Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Gabriel Dos Reis a écrit : On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Michel Lavaud wrote: | | > | > # [...] so they translate their tolerance to errors in experimental | > | > # results toward tolerance to possible errors in commercial software | > | > | > | Ah, OK. You meant gratuitous interpretation, I suppos

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Michel Lavaud wrote: | Maybe it would be clearer to say "so they extend their tolerance" ? Sorry for | my poor English :-( Tout le monde devrait parler français, n'est-ce pas ? ;-) -- Gaby___ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-deve

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Michel Lavaud wrote: | | > | > # [...] so they translate their tolerance to errors in experimental | > | > # results toward tolerance to possible errors in commercial software | > | > | > | Ah, OK. You meant gratuitous interpretation, I suppose ? | > | > Do you have factu

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

| > # [...] so they translate their tolerance to errors in experimental | > # results toward tolerance to possible errors in commercial software | > | Ah, OK. You meant gratuitous interpretation, I suppose ? Do you have factual data? Yes, cf the chapter on error bars, in any course of

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Maybe it would be clearer to say "so they extend their tolerance" ? Sorry for my poor English :-( # [...] so they translate their tolerance to errors in experimental # results toward tolerance to possible errors in commercial software Ah, OK. You meant gratuitous interpretation, I suppose

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Michel Lavaud wrote: | Gabriel Dos Reis a écrit : | > Michel Lavaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | > [...] | > | > | > | This trend is especially common among experimental scientists, for two | > | > | reasons | > | > | : first, they have lot of money so they can buy ve

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Gabriel Dos Reis a écrit : Michel Lavaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | > | This trend is especially common among experimental scientists, for two reasons | > | : first, they have lot of money so they can buy very expensive software, and | > | second, there is an inherent uncertainty in

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Michel Lavaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | > | This trend is especially common among experimental scientists, for two reasons | > | : first, they have lot of money so they can buy very expensive software, and | > | second, there is an inherent uncertainty in experimental results, so the

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Gabriel Dos Reis a écrit : On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Michel Lavaud wrote: [...] | Personnally, I think the only valid, scientific way is the first one : any | work proposed for publication that uses commercial software ought to be | rejected by the referee, unless it says explicitly and honestly tha

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky a écrit : If the plane I'm flying is built based on simulations with commercial mathematical software tools, whose accuracy is guaranteed in the usual way, i.e. no guarantee at all except refund for the price of the software whatever consequences and it is forbidden to ge

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Michel Lavaud wrote: [...] | Personnally, I think the only valid, scientific way is the first one : any | work proposed for publication that uses commercial software ought to be | rejected by the referee, unless it says explicitly and honestly that it used | commercial, non-p

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Michel Lavaud wrote: If the plane I'm flying is built based on simulations with commercial mathematical software tools, I surely want them to be the best. If the plane I'm flying is built based on simulations with commercial mathematical software tools, whose accuracy is guaranteed in the u

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Hi, is this kindergarden? or do we talk Axiom issues here? lol... Ciao BF. On Nov 26, 2007 9:24 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Arthur Ralfs wrote: > > M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > >> Well ... if you mean "*Red Hat* Linux has won a significant market > >> share in serv

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Dear Tim, I do not completely agree with the following: > [...] The 3Ms have the idea, the time, and the money. [...] then how do you explain that both Mathematica, Maple and Magma use the GNU MP library? Clearly the idea/time/money are not enough, even for companies of 1000+ people, to

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

If the plane I'm flying is built based on simulations with commercial mathematical software tools, I surely want them to be the best. If the plane I'm flying is built based on simulations with commercial mathematical software tools, whose accuracy is guaranteed in the usual way, i.e. no gua

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 26, 2007 8:06 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > root wrote: > > The NSF, INRIA, and others cover it. > > These are the same people who won't fund Axiom because "it competes > > with commercial software". Which shows that they don't understand > > that Axiom is NOT tryin

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

"M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | > Suppose someone creates a | > closed, commercial, really fast Groebner basis algorithm, does not | > publish the details, and then the code dies. It can happen. Macsyma | > had some of the best algorithms and they are lost. | | 1. Wh

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

root wrote: The NSF, INRIA, and others cover it. These are the same people who won't fund Axiom because "it competes with commercial software". Which shows that they don't understand that Axiom is NOT trying to compete; and that funding competition to commercial software implies funding BOTH side

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

"William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | You're right, the strategy I'm using may benefit the 4M's. That doesn't | bother me at all, since my first allegiance is to mathematics and mathematical | research, and I think having more options and more support for mathematical | software to

Re: content mathml was Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

>root wrote: >> You let the enemy use your own strength against you. The Axiom front >> end is the same as the Axiom back end. It's all "of a piece" so that >> viewing the documentation and the code are all a single thing. When >> you read the documentation like a book (ala Knuth or Queinnec) you >

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

...[snip]... > True, you can't.But honestly I really don't see the 4M's as the > enemy. "Enemy" is used in the metaphorical sense. You have chosen these systems to be "the competition", thus, the "enemy" in the metaphor. That does not imply that the (n)Ms are evil in any way. I quite like th

content mathml was Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

root wrote: > You let the enemy use your own strength against you. The Axiom front > end is the same as the Axiom back end. It's all "of a piece" so that > viewing the documentation and the code are all a single thing. When > you read the documentation like a book (ala Knuth or Queinnec) you > lear

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > Arthur Ralfs wrote: >> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: >>> Well ... if you mean "*Red Hat* Linux has won a significant market >>> share in servers", I agree. However, I don't think as a user that >>> either Firefox or OpenOffice are of sufficient quality or maturity to

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On 11/26/07, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm saying: > > 1. Firefox is *not* better than IE 7 on the Windows platform for any > reasonable definition of "better". In particular, the hype about Firefox > being more secure than IE is unsubstantiated and cannot in fact be > p

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

William Stein wrote: Whether or not a system can compete is determined by what actual real people really want and can afford when teaching or doing research. It's not at all clear to me that actual research mathematicians, teachers and engineers want what you're describing above more than the o

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Arthur Ralfs wrote: M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: Well ... if you mean "*Red Hat* Linux has won a significant market share in servers", I agree. However, I don't think as a user that either Firefox or OpenOffice are of sufficient quality or maturity to be used on a Windows desktop, and I don't c

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 26, 2007 10:01 AM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ==> Ed Borasky writes: > >> There is nothing particularly special about mathematics software that > >> makes it winning in a similar sense impossible, as much as Wolfram > >> would argue that (as he often used to do in interviews I've rea

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On 11/26/07, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > ... > Well ... if you mean "*Red Hat* Linux has won a significant market > share in servers", I agree. However, I don't think as a user that either > Firefox or OpenOffice are of sufficient quality or maturity to be used > on a Windows desktop, and I don

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > > Well ... if you mean "*Red Hat* Linux has won a significant market > share in servers", I agree. However, I don't think as a user that > either Firefox or OpenOffice are of sufficient quality or maturity to > be used on a Windows desktop, and I don't consider what

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

==> Tim Daly writes >> I believe that if such a system were available now there would be >> much less incentive for Universities to use closed source software. >> And, by implication, more work (more science) would be done using >> open software as a base. Eventually the loss of commercial versions

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: William Stein wrote: Well I'm trying to directly compete with heavily financed commercial systems. I think you are wrong that one cannot win. Linux, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc., are all examples of direct competition with heavily financed commercial systems, where t

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

William Stein wrote: Well I'm trying to directly compete with heavily financed commercial systems. I think you are wrong that one cannot win. Linux, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc., are all examples of direct competition with heavily financed commercial systems, where they have all won, at least wher

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 26, 2007 12:20 AM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> >> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the > ...[snip]... > >> Either the initial grant had principal investigators at different > >> schools (or one of the PIs moved), or a visiting scientist arrangement

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

> >> >> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the ...[snip]... >> Either the initial grant had principal investigators at different >> schools (or one of the PIs moved), or a visiting scientist arrangement >> allowed someone on leave to join the project for a while, othe

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

"William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] | Just out of curiosity does Axiom always have a 30 year horizon, or does | it become a 20 year horizon at some point? I think it always has 30 years horizon -- the horizon doesn't move ;-) -- Gaby _

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 25, 2007 7:54 PM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the > >> >> various subprojects like Axiom? Open source is mostly volunteer work > >> >> done in "spare time". While it is amusing to daydream of being paid to > >> >>

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

>> >> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the >> >> various subprojects like Axiom? Open source is mostly volunteer work >> >> done in "spare time". While it is amusing to daydream of being paid to >> >> develop open source computational mathematics on a full time basi

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 25, 2007 2:14 PM, C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the > >> various subprojects like Axiom? Open source is mostly volunteer work > >> done in "spare time". While it is amusing to daydream of being paid to > >> develop open

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

>> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the >> various subprojects like Axiom? Open source is mostly volunteer work >> done in "spare time". While it is amusing to daydream of being paid to >> develop open source computational mathematics on a full time basis, it >> see

[Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

Dear Tim, > Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the > various subprojects like Axiom? let me give my opinion on that specific point. As a developer of two "subprojects" used by SAGE, I can say that the SAGE developers do a tremendous work in porting, testing,

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

I had an offline discussion with management at Texas Instruments about Derive. I'm concerned that this historically interesting piece of software is simply going to disappear once TI decides they no longer want to support the CAS business. I have asked them to build a "deadman" clause into the ha

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

William Stein wrote: On Nov 18, 2007 12:59 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sixth, computational mathematics, which currently rests on closed source commercial efforts, will eventually suffer from a massive "black hole" once the current software dies. Suppose Wolfram Research and Maplesoft go out

[Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

William, >Actually NIST already has been working on an " Abramowitz & Stegun >style document " >for the last decade. I had a long talk on Friday in my office with the >guy who started that effort a decade ago... It's actually very exciting, >and I do think there is some possibility for something

[Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 18, 2007 3:49 PM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One possible other source for funding is NIST (although the year that > I thought to apply they only had funding for prior project, no new > money available). > > An outstanding problem is that we have many different computer algebra > and

[Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

>> Third, even if the NSF funded SAGE, how would those funds benefit the >> various subprojects like Axiom? > >let me give my opinion on that specific point. As a developer of two >"subprojects" used by SAGE, I can say that the SAGE developers do a >tremendous work in porting, testing, reporting bu

[Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

William, One possible other source for funding is NIST (although the year that I thought to apply they only had funding for prior project, no new money available). An outstanding problem is that we have many different computer algebra and symbolic computation systems that compute different answe

[Axiom-developer] Re: AMS Notices: Open Source Mathematical Software

On Nov 18, 2007 12:59 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Joyner and William Stein published an opinion piece in the > AMS Notices raising (yet again) the issue of mathematical results > that depend on closed source symbolic mathematics. They would like > to see open source efforts funded. >