Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

James A. Donald  wrote:
>> You want an article appearing a peer reviewed journal
>> proving that the journals are not genuinely peer
>> reviewed?

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> No.  I want an article appearing in a peer reviewed journal indicating that
> the threat of global warming is significantly over-stated.

But the question in dispute is whether reviewed journals are actually 
peer reviewed on politically sensitive topics, rather than theologically 
reviewed for comformity with the holy doctrines of state sponsored religion.

Recent events prove that on certain topics, they do not carry science, 
but are mere megaphones for the holy ranting of the priesthood.

Science is not that which the state decrees to be science.  It is that 
which follows the rules of science, which unwritten rules correspond, 
more or less, to the written rules of the older and more prestigious 
journals.

If these journals are reluctant to apply these written rules on certain 
sensitive topics, then what appears on those sensitive topics will not 
be science, and hence what appears or fails to appear in such journals 
is not an indication of truth, but of religion.

In particular if the replacement hockey stick had been genuinely peer 
reviewed, then, in accordance with the unwritten rules of science, and 
the written rules of the older and more prestigious science journals, 
the data and calculations supporting the graph would have been made 
available.  Had the data and graphs been made available, people would 
have objected nine years ago that ten trees are not enough.

Since not genuinely peer reviewed, since not in conformity with Journal 
rules, therefore not genuine science, therefore mere theology.





--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
 > Your language gives you away.  There is nothing
 > "fraudulent" about attempting to reconstruct past
 > climate data.

It is entirely fraudulent to claim to have reconstructed
past climate data when ones results depend entirely
on a group of ten trees, and to refrain for nine years
from revealing how few trees were involved

It is a gross violation of the scientific method, and
rules of the journals involved, to present the results
of one's calculations and for nine years to refuse to
reveal how the calculations were done and what they were
calculated from.

Had he originally revealed how he calculated it, or what
he calculated it from, everyone in the world would have
asked:
"TEN trees!  Of which only one grew unusually
fast!  If I was to pick another ten trees, would
the result be similar?"

And of course, the result for the next few trees was
completely different - as Bricca well knew, but some how
neglected to mention for nine years.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
 > I am asking for reliable data, from peer-reviewed
 > articles.

You want an article appearing a peer reviewed journal
proving that the journals are not genuinely peer
reviewed?

You are, however, happy to rely on assertions by peer
reviewed journals that they are in fact peer reviewed?

That only now are we complaining that the blade of the
replacement hockey stick is based on a mere ten trees
proves that for the past nine years we did not know what
the blade of the replacement hockey stick was based on.
Obviously, people would have complained as soon as they
knew.

Therefore "Science" was violating its policy, and the
basic principles of science, that the calculations and
data supporting any result must be made available.

That the calculations and data supporting the
replacement hockey stick graph was not made available,
proves that there was and is no real peer review for
politically correct science.

That basis for the replacement hockey stick blade was
ludicrously weak, proves that there was and is no real
peer review, for peer review is supposed to catch such
things.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:59 AM, James A. Donald  wrote:
> 
James A. Donald  wrote:
>> Unsupported and unexplained politically correct pseudo
>> science appears all the time in "Science" and "Nature"

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> If you want me to believe it, you must cite a reputable source.

And the only reputable sources are Science and Nature?

The proof of what I say is that we only *now* know that Bricca's results 
depended on a mere ten trees, which unsurprisingly give results quite 
different from other trees that might equally well have been used.  If 
Bricca had nine years ago explained how he was reconstructing 
temperatures, the criticism that his twentieth century data sample was 
far too small would have been made nine years ago.

Since the criticism was not made nine years ago, he did not make the 
data from which he supposedly calculated past climate available nine 
years ago.  Therefore, until a few days ago, his results were 
unsupported and unexplained, for only now are we able to criticize the 
support and explanation.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

James A. Donald
>> This works in those fields where there is a lot of private funding, but
>> in fields that are politically sensitive, and wholly government funded,
>> we unsurprisingly get politics rather than science.

Kent Tenney wrote:
> Do you think oil and coal companies have political power?

Sure they do, hence the "carbon credits", which is a carbon tax in which 
some large part of the tax receipts is paid back to those who have in 
the past produced carbon.  Carbon credits is a tax on petrol and 
electricity to be paid by you and me, and received by various greeny 
groups, and by people who produced carbon in the past.



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> My wish is that we, individually and collectively, become connoisseurs
> of evidence. And especially evidence that *disconfirms* our own
> views.

Your view is that Global Warming "Science" is science

Well then, you should go and look at the evidence that disconfirms that 
view, the evidence as to whether Global Warming "Science" is subject to 
the normal restraints, rules, and requirements of science:

Here is the tale of his correspondence with the journal "Science"



Which concludes:  "This the 39th email in my correspondence with Science 
and I still don't have a complete record on either Esper et al 2002 or 
Osborn and Briffa 2006"

Here  
is some more correspondence on two other bodies of secret data and 
mystery calculations, where Steve unsuccessfully attempts to get 
journals to follow their own policies that scientists who publish must 
make the data and calculations supporting their results available.

There is plenty more where that came from - I just googled and skimmed 
the first few links.

We now know that the reason he did not get the complete record for 
Briffa is that the crucial part of the record, the data that supposedly 
shows the twentieth century is substantially warmer than the last 
thousand years, was one cherry picked tree of ten cherry picked trees, 
which one remarkable tree has been revealed to have been much used in a 
wide variety of papers.  The Esper data are still not available.

If Global Warming Scientists can publish bare assertions and get away 
with it, as that correspondence proves, then, by the standards you have 
set forth, by the rules of what science is and how it should be 
conducted, by the unwritten rules accepted by all scientists, and the 
written rules set forth as journal policies, Global Warming is not 
science, but Gaean theology, Global Warming Scientists are not 
scientists, but Priests of Gaea, and the fact that they can publish in 
science journals is state sponsored and state enforced religion.

> A) Science, which imposes harsh penalties for those who misstate the
> truth, and rewards those who discover new kinds of valid evidence, or

Yet again and again, Global Warmers have mistated the truth, most 
recently with the Yamal data.  Far from being penalized, they have been 
rewarded with wealth, power, fame, the defunding and dismissal of their 
enemies, and state enforcement of their theology.



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> There are *huge* disincentives for scientists to
> mislead themselves or others.  If there were real data contradicting global
> warming or evolution, people would instantly make their career by uncovering
> them.

This works in those fields where there is a lot of private funding, but 
in fields that are politically sensitive, and wholly government funded, 
we unsurprisingly get politics rather than science.

The government likes data that supports more government power, rewards 
those that tell it what it wants to hear, and punishes those that tell 
it what it does not want to hear.

Environmentalism is a state sponsored religion, for it is perfectly 
visible to anyone that wants to look that it is not subject to the same 
standards as normal science, the story of Briffa and the Yamal data 
being one example of a great many.

People have lost their jobs for reporting that glaciers are advancing in 
a particular area, even though they fully agreed that most glaciers are 
retreating.  This makes it hard to tell whether most glaciers are indeed 
retreating, though they probably are.

Environmentalism generally, and the Global Warming movement in 
particular, acts like a holy and sectarian religious movement, a 
religious movement backed by state power, not like science.






--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

James A. Donald  wrote:
 > > Genuine science is replicable.  And "replicable"
 > > does not mean two priests recite the same doctrine,
 > > it means they explain what they did in such a
 > > fashion that anyone else could do it also.
 > >
 > > If they refuse to explain, they are not scientists,
 > > but priests of Gaea.

Edward K. Ream wrote:
 > You can't be published in journals like Nature or
 > Science (or any other reputable scientific journal)
 > if you can't explain your work.

Unsupported and unexplained politically correct pseudo
science appears all the time in "Science" and "Nature"
For example:
<http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/01/ross-mckitrick-defects-in-key-climate-data-are-uncovered.aspx>
: : Despite the fact that these papers appeared
: : in top journals like Nature and Science, none
: : of the journal reviewers or editors ever
: : required Briffa to release his Yamal data.
: : Steve McIntyre’s repeated requests for them
: : to uphold their own data disclosure rules
: : were ignored.

This sort of thing (that PC science is in practice
exempted from data disclosure, and proudly proclaims
results on the basis of secret evidence) has been an
ongoing scientific scandal from the very beginning
of the global warming movement, and everyone aware
of this unscientific practice should have realized
that global warming science is not science, but
politics and religion, and that global warming
scientists are not scientists, but priests of Gaea.

Environmentalism, and several other isms, are state
sponsored religions, which because of state backing
have the privilege of publishing their holy texts in
scientific journals despite conspicuous and infamous
failure to comply with the standards and rules of
those journals.

Nine years later, Briffa's Yamal data for twentieth
century temperatures turned out to be that one tree of
ten selected trees grew unusually rapidly during the
twentieth century as compared to fossil trees of the
same type from the same area.  These ten trees were
selected by Bricca after a great many other trees in the
same area were measured, but the rest of the
measurements were not included.

The larger population of trees, taken as a whole, shows
much the same growth pattern as the fossil trees.

Take out one tree from those ten, Yamal06, and most of
the evidence for climate change vanishes.  Restore the
much larger set of tree measurements from which the ten
trees were selected, and all of the evidence for climate
change vanishes - the population as a whole is has the
same growth rates as the fossil tree.

Take out one tree from half a dozen graphs of global
warming in near a dozen papers, and suddenly they do not
show global warming any more.

Bricca has, at this time, not yet explained why those
ten trees, and not other trees in the same area measured
in the same survey.  And whatever his explanation, ten
trees is not enough.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

ne1uno wrote:
 > so what's your spin on the anti junk science view of
 > glaciers receding?

As Climate skeptic sarcastically observed:  "Somehow,
man’s burning of fossil fuels in the late 20th century
has caused glaciers to begin melting … starting in the
18th century."

glacier change is evidence of climate change, but not,
however, anthropogenic climate change.

  Glaciers have been retreating at a roughly steady rate
from 1850 to the present, but substantial increases in
CO2 only set in after 1950 or so

Glaciers are a lagging indicator of climate change,
because the current position of the glacier front
reflects snowfall centuries ago - glaciers are
retreating today because of seventeenth century global
warming.

Sea ice is as more responsive indicator, and since 1978,
there has been no trend in global sea ice, resulting in
ever escalating prophecies of sea ice melting real soon
now, and orgasms whenever the arctic melts more than
usual in the summer.

Glaciers have yet to retreat to the positions they were
in shortly after the Medieval Climatic optimum - telling
us that climate changes from time to time, but that it
is today not as warm as it has been, nor as cold as it
has been.

 > or continuing to depend on the internal combustion
 > engine? overreacting to climate change will hardly
 > make the top 100 major follies of the human race in
 > the last 20 years

As the communists intended to annihilate the
bourgeoisie, and the Nazis intended to exterminate the
Jews, the greenies intend to destroy industrial
civilization and reduce the earth's population to
"sustainable" levels.  If they actually believed it was
important to reduce CO2 production, they would support
building nukes and building solar thermal hot salt power
stations in the desert.  That they oppose solar thermal
hot salt power stations shows they want the lights out.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Kent Tenney wrote:
 > The science is beyond me, but I'll take the word of
 > 100's of climate scientists from many countries over
 > several decades over an economist who says what people
 > want to hear.

Genuine science is replicable.  And "replicable" does not
mean two priests recite the same doctrine, it means they
explain what they did in such a fashion that anyone else
could do it also.

If they refuse to explain, they are not scientists, but
priests of Gaea.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: OT: The Monty Hall Problem

[James A. Donald]

Jesse Aldridge wrote:
 > The connection to global warming is that there are
 > situations where cooperation breaks down.  Not because
 > people don't understand the situation, but because
 > circumstances compel them to take harmful (though
 > logically sound) actions.  For example,  China and
 > India don't want to cut emissions, because they want
 > to become "the new US".  And the US doesn't want to
 > cut emissions because we want to retain our status as
 > "#1".  I can easily see the industrialized world
 > continuing to make half-assed efforts that fail to
 > effectively address the underlying sources of
 > greenhouse gases.  Instead we will come up with
 > ad-hoc, expensive adaptations to a hotter planet.

Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global warming is a scam.
The direct, scientifically established effects of CO2
will warm the planet about 0.5 degrees centigrade by
2100, which is small compared to the random century to
century drift of climate.  The sky is falling effects
are the result of pseudo science, junk science.  For a
relatively easy to understand summary of the latest
fraud to be exposed, see

one of many such discoveries of junk science.

The short of the above story is that the evidence that the
twentieth century has been warmer than the past turns
out to be an average taken over TEN TREE growing in a
cold climate, whose growth therefore should reflect the
length of the warm season, ten trees selected from a
large population of trees by Briffa, ten trees that have
appeared again and again in a variety of supposedly
independent graphs of temperature that supposed confirm
each other.  Of these ten trees, ONE TREE, Yamal06, showed
remarkable and unusual growth as compared with fossil
trees.  However, it turns out these were ten *selected*
trees, selected without explanation from a much larger
set of measured trees.

When we average over whole set of similar nearby trees
their growth patterns are similar to those of fossil
trees from the same area.  And similarly, if do our own
selection, by averaging over nine of the ten trees that
Briffa selected, and exclude Yamal06 as an outlier,
again the growth patterns of the nine we select of the
ten Briffa selected are similar to that of the fossil
tree population.

There is no evidence that temperatures have risen during
the twentieth century.



Sea ice remains the same as it has been since 1978, when
satellites first gave us accurate observations of total
ice area


There is no persuasive theoretical reason to expect
unreasonably strong warming from CO2 emissions, and we
have not in fact actually observed such warming in
recent times.  In 2006 the arctic  had unusual melting,
but not as much as it melted in 1959, and every arctic
summer since 2006, the ice has been greater than the
last, despite regular loudly announced predictions of
the opposite.  In any given year, there is always an
unusual weather event somewhere, some time, but truly
global averages, such as world sea ice, world tropical
storm energy, etc, show no long term pattern, the show
some warm years and some cold years, some warm decades
and some cold decades - the tropical storm energy shows
pretty much the same non pattern as global sea ice.

Twentieth century temperatures are warmer than most of
the last two thousand years, cooler than the Medieval
climatic optimum, and cooler than most of the last ten
thousand years. The climate gets cooler, it gets warmer,
it gets cooler again.  In recent decades, when most of
the CO2 was released, there has not been much change.
Climate change is indeed real, in that the climate is
usually changing.  Bur climate change right now is not
real, or at least not real enough to be measurable, in
that it is not clear whether over the last few decades
the world has been getting cooler or warmer, or, as the
sea ice would suggest, staying quite unusually constant.
In another hundred years or so, it will be easier to say
whether things were getting cooler or warmer in our
time.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Associating file types on windows

[James A. Donald]

Stephen_B wrote:
> The chapter 1 documentation on installing leo says this regarding
> associating a file type in windows:
> 
> In the Action field type Open, then type one of the following lines:
> 
> \pythonw.exe   
> \launchLeo.py "%1"
> 
> Following that suggestion, I would need to have the following line
> minus the single quotes:
> 
> 'Open C:\Python26\pythonw.exe C:\Program Files\Leo-4-6-1-final
> \launchLeo.py "%1"'
> 
> That is 79 characters, but the "action" field in the new action dialog
> for a windows file type seems to limit you to 62 characters.
> 
> Is this just a windows limitation?

These instructions do not work from me, and from what I understand of 
Windows file associations they should never work for anyone, regardless 
of length limits.  The file associations you can create using 
filemanager/tools/folderoptions are not real file associations, but 
something different that are sort of like file associations except that 
they are completely confusing and do not quite work.

What I did was use regedit as follows.

I created the the key:
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/.leo with the default value leoPLSK0il

PLSK0il is just some random gibberish intended to guarantee uniqueness.

I then created the keys:

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/leoPLSK0il/DefaultIcon with the default value of 
the path to a suitable icon

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/leoPLSK0il/shell/open/command with the default 
value of c:\python26\pythonw.exe 
C:\Python26\Lib\site-packages\Leo-4-5-1-2-final\launchLeo.py "%1"

Which is how standard install programs do this stuff.

To my surprise it still did now work, whereupon I went back to folder 
options and cleared the stuff about file types, whereupon it then worked.








> 
> StephenB
> > 
> 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Leo and google chrome os

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> I am skeptical of the following:
> 
> QQQ
> And as we did for the Google Chrome browser, we are going back to the
> basics and completely redesigning the underlying security architecture
> of the OS so that users don't have to deal with viruses, malware and
> security updates. It should just work.
> QQQ

I have for a year or so been talking with Google people about the design 
of operating systems safe from viruses.  They are not saying anything 
about Chrome OS, or even if they are working on it but they appear 
familiar with the ideas
expressed in 

Which describes how to construct an operating system that looks familiar 
to the user, looks like windows or graphical linux, yet does not permit 
malware or viruses.




--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: *critical bug* - Leo 4.6b1 destroying data

[James A. Donald]

Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> The deal is that if you use @file nodes, you set yourself up for data
> loss. @file nodes are deprecated

Deprecation scarcely seems sufficient.

Software that exposes dangerously sharp edges usually has a "default 
mode" and an "advanced mode", and in default mode the sharp edges are 
unavailable.



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: @shadow and what should I put under version control

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> I have often said that at most one @thin tree should be responsible for each
> clone. 

doubtless, but there is nothing to mark or record a clone as which @thin 
tree is the right one for editing it, should one edit it outside of leo, 
or, as is quite likely, someone else edit it outside of leo.



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: @shadow and what should I put under version control

[James A. Donald]

thyrsus wrote:
 > * If you've got nodes cloned into multiple @thin or
 > @file locations, and their contents gets changed
 > outside of Leo, then the last version encountered
 > during the reading of the derived files wins.

This is a bug, in that it is guaranteed to surprise:
"What happened to my changes", cries the user, having
long forgotten that the node was cloned into some
obscure place for some reason no longer very relevant,
perhaps to document a bug long ago fixed and forgotten.

The version whose file has the most recent change date
should win.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: What to do about the windows installer?

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> Problems with the windows installer persist.
> 
> The 'make' button in dist.leo creates the installer's exe with a
> pretty gross hack: appending the .zip file to an already-existing .exe
> file.  I don't know whether this hack contributes to the problems
> users are having.  The hack uses the Python 2.5 version of the
> original .exe file, and the make button ensures that dist.leo was
> opened using Python 2.5.
> 
> I do know that these installer problems are tiresome, and they often
> create more trouble for users than the installer is worth.  I also
> know that I'm not qualified to fix installer problems.
> 
> Anyone have any idea what to do about this mess?

Python went with msi - which is what I would do.

Indeed, I was so disgusted by the leo installer for windows that I 
intended to do this, but somehow have not got around to doing it
partly because to make a solution compatible with leo's license,
I would have to learn  msilib.py - which I need to do anyway,
but have not yet done.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: How likely are sha-1 collisions?

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> On Jun 12, 8:27�am, Kent Tenney  wrote:
>> http://lwn.net/Articles/307281/
>>
>> the authors of Git seem to be willing to take the chance,
>> and willing to bet the Linux kernel on it.
> 
> They may be correct, but I want to know why.  Exactly.

They are correct because SHA1 was designed to make it very hard to 
construct two files that hash to the same value

Unless one is very cleverly contructing files to hash to the same value 
one will have to create about 2^80 files, before two of them are likely 
to hash to the same value - which is vastly more than one is likely to have.

If one is very cleverly constructing files to hash to the same value, 
things get complicated - but the numbers are still far vaster than one 
is  going to encounter in practice

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Same node cloned over 2 external files (qtNotes.txt)

[James A. Donald]

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Ville M. Vainio  wrote:
> > This makes me slightly
> > nervous, since I never commit that file (or anything apart from .py
> > files in the first place), and I'm afraid sometimes valuable code in
> > .py file could be thrown away because code in .txt file will take
> > precedence.

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> That's highly unlikely to happen, because qtNotes.txt will likely be in
> synch with all the .py files when you commit.  The only thing to avoid would
> be to make external changes in qtNotes.txt rather than the "primary" files.

You can do this sort of thing, because you are mindful of the internals, 
but it is behavior that is dangerous and difficult for naive users - or 
even highly sophisticated developers such as Ville M. Vaino.

Open source projects have a chronic and infamous tendency to drift away 
from user friendliness, and the out of dateness of the documentation, 
and the non obviousness what is safe and unsafe usage, represents such a 
drift.



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Adding new files into a leo file.

[James A. Donald]

James A. Donald  wrote:
>> When I want to bring a new file into a leo project I use the following
>> convoluted procedure:
>>
>> /Outline/Insert child
>>
>> Then I change the name of the child node to
>> @auto existingfile
>>
>> Then I select the child, then I
>> /File/readwrite/Read auto nodes
>>
>> Which for some reason only reads the node selected.

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> It reads all @auto nodes in the tree that is selected.

I do not know how to select the root, how to select the whole outline

>> Then I edit the name of the child node to
>> @thin existingfile
>>
>> Of course, if I forgetfully selected wrong node when I did read auto
>> nodes, then I lose the data in the existing file

> I don't understand this comment.  How do you lose data by *reading* a node.

I lose data by thinking that I have read the node, when in fact I have not.

>> Is there a better and safer way?

> Yes.  Just create an empty @auto node.  Save the .leo file, then reload it.

This does not seem a big improvement. Coming as I do from the windows 
world, I expected to be able to include files by just selecting them

 > The rule is that Leo does not write existing "insignificant" @auto nodes.

This somewhat protects one against inadvertently losing data by creating 
an insignificant @auto mode.  Since, however, my objective is to convert 
existing non leo files into @thin files 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Adding new files into a leo file.

[James A. Donald]

When I want to bring a new file into a leo project I use the following 
convoluted procedure:

/Outline/Insert child

Then I change the name of the child node to
@auto existingfile

Then I select the child, then I
/File/readwrite/Read auto nodes

Which for some reason only reads the node selected.

Then I edit the name of the child node to
@thin existingfile

Of course, if I forgetfully selected wrong node when I did read auto 
nodes, then I lose the data in the existing file

Is there a better and safer way?  It seems to me that dragging and 
dropping a file into leo file should accomplish the same result, but
it does not.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Adding a new file extension?

[James A. Donald]

ljth...@gmail.com wrote:
> How do I tell Leo that, say, a .hpp file is C++?  Leo is writing out
> the '#--unknown-language--' comment delimiters in my .hpp file and
> getting them right in the .cpp file.

@thin somefile.hpp
@language c++
@tabwidth -4
@others


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: @file in multi OS environment

[James A. Donald]

>> you should create your files so they can be
>> all referenced in the same way relative to the .leo file that refers to
>> them.

LordMax wrote:
> Thanks but isn't possible 'cause file reference are different from
> linux and windows.

"@file ./somesubdirectory/somefile"  should work on both systems, the 
"./" referring to the directory in which the leo file is found.

Analogously for "../"

I tested this only on windows, but it is unix style, so should work on unix.

You should always use relative file names in unix format, to allow 
portability.





--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: ileo... generic shell enhancer?

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> This is the age-old question.  How can we deal with multiple uses of data?

By using scripted transformations, such as *.leo -> *.html.rst.txt -> *.html



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: ileo... generic shell enhancer?

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> This is the age-old question.  How can we deal with multiple uses of data?
> For me, leoPy.leo is where I live.  Any place else will be out of sight, out
> of mind.  For others, other places will be more useful.  In this case, the
> list is primarily for me and other developers, not for newbies.

Comparing the web site with the mailing list, the web site is 
disturbingly inaccurate and out of date.  The windows install does not 
install leoPy.leo, nor is leoPy.leo directly accessible by googling.

Newbies, such as myself, find it difficult to access that which will 
enable them to cease to be newbies, but literate programming is supposed
to semi-automate such access.

Googling on the use of Leo with ReST, I get the impression that the 
number of people using Leo in this fashion - to make information 
accessible, is rather small.





--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: ileo... generic shell enhancer?

[James A. Donald]

Kent Tenney  wrote:
>> I think it would be great if, instead of being many levels deep
>> in a very large Leo file, a list of 'cool plugins' was a wiki page
>> which could be shared with anyone, instantly accessed from
>> any browser.
>>
>> Especially for those evaluating Leo.

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> For me, leoPy.leo is where I live.  Any place else will be out of sight, out
> of mind.  For others, other places will be more useful.  In this case, the
> list is primarily for me and other developers, not for newbies.

Presumably, a script should automatically generate *.html from *.leo via 
ReStructuredText.  Indeed, was that not one of the core ideas of 
literate programming?


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Thoughts on Leo coding style

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> The trick is to ignore almost everything, and focus on:
> 
> a) The overall design of the program and
> b) the small parts of code that you want to change.

Which is of course what an outline editor for literate programming is 
for.  You have created a tool to implement this trick.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Should government provide funding for open source software?

[James A. Donald]

Jesse Aldridge wrote:
 > That would be a step up from the current situation,
 > where developers gravitate toward projects that have
 > the greatest chance of being profitable (to a
 > corporation, rather than society).

Been tried, is still being tried.  Does not work.  Open
source funded through government patronage is not
useful, science funded through government patronage is
not true.

If government funds some particular open source because
some government activity is actually using it, and needs
a particular feature or particular bug fix, rather than
funding it as patronage, that works fine.  Similarly,
government can develop an atom bomb just fine. Patronage
by committee and consensus is the problem, rather than
government itself.  The Gates foundation does not do
much better than the equivalent government entities.

If you want grants, learn to be an expert in
grantsmanship, which is, unfortunately, a full time
activity entirely incompatible with knowing what leo
should be.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Should government provide funding for open source software?

[James A. Donald]

Matt Wilkie wrote:
 > government should *use* open source software, which
 > will inevitably evolve into contributing to it because
 > sooner or later you have to fix it yourself. []
 >
 > I am less confident in the idea they should fund it,
 > at least not directly. Picking who is deserving of
 > patronage and who is not will turn into a big game, on
 > both side of the line,

Government is already patronage funding open source
through Academia:  Hands up anyone who uses any open
source generated in Academia.

Patronage funding works when the patron is a prince or
an aristocrat, who has good taste and does not give a
damn about what other people think, because he
confidently believes himself superior.  Patronage
funding by a bureaucracy, consensus, or committee fails
every time.  Observe: it is already in practice, and
already failing.  The Prince will sometimes be right.
The committee will *never* be right, because gaming the
system is fundamentally incompatible with funding
genuinely good projects.  Similarly, if the prince
worries too much about other people's opinions, it does
not work either - observe the Bill Gates foundation for
example.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Should government provide funding for open source software?

[James A. Donald]

Jesse Aldridge wrote:
> Yeah, I saw that.  I'm considering sending an e-mail to one of their
> "primary points of contact" (Ephraim Glinert -- eglin...@nsf.gov).
> 
> I hesitate though, because I have very little in the way of
> qualifications.  FYI, I am a 24 year old college dropout living off of
> savings (I have enough to last me for a couple of years).  Pretty much
> all I can provide is code from personal projects.
> 
> I wonder if it might be better if *you* applied and then "hired" me or
> something like that.  I really have no idea how this sort of thing
> works.  If you'd rather not, then I'll just go ahead and e-mail him
> myself and hope for the best.
> 
> The categories are pretty vague, but I think "Information and
> Intelligent Systems (IIS)" (http://nsf.gov/pubs/2008/nsf08575/
> nsf08575.htm) seems to be the most appropriate for Leo.
> 
> I get the impression they're pretty tilted pretty heavily toward
> academia -- they list "Small Projects" as "up to $500,000 total budget
> with durations up to three years" -- ever considered hiring a small
> army to work on Leo? :)

Academic open source is not open source.  Observe that no one uses their 
output for anything actually useful.  Rather it is government take over 
bid.  Observe what government funding has done to science, replacing 
replicability by "consensus".

Therefore, since you are doing real open source, your prospects of 
getting government funding are similar to those of Climate Audit getting 
government funding.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Install bugs on XP

[James A. Donald]

Edward K. Ream wrote:
> As
> mentioned in the faq, the installer is not needed.
>
> Here is my "edit" association for .leo files:
>
> c:\python25\python.exe -i c:\leo.repo\trunk\launchLeo.py --gui=qt %1 %2
>
> That is, you want to execute python on launchLeo.py in the top-level leo
> folder.  I use the -i option so that the console window will stay open after
> closing Leo.  Note that the -i options does not exist if you use
> pythonw.exe.

I followed the instructions given in the FAQ, but they did not work
for me.

So instead I used the registry editor.

I created a key
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/.leo
With the default value: leoliterate

I then created a key
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/leoliterate with the default value: leo literate
outline
And subkeys
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/leoliterate/DefaultIcon with the default value: C:
\Python26\Lib\site-packages\Leo-4-5-1-2-final\leo\Icons\LeoDoc.ico
That being where my LeoDoc.ico was to be found
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/leoliterate/shell/open/command with the default
value:
c:\python26\pythonw.exe C:\Python26\Lib\site-packages\Leo-4-5-1-2-final
\launchLeo.py "%1"

That being where my pythonw.exe and launchLeo.py files were to be
found.

This still did not work, so I brought up control panel / folder
options /file types

Which now gave me the option of "restoring" the file association to
leo literate outline.  I clicked on restore, and now the file
associations work.

I am pretty sure that a correctly configured registry should look
something like my registry, and that fiddling with control panel /
folder options /file types is not going to accomplish that result.

But this still left me without an icon to launch the program

So I created the folder
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\leo
and in it I created a shortcut, with the target
c:\python26\pythonw.exe C:\Python26\Lib\site-packages\Leo-4-5-1-2-final
\launchLeo.py
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Install bugs on XP

[James A. Donald]

Files are installed and compiled, and then I get
*** run_installscript: internal error 0x ***

Which leaves me uncertain as to what aspects of install have been left
unfinished.

I don't get any program launch icons, and it took a fair bit of
exploring to find out where it had been installed.  The program
appears to run.   I created a file test.leo containing a single string
"test", and found that the leo file time had no association.

I also found that when I launch leo, a command line window appears and
hangs around.  This should not happen - there is a way to tell python
under windows to hide or end the command line window when it launches
a program that has a gui.

I attempted to manually create an association, but found that windows
does not much like the idea of associating a file type with something
not directly executable - presumably I have to associate a command
line that tells windows to do something like
python launchleo.pyo 
but it is not obvious how to do this.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---