When your body has more than its share of microbes/parasites, even the otherwise-healthy food, may make you worse, because those microbes/parasites may thrive with the nutrients. They may multiply, and you may loose.
It is all the same, in a world where either our privacy is intruded, or copycats duplicate our intellectual property (software, etc.). When we want to keep what we own, we may even get called names. We have to act wise, with sound strategy. Otherwise, what we produce, with our own mental energy, may hurt ourselves, and other innocents, because the parasites may prosper with their plunders.
On this page, I present my vote-for-improvements policy, for aFiRMz, and for the other content I write and publish at this site. These are very easy, and versatile ideas - adoptable by yoursself, too.
On this page, I publish a few strategies, for a relief. The metaphor, here, is flight and fight.
In contrast to the usual meaning of the word "flight," in the term "flight-or-fight" where flight means "fleeing," I rather mean the air force. That is, the flight helps our fight, if there is anybody out there that we must fight against. If no such problem, the flight is for our own enjoyment, as we develop ourselves, and our masterpieces.
In other words, as MacmillanContemporaryDictionary lists, I prefer the first set of meanings about flight, rather than the second set, which is the implied, in that common-term "flight-or-fight." I would rather have it as flight-and-fight, or even possibly/passably, flight-for-fight.
A force with the flight idea is that, in case of a dispute, this lets the victim to convince the third-party people, about who is the thief. i.e: If my very-private work turns out to be the same with the work claimed by some others, let's find out whose work is stolen, really. If I improvise around only a very few texts, if I restrict my metaphors within well-defined limits, then why and how would the other side especially pick the very same texts, if they also suspect their privacy is intruded? For example, I list only two or three years of journals, the years I subscribed. Even in a single year, there are twelve months, each with their very good topics. Why would the adversary "need," after so many years, to pick those (my birth-month) march-issues, within those two-or-three years (around 1990)?
For fresh metaphors, this suffices for me. It does not restrict an imaginative mind, when I combine the ideas in those old issues. At the same time, I think, it also suffices to absurd'ify any similarity between adversaries. If my adversary insists to be similar to me, to study the exact texts, and journal-issues that I study, anybody would question how serious is that adversary, about the claim that he/she/they own(s) the work. Why so tightly get stuck at me?
This lets me, distinguish myself, and at each step, it is more and more difficult for those copycats, or privacy-intruders to explain "why the similarity?" Such thieves would probably publish, at strict lockstep, in the order I publish features - maybe a few days later, or earlier.
We are to protect what we own, against invaders, tyrants, copycats. Flight is not in any sense of fleeing. It is, rather, in the sense of an air-force. Flight is an act, worth itself, as we express and improve ourselves with it. Flight is a resource, too, as it raises the level of our resources.
You cannot "grab the air," you cannot ignore the flights of others. At airports, there are the flight-control people. Here, we arrange our own rules, for our flight, to avoid clash with others, as far as possible. Next, if they do come near, they must explain why they insist.
After we learn the identity of the thieves, we may point out the trajectory of their past "work," too. This especially fits, if those thieves, as I expect, turn out to be null-to-negative. That is, whenever they published something, they blundered. When we spot them, we may point out the awful lack of quality in their past "work," too.
That is the confrontation, as it stresses the fact that, such a bunch of copycat thieves, could not possibly rival the victim's work, at the victim's quality level - unless the thieves intruded the victim's privacy, and stole his/her work. That is where, we marshall our flight, too, for our fight.
For the fight, we are freed with the force of our flight. When fight is coupled with flight, the thieves cannot grab, only with their empty claims. We differentiate our work, with our idiosyncratic, self-owned, customized preferences, the flight.
In the flight case, the enemies do not probably have anything published/announced, whereas a target of fight has probably published, but only to demonstrate his/her lack-of-achievement. (e.g: copycat82/83).
The potential privacy-intrusions may know no limits. As an anti-abuse strategy, flight (or, flight-for-fight) is a versatile, forceful relief. The strategy to adopt self-formulated limits for yourself, e.g: to restrict yourself to a few areas/fields, and even to a few publications/paths within that range of fields/areas, is fine:
After a confrontation, now, we would know the/a thief. Then, we may even revise our ranges. For example:
As far as we are the honest side, a little flexibility like these, may fine-tune the moves. That is, move after move, we prove that the other side is the thief, the privacy intruder, the copycat.
Such a strategy helps, even in an extreme case, where an evil chaos-inducer may shuffle ideas of two sides, by peeks and pokes at the privacies of both sides. Those two sides, when they find out each other, they may immediiately differentiate themselves, and adopt different paths. It is very easy - for the honest people.
aFiRMz is a programmer's tool (a Free-form interactive Resource-Modeler from/by zElQarneyn). I had started this project, with its predecessor, zFIX (zElQarneyn's Ferzen'ish Imaginative/Independent eXplorations/eXcursions).
aFiRMz joins zFIX with my final-project as a COMP student (in 1990), the GFS (graphical file system). I republish functions from GFS, where it would fit a versatile software tool. This is a heavy-hit. i.e: I reinforce my difference, my work, with the intricacies of an older work of mine. For example, an aFiRMz programmer should rather read how form.mediator() works, within. A "look-alike," would be a deficient match.
There are two ways that you may vote, to have your wish-list get implemented in aFiRMz.
The first way is to vote in favor, or against,
Another possibility is for your preference/suggestion of features, from the texts I list. This is only another way of voting. Just point at the ideas in specific page(s) of these textbooks/magazines/journals, and I consider them. I have strategies for this, along with the list of those texts.
Mainly two types of people. The registered-aFiRMz'ers, and other identifiable (i.e., non-anonymous) people. At this point of releases, the aFiRMz is not yet a payable/registerable software. (You may also read my prospective software-license agreement, beta-0 version.) Currently, the only way for acceptable-votes is being identifiable as a real-person(ality), not an anonymous one. Most easily, that may be a person identifiable through an [academic or other well-known] institution/position. Unfortunately, this excludes even people like myself, because I am self-employed, and unless you already know-me-with-my-name in real life, you may not be able to tell whether my name (written at the footer of every page at this site), is a real, or a nick-name. I may be known, in person, by only a few thousands of people, I guess.
My spontaneous, very original to aFiRMz, proposals are likely to be on the very-idiosyncratic aspects of it, not likely to be found, in that combination, anywhere else.
For the textbook-based votes, at this stage of my project, I cannot take those suggestions referring to multiple ideas (different pages, at once), and suggesting a combination of them. That would necessitate my being able to verify that a first-thinkable algorithm to cover that case, is not already patented. By taking suggestions from only a-single-page (or a few, in sequence), from a well-known textbook, I expect checking for patent-infringements would be easier. And citing the source, and avoiding plagiarism, will be naturally easier, too.
The issues of patents, plagiarism, and intellectual property, are among the points I find important, and discuss in this site, at length, and only intend to expand on. You may have already read my publication strategy. I think of networking for telling each other, about who else has what features designed/implemented, either similar to one's own work, or usable with it, improving it in some aspect. That would help both against patent-infringement plagiarism, and for improving our own, by employing/contracting/licensing others.
These are the usual concerns. You may have already read a lot about the thinking that, to avoid patent-infringements, we may have to stick with widely-used libraries from big companies. Yet, the recent Microsoft case (as I read in a web article, by Cringely), that it was a patent-infringement case that lead to the exclusion of the older way of applet-embedding in web pages, from the Internet Explorer version six.
Furthermore, I have a special situation. At this site, there is a case study: an unbelievable Ph.D. which discusses a case of academic plagiarism. It is a weird case, and I would not like to be a victim of trickery, after implementing a trivial-sounding combination, unbeknownst to me, specifically designed to infringe something. You need to be aware of dirt, when dealing with it. In other words, I am NOT a "me too!" person, and I would like to underline it, by keeping at a healthy distance.
If some feature you want is not published anywhere, and/or has to include several ideas/references at once, that possibly means you should be making it as an installable-feature, yourself. Your algorithm, may be implemented by yourself - in your sincereity.
In that case, instead of asking that feature itself, you may consider asking my introducing some macro-tools, and/or visual-design tools, etc., to enable implementing your own ideas. After all, if you can write and explain it in an e-mail, you should be also able to program and install it with aFiRMz, yourself. Given that aFiRMz is already a programming tool, this sounds quite natural.
You may also carefully watch the wide variety of proposals I submit, under several headings, and vote for the ones you would like, and against those you would not like to be implemented. This may relieve the necessity of pointing at any pages, at all. Once the resulting state of aFiRMz is in the waters you could get your boat going, you might push your own code only a little bit, to achieve the feature you all-wanted.
N.B.: If some algorithm in those texts have been patented, please inform me of such, when you ask the feature. This may be considered, more likely, as a separately-installable module (and a paid-option). And such patent-relevance would also be relevant if I may have proposed a feature, which unbeknownst to me, may have been patented. Sharing such information about patent-existence may save programmers (and also the users) from some headache, and some feature-revoking problems. (Cf. the shift in style, in Microsoft's Internet Explorer version 6, which dumped the older style for embedding applets in a web page.)
With each textbook reference, I also list the day I purchased it, or the day it arrived via post-office. With each magazine/journal, the date it has arrived.
I code the flight books for the desirable qualities, with letters, for each:
In other words, the flight books are preferred for their reflecting what I do own since decades, and what I had preferred myself.
The flight-resources I list on this page, are possible to get studied for the aFiRMz tool. Fight-resources are for the (possible) extra forms/modules.
Byte March 1989
Byte March 1990
Byte March 1991
Communications of the ACM, March 1990
Communications of the ACM, March 1991
C Users' Journal, March 1990
C Users' Journal, March 1991
C Users' Journal, March 1992
C Users' Journal, March 1993
Data Communications International, McGraw-Hill, March 1989
Dr. Dobb's Journal, March 1991
Elo Elektronik, 55 (trk), Mart 1990
IEEE Computer, March 1991
IEEE Software, March 1991
IEEE Trans. on Knowledege and Data Engineering, March 1991
Newsweek International, March 2, 1992
Newsweek International, March 9, 1992
Newsweek International, March 16, 1992
Newsweek International, March 23, 1992
Newsweek International, March 30, 1992
Newsweek International, March 1, 1993
Newsweek International, March 8, 1993
Newsweek International, March 22, 1993
Newsweek International, March 29, 1993
Newsweek International, March 7, 1994
Newsweek International, March 14, 1994
Newsweek International, March 21, 1994
Newsweek International, March 28, 1994
Aho, A.V., Kernighan, B.W. & Weinberger, P.J. (Oct. 1988). A, B, C
"The AWK programming language"
(reprint with corrections) Addison-Wesley. 0-201-07981-X (Arrived: Oct. 10, 1990)
Booth,D.J. (1987). A, B, C
"A FIRST course in Statistics"
DP Publications. 0-905435-84-2. (Arrived: Oct. 9, 1989)
Brooks Jr.,F.P. (1982). A, B, C
"The Mythical Man-Month
Essays on Software Engineering"
(reprint with corrections), Addison-Wesley.(Arrived on Jan.15, 1991)
This is not a book on programs, but on programming. Maybe I should also include some references on social/organizational psychology, but I am postponing it, currently. You may start your proposals for software-management by pointing to this, if not the larger software-engineering book listed a bit above. I may spontaneously generate a lot of such proposals, any way, because this was one of the mid-way issues I had so often replied with, when people kept asking me why I went to psychology, after computer programming. (Neural Networks interest was the more dominant, maybe, indeed. The psychology department had no specific discussion of these two, or the interface-design issues, but the basic knowledge of social/organizational and cognitive psychologies are valuable, especially when you also read articles of other such mid--way researchers, in psychology, ergonomy or computer science journals and trade magazines.
Brookshear,J.G. (1989). A, B, C
"Theory of Computation
Formal Languages, Automata, and Complexity"
Benjamin-Cummings. (Arrived: Jan. 15, 1991)
Date,C.J. (1990). A, B
"An Introduction to
Database Systems, Volume I, Fifth edition"
Addison-Wesley. (Arrived: July 26, 1990)
Ferris,T., ed. (with a foreword by Fadiman,C., gen.ed.) (1991). A, C
"The World Treasury of
Physics, Astronomy, and Mathematics"
Little Brown, & Co. (Arrived: June 20, 1996)
Grolier (1982). A, B, C
Grolier (encyclopedia, 30 volumes); 0-7172-0113-9.
Hansen, T.L. (1990). A, B, C
"The C++ answer book"
Addison-Wesley. 0-201-11497-6 (Arrived: Oct. 10, 1990)
Holtz,F. (1989). A, B, C
Programming in Turbo C"
Windcrest. (Arrived: June 6, 1990)
Holub, A.I. (1990). A, B, C
"Compiler design in C"
Prentice-Hall. 0-13-155151-5 (Arrived: Feb.8,1991)
Khanna,T. (1990). A, B, C
"Foundations of neural networks"
Addison-Wesley; 0-201-50036-1. (Arrived: July 26, 1990)
Knuth,D.E. (1973). A, B, C
"The art of computer programming Volume 1 second edition",
Addison-Wesley; 0-201-03809-9. (Arrived: Jan.15, 1991)
Knuth, D.E. (1986). A, B, C
Addison Wesley. ; book; 0-201-13447-0; (Arrived: July 11, 1989)
Lucey,T. (1987). A, B, C
"Management information systems fifth edition"
DP Publications; 0-905435-79-6. (Arrived: 0ct.9,1989)
Lucey, T. (1988). A, B
"Quantitative techniques an instructional manual third edition"
DP Publicatiions; 0-905435-89-3. (Arrived: 0ct.9,1989)
McArthur,T. (Ed.) (1992). A, C
"The Oxford companion to the
Oxford University Press. (Arrived: June 20,1996)
McClelland,J.L., & Rumelhart,D.E. (1988). A, B, C
"Explorations in Parallel Distributed Processing
A Handbook of Models, Programs, and Exercises"
The MIT Press. (Arrived: Dec.28,1989)
Miller, N.E. (1987). A, B, C
"File structures using Pascal"
Benjamin/Cummings; 0-8053-7082-X. (Arrived: July 11, 1989)
Norton,P., & Wilton,R. (1988). A, B, C
"The new Peter Norton programmer's guide to the IBM PC & PS/2"
Microsoft Press. 1-55615-131-4. (Arrived: June 6,1990)
Phoenix Technologies Ltd. (June 1989). A, B, C
"CBIOS for IBM PS/2 computers and compatibles
the complete guide to ROM-based system software for DOS"
Addison-Wesley; 0-201-51804-X. Phoenix technical reference series; (Arrived: Oct.10,1990)
Pinel,J.P.J. (1990). A, B, C
MA:Allyn and Bacon. 0-205-12497-6; (Arrived: Feb.8,1991)
Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A., & Vetterling, W.T. (1988/1989). A, B, C
"Numerical Recipes in C
The Art of Scientific Computing" (reprint) Cambridge University Press. (Arrived: June 26, 1990)
Rees,M., & Robson,D. (1988). A, B, C
"Practical compiling with Pascal-S"
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. 0-201-18487-7 (Arrived: July 11, 1989)
Sommerville,I. (1989). A, B, C
"Software Engineering Third Edition"
Addison-Wesley. (Arrived: July 26, 1990)
Strang,J. (1986). A, B, C
"Programming with curses"
O'Reilly & Associates. 0-937175-02-1; Nutshell series (Arrived: Oct. 10, 1990)
Strang,J., O'Reilly,T., & Mui,L. (1986). A, B, C
"Termcap and Terminfo"
O'Reilly & Associates. 0-937175-22-6; Nutshell series (Arrived: Oct. 10, 1990)
Stroustrup, B. (July 1997). A, B, C
"The C++ programming language"
(reprint with corrections), Addison-Wesley. 0-201-12078-X (Arrived: Oct. 10, 1990)
Tenenbaum,A.M., Langsam,Y., & Augenstein,M.J. (1990). A, B, C
"Data Structures Using C"
Prentice-Hall. (Arrived: Feb.8, 1991)
A fight requires books that are about what the enemies claim. For example, to prove the plagiarism of an adversary, I may implement the prior art, that had existed before that copycat published its paper, or its Ph.D. dissertation. This is possible here, because at this site I publish about copycat82, an un-credible Ph.D. dissertation, (and its associated published paper copycat83), which is mainly a case about its plagiarism.
This does not mean the books or papers I list for fight, any less valuable than those for fight. But with my strategy, I would not include them, if they were not informative about my adversaries.
In any case, to keep with the spirit of the flight, I keep what I implement from the fight-justified texts, as extras that are installable upon preference. e.g: If I write a software tool, I may implement the flight-texts for the standard executable, whereas the fight-texts may exist as extra features, left to preference.
Aho,A.V., Sethi,R., & Ullman,J.D. (1986).
Principles, Techniques, and Tools"
Addison-Wesley. (Purchased on May 11, 1989)
Banks,J., & Carson,II,J.S. (1984).
"Discrete-Event System Simulation"
Prentice-Hall. (Purchased (or, replaced): on Jan.25,1994)
Baron,R.A., & Byrne,D. (1991).
understanding human interaction
Allyn and Bacon. (Arrived: Nov.23,1991)
Bernstein,P.A., Hadzilacos,V., & Goodman,N. (1987).
"Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems"
Addison-Wesley. (Arrived: Sept.14,1993)
"Schaum's Outline Series
Teory and Problems of
McGraw-Hill. (Arrived: Apr. 3, 1993)
Chang, S.K. (1989).
"Principles of pictorial information systems design"
Prentice-Hall International. 0-13-710393-X (Arrived: Feb.14, 1990)
Foley, van Dam, Feiner, Hughes, (1990).
Principles and Practice, Second Edition"
1990, Addison-Wesley. (Arrived: Feb.18,1992)
Law,A.M., & Kelton,W.D. (1991).
"Simulation Modeling & Analysis, Second edition"
McGraw-Hill. (Purchased on Oct.12,1994)
Lipsey,R.G., Steiner,P.O., & Purvis,D.D. (1987).
"Economics, Eighth edition"
Harper & Row. (Purchased on Nov. 12, 1988)
This is an economics book, but it may be inspiring. I may introduce other such later; experimental, for the time being. Historically, an idea, based on such economics- (or, free-market-) analogies was an XEROX operating-system.
Mendenhall, W., Wackerly, D.D., & Scheaffer, R.L. (1990).
"Mathematical statistics with applications fourth edition"
Duxbury Press. 0-534-92026-8 (Purchased: Jan.24,1994)
Sanders,M.S., & McCormick,E.J. (1992).
"Human Factors In Engineering and Design, Seventh edition"
McGraw-Hill. (Purchased: Oct.12, 1994)
This is an ergonomy book, with some interface-design relevant discussion. It may not be a first-choice if you have a limited interest, only in computers. But if you already have this book, it may also be a reference/basis for some proposals and/or metrics-communicating.
An Introduction, Fifth Edition", Macmillan. (Purchased: Dec.8, 1993)
"MINIX for the IBM PC,XT, and AT, Reference Manual"
Prentice-Hall Software Series. (No dates in it. But must have arrived in 1991, or 1992. Let me find the invoice, later.)
"Modern Operating Systems"
Prentice-Hall. (I purchased on Mar.2,1994)
This textbook plus the MINIX reference manual, listed above, together cover more than Tanenbaum's older book on Operating Systems with MINIX. You may also ask/suggest from that version, but without exact page numbers.
McGraw-Hill. (Arrived on Dec.21, 1989)
The on-line documents for Java, PICmicro, as well as the Intel 80x86 platforms. Vote for your favorite-features before the aFiRMz release to cover Java and PICmicro platforms appears. Here, "Java," does not mean the Java language, but the Java platform(s), the JavaVM(s) (JVM, Java Virtual Machine, in its several versions).