Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Saturday, January 1, 2000
First day of the year 2000
Because Annabel wanted to see the
fireworks, Li-Xia woke her up just
before 12, while I was uploading some of my web files. (This
process ran during the turn of the year. So both my PC and
my provider passed the Y2K test!)
Annabel was barely awake when the magic second was there.
We entered the year 2000, not the third millennium as so many
people proclaimed. (They are going to find out
they were wrong before it really starts on January 1, 2001.)
We went upstairs to watch the fireworks from the window.
While I was taking some video, we discovered that
Andy was screaming. After taking him
out of bed, he only calmed down after we had put him in front
of his favourite video, and he had watched it for at least five
In a sense it felt strange having reached the year 2000.
Some kind of feeling of We finally made it. In the past
week I often thought back about the past decades. But on
the other hand it also feel just the same as before.
Tuesday, January 4, 2000
The Millennium Bug
Today on the news, it was concluded that the Millennium Bug
did not occur, and that all efforts that were spend might have
been spoilt. First of all, this is not a logical conclusion. You
can also conclude that it money was well spend, because it did
not occur. But what matters more, I think, that this statement
so clearly shows that the media does not understand what this
bug is. Of course, they are wrong to call it the millennium bug,
as it would be proper to call it the Y2K bug. The media talks
about it in the sigular form, as if there is only one bug, just
like in case of a disaster: there is one disaster with many
victims. I almost got the impression that the Dutch television
set-up some cameras in an academical hospital to see the bug,
as if it could suddenly jump out of one of the machines.
Misconceptions about when the 3rd millennium starts
It looks like the western world is divided in those who believe
the 3rd millennium already has started, and those who
know it will start on January 1, 2001.
Sites that support the fact that the next millennium only starts
next year are:
If you believe that the 3rd millennium has started on
January 1, 2000, please consider the following things:
- You believe that our current Julian calendar should be taken
as the starting point for determining the start of a
millenium. This means that all arguments based on a birth
day of Jesus Christ, can be done away with from the start,
as He was not born anything close to the first of January of the year 1.
- The expression "The year 1995", for example, is a short
hand for "The 1995th year of to the Julian calendar".
Year 1, was thus the first year of our Julian calendar.
- Only at the end of the first year, one year had passed.
- Only at the end of the 100th year, the first century had passed.
- Only at the end of the 1000th year, the first millenium had passed.
- Only at the end of the year 2000, the second millenium has passed.
(About February 29)
Thursday, January 20, 2000
Today, I attended the first day of the symposium
Software Architectures and Component Technology.
There is much to say about, but I am only given some
phrases that I found worthy noting down. Some of these
are just new slang, I think.
Does this make sense? No, of course not.
- I want to make sure that we are on the same page
- a breed of printers
- small grain reuse did not work
- if fuel for
- to mitigate the risk
- architecture-based design is more than a design method
- UP does not deal with architecture design considerations
- give you a four thousand feet view
- out in front of you
- Oh boy, that is a nice question
- ROSE is not appropriate
- Use the best and make the rest
- The good news is UML, and the bas new is UML
- After you have become a filthy rich CEO, you can still
become a software architect
- If it ain't broken, don't fix it
- You used up your slides
- I have a dead-line next week. What does architecture bring me?
- I will take a step here
- What is better trail-and-error or using
a design methodology?
Friday, January 21, 2000
Today was the second day of the symposium. Maybe even more interesting
than the first day. It is strange, but often when I attend conferences
like this one, I get the strange feeling that
computer science has not
evolved much in the past decades.
Tuesday, January 25, 2000
Lately, I often ask myself whether these web pages
are not a form of self glorification,
or in other words a way to show-off, seeking admiration from
others. It's it simply a search for recognition
Maybe it has to do with my age that I am contemplating
what I have achieved so far in my life. I noticed
that lately I have been thinking a lot about what I
did in the past. For example, about the
trips I made.
Because of this, I am also paging through my old
diaries, which brings back memories from the past.
However, seeking recognition is a dead-end road. As a
Christian we should not seek to
glorify ourselves. Jesus
made some pretty confronting statements.
If anyone wishes to come after Me,
let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily,
and follow me.
For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it,
but whoever loses his life for My sake,
he is the one who will save it.
Luke 9:23,24. according to NASB
Friday, January 28, 2000
I made a bitmap of the jpeg-image
of a painting by Billy Foley, and
I made some of the background white, as it is white and not
coloured as in some parts of the image.
I was wondering if there would exist a technique to
get an image with a higher resolution than the one
I was having. Of course, you cannot make the image
contain more information than it already has.
Information is the opposite of entropy (which is
the measure of chaos). So it seems that any operation
applied to an image can only reduce the information
in the image.
This is true if you do not have any additional knowledge
about the original thing the image was taken from.
But if you do know some properties of it, than it is
possible to improve the image.
Sunday, January 30, 2000
Today, I for the first time drank some tea from two cute
teacups we bought yesterday for one guilder each.
Monday, January 31, 2000
L1 to K
The coming two weaks I will be attending a XRF
course organized by my employer, the company
I am working
with. In the course material there was a nice
small map with the title
How to get to Almelo.
Today, there was a lecture about the physics of
X-rays and fluoresense. Somebody noted that in some
table (in the book
Quantitative X-ray Spectrometery)
the drop of electrons from the L1
orbital to the K orbital was missing, and asked if they
could make this drop or not. The physics of electrons
is really a strange and abstract subject. Everytime
it amazes me that we as humans know these kind of things.
Yet I remember that some Nobel-price winner said that
he still not really understands how it works. We know
the tricks of how to calculate things, but have no clue
about the why it works like this.
Image conversion program
I found a very nice image viewing and conversion program
with the name XNView. I used it to clean up this
image of a painting by Billy Foley, to make it look more like the original.
This is the result.
December 1999 |
February 2000 |