Eliza is a sort of computerized therapist. Using your choice of Mac voices and a female or male character, you can carry on a loopy conversation with your Mac. Just type in a statement or question, and Eliza responds in a loosely related way, sort like a magic 8 ball, but with more details. With a large vocabulary, Eliza is able to formulate an almost limitless number of responses - can you formulate a limitless number of statements and questions?

Here's your chance to try. By the way, Eliza also functions as a simple text editor, just in case you need to make notes of your own. Please read the documentation for much more detailed information and instructions. Note Eliza requires a Mac or Mac-compatible computer running System 6.0.7 or later. It may work with 6.0.3 or later. To use the speech facility, you need to install Apple's PlainTalk (Speech Manager). The old Macintalk is no longer supported.

An advanced python debugger, with support for smart breakpoints, multiple threads, namespace modification, embedded debugging and encrypted communication. Or perhaps software to help create a chat bot then you will find it here under Software downloads which are divided further into A-C, D-f, G-I, J-L, M-O, P-S and T-Z. ALIMbot ALIMbot from the first well-known classical chatbot ELIZA, designed by computer scientist Joseph Weizenbaum of MIT and released in 1966.

Install Ulang Windows 7 Tanpa Cd Dan Flashdisk. Eliza runs fine without the Speech Manager but, of course, loses the speech capabilities, and where's the fun in that? Eliza is 32-bit clean, System 7 compatible, 68040 cache compatible, virtual memory compatible, big-screen compatible and Apple-Event aware. It also recognizes extended keyboard keys.

I have recently started a company and published a closed source application. Keymonk is a keyboard for Android that lets you sweep words with two fingers: It is a significant evolution over traditional sweep keyboards. Its premise is that since the QWERTY keyboard is designed to maximize hand alternation while typing, it should be beneficial to be able to sweep words with both fingers, each at its side of the keyboard. For example, to input the word ‘make’ with a traditional sweep keyboard you would start at M, sweep to the other side of the keyboard to A, then all the way back to K and again to the other side for E.

With Keymonk you may instead start with your right finger at M and your left finger at A, then sweep your right finger to K and your left finger to E, resulting in two short and natural sweeps: I find it very convenient for inputting large amount of text nearly as fast as I would with my laptop keyboard. Young people seem to get the hang of it quickly. It is currently enabled for download in English speaking countries. Take a look at these two graphs from “Google Insights”. They show an ongoing decline of GPL, GNU and Linux in normalized search volume: One possible interpretation is the decline of the desktop and rise of smart phones and digital consumerism, but note the search term PC is stable in the second graph. Another possible interpretation is that GNU/Linux people are the “early adopters” of the Internet and the decline is expected as the Internet reaches more and more people, but nevertheless I don’t like these graphs at all.

Rconsole is a new Python console that you can attach to a running script to inspect and modify its namespace. I hacked it up since I did not find a simple to use alternative to inspect a daemon process. Rconsole is included with the rfoo package. To invoke it within a script add the following to its code: from rfoo.utils import rconsole rconsole.spawn_server() To attach from another shell do: $ rconsole rconsole is not a debugger and does not freeze the script.

You can think of it as a window into the belly of a long running script. It is lightweight and non-disruptive. You may leave it inside production code and attach when you need to check in on the health of a long running script: • Import guppy.hpy into a running script to investigate memory leaks. • Change function definitions and reload modules on the fly. • Inspect live internal data structures.

Ever since I discovered Free Software I was haunted by the problem of developing software sustainably. Today I would like to suggest a possible model which may be suitable to individual developers and small business.

That is, distributing software using relaxed non Free Software license, combined with releasing each modification as Free Software a determined time after its introduction, or in other words - Delayed Release. This approach may be inline with views expressed by Richard Stallman in an interesting article on Copyright by the title “Misinterpreting Copyright—A Series of Errors” (1). Referring to copyright on software he writes “In my own field, computer programming, three years should suffice”. Stallman does not reject copyright as a concept but is interested in “Finding the right bargain”. Possibly the most well known scheme for developing Free Software profitably is that of charging for related services. The problem is this model requires business skills most software developers do not have and is often not even applicable.

With Delayed Release, software developers may have easier time developing Free Software profitably, leading to increase in production of Free Software. Once people find that ideals of Free Software can practically co-exist with their realities, those ideals will have easier time spreading. Rfoo is a new Python RPC package which can do 160,000 IPC calls per second on a regular PC. It includes a fast serialization module called rfoo.marsh which extends the Python built in marshal module by eliminating serialization of code objects and protecting against bad input. The result is a safe to use ultra fast serializer.

Go get it at Interface of rfoo.marsh rfoo.marsh.dumps(expression) rfoo.marsh.loads(binary_string) Serve RPC method to clients class MyHandler(rfoo.BaseHandler): def echo(self, str): return str rfoo.InetServer(MyHandler).start(port=50000) Call method on RPC server c = rfoo.InetConnection().connect(port=50000) rfoo.Proxy(c).echo('Hello, world! Becker Speedcamupdates Spud Mackenzie on this page. ' It is easy to identify a Free Software project. It includes the term “Free Software” in its website.

Open Source projects created by corporations, by hackers who reject the ideals of Free Software or by developers who do not know the difference NEVER include the term. Some notable Free Software projects are therefore: There are of course many others and please comment with your favorite ones, but in fact, if you try to think of a recent notable FOSS project and check out its website you are most likely to find it is an Open Source project rather than Free Software.

For example, Apache, Lighttpd, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Python, Django, Drupal, Firefox and others. For those of you who wonder what the difference between Free Software and Open Source is, I recommend the following article: There can be several reasons why this is the state of Free Software. I believe one of them is that there is no economical energy behind Free Software. Where I live the media goes on and on about how The Iranian people is using web technology against its regime - for example Twitter, Youtube, e-mails and also cellular phones, SMS, etc These technologies are described as giving an upper hand to the people as opposed for example to the revolution which took place 30 years ago.

I think this technology is actually being used against the people. You can not use it without being completely exposed. Anyone using it is being monitored and ironically has his/her social network mapped. Once someone is determined to be an organizer or worth the effort of taking down, he/she can be easily arrested. Standard captcha are either broken or are an accessibility nuisance or both. In its most noble form - reCaptcha - it is used brilliantly to digitize books and provide people over at India with a living: Smart engineers all over the world are busy trying to invent the most inaccessible new generation captcha possible, which typically involves analyzing or playing around with images. However, it came to my mind recently that there might be another way, accessible and more faithful to the original Turing test ().

Can a computer administer an effective textual reverse Turing test to block registration spam? Can Eliza, the friendly nonsensical therapist, the famous first Turing test runner up, do that?

Imagine you try to register a new account at web20.com and suddenly Eliza pops up and asks you to elaborate on why you chose to submit the spammy looking email address john23kjdsf784@mail.ru Seriously, spam filters such as Akismet (for blogs) or Gmail have become so efficient that they have practically eliminated comment and email spam. By requiring a registrant to submit enough textual information it may be possible to apply these filters to registration spam. In addition, such a conversation, while being entertaining enough for the casual registrant, can be too time consuming for professional-human-captcha-solvers, relieving the potential problem of relay attacks. Finally, if a new developer vs spammer war ensues around chat captcha we will soon see the first computer to pass the Turing test.

Here is my five-months-late take on the Negroponte-Microsoft love story announcement. It is an ironic story in which the FLOSS community is harnessed to pull the OLPC wagon to Africa and goes ballistic when told that they have to carry Microsoft in that wagon as well. I say that anyone in that community feeling betrayed can only complain of his or her own ignorance. Take a look at Negroponte’s announcement (): The term Open Source appears 27 times in the announcement and comments while Free Software appears in one comment only where it is being slammed.

Take a look at the Wikipedia article on OLPC (): The term Open Source appears 7 times but nothing there on Free Software. Well, isn’t Open Source all about that corporate-friendly magical method for creating high quality software? Not about user freedoms or hating a particular corporate. You would think the FLOSS community members who feel strongly about something would actually know what it means, right? And guess what, there is a two years old interview with Stallman on YouTube in which he warns of such an occurrence (). This is what he says beginning on minute 08:45: “I ask you to please always call it Free Software because that way you will encourage other people to pay attention to the question of freedom. The term Open Source was formulated by people who did not want to talk about freedom and that is the stupidest thing any people can do.

If people don’t talk about freedom it gets forgotten and then somebody says ‘if you will just accept these little restrictions, here is this convenient pleasure you can have’, essentially saying ‘we will sell you something in exchange for your freedom’. And if you have not been thinking about freedom and realizing what freedom means, you might accept that poisonous deal and then your freedom is gone.”.

Tychod stands for Tycho debugger which is a reference to a story/article by called about a world where possession of a debugger has been made illegal to prevent people from working around DRM mechanisms. An interesting point that Stallman discusses in another article is that popularity of free software is spreading faster than the philosophy of freedom that motivated it. This is what he says: Estimates today are that there are ten million users of GNU/Linux systems such as Debian GNU/Linux and Red Hat “Linux”. Free software has developed such practical advantages that users are flocking to it for purely practical reasons. The good consequences of this are evident: more interest in developing free software, more customers for free software businesses, and more ability to encourage companies to develop commercial free software instead of proprietary software products.

But interest in the software is growing faster than awareness of the philosophy it is based on, and this leads to trouble. Our ability to meet the challenges and threats described above depends on the will to stand firm for freedom. To make sure our community has this will, we need to spread the idea to the new users as they come into the community. But we are failing to do so: the efforts to attract new users into our community are far outstripping the efforts to teach them the civics of our community. We need to do both, and we need to keep the two efforts in balance.

First I chose GPL for Winpdb, then only 2 years later I actually discovered Free Software, what it stands for and the fascinating universe behind these two words, but now a year later I have stumbled on a problem. GPL is a tool that uses copyright to enforce software freedom, but in order to be able to enforce that there must be a copyright holder that can take action. The FSF is aware of this and is carefully requiring contributors and their employers (!) to sign legal papers of copyright transfer: The problem is that most GPL projects can not afford to force potential contributors to get their employers to sign legal papers as it will reduce the number of contributions to 0 and therefore the copyright to their projects is either dispersed among the different contributors or even worse, is questionably held by a single person or entity (with emphasis on questionably). What does that practically imply on GPL? On my search for answers I stumbled upon an interesting article from the year 2000 in Advogato (A recommended site). It became even more interesting when I spied a comment by one Bram Cohen who at the time was little known in the Universe as he did not yet leave his job to write BitTorrent: I would appreciate your educated opinion or a reference to articles on this subject.