The interesting thing about this example is that not only is it true that the user doesn’t know in detail how the thing works, it may be that nobody knows how the thing works other than a machine learning approach produced an inaccessible algorithm.

I should say I have ubuntu loaded on to all of the computers under my control. Some are dual boot with the unmentionable. I think the only commercial software I struggle to do without is Maple.

I am tempted by the delicious excitement of recommending rejection of a paper because of its reliance on proprietary software or hardware. I can hear the howls of outrage already.

There is a fledgling open source hardware philosophy which I hope is growing. Have a look at http://www.opencircuits.com/Open_source_electronics

Good question. In the areas I’m somewhat familiar with, which would be mass spec and maganetics, allmost all of the hardware is “open source” with only a few bits and pieces probably not being quite as open. It seems to me that any technology whereby the explanation for how something works or what the outcome might be has the phrase “and then here, for this part, there’s an input and an output but if we tell you how it works we’ll then have to kill you. Or have you sign a non-disclosure agreement, at least” should not be allowed in a peer reviewed journal.

How’s that for a radical position?

Can we rely on a suite of test measurements which verify that the machine does indeed meet its specifications and not worry about the details of what’s inside? If the answer is yes what’s different about software?

Not to sound like I’m pushing it, but suggest SAGE to your daughter as well.

Thanks for the tip!

Not to sound like I’m pushing it, but suggest SAGE to your daughter as well. It runs in command line or in a browser window/notebook style. It’s essentially a Python front-end that provides access to several programs (maxima, which , octave, (it comes with maxima, but will work with the others as well).

It also comes with a latex class that allows sage code to be embedded in latex files and executed at compilation. very easy to use.

There are others besides Linux?

Yes, I’m aware of the BSDs, OpenSolaris, and Plan9 (as well as some really obscure ones.) The point being that someone who doesn’t have the time for Ubuntu is freaking nuts to go down those roads instead for their first ventures into NixVille.

I am thinking in the direction of going with an open source OS, rather than learning linux at this point.

There are others besides Linux?

DuWayne, just go score a copy of Ubuntu and boot the silly thing. It’s a live CD, so you don’t even have to install it to take it for a (pardon me) spin. It’s just not a big deal — and there are lots of us who will be glad to point you at solutions to any problems you run into.

I don’t know that I really operate under that assumption regarding software, but I can see how it would come across as though I did. (I think I’m pretty clearly an Open Access nut.)

If asked, I’d have said that proprietary software covered more kinds of applications but what F/OSS does, it does at least as well as proprietary equivalents.

Thing is, I’ve used very little F/OS software, for all the same reasons I bemoan in others: too busy, don’t have time for the learning curve, need this done yesterday so just going to use the software I’ve always used… Little by little though, I’m trying to wean myself off proprietary wares.

(And yeah, something is up with my MT install I think — comments are borked and it’s doing horrible things to my entries. I’ll poke at it but don’t expect results until the Spousal Unit tires of my cussing and takes over.)

I am kind of torn on linux though. On the one hand I would like to be a little more independent, on the other I am ridiculously focused on other things and don’t know that I need more on my plate. I definitely want to get off the fucking microsoft OS, but I am thinking in the direction of going with an open source OS, rather than learning linux at this point.