Music: Tick, Tick,...Boom! (Comment on this)