Re: I Want An Easier, Faster, Better CAD Tool

Archive-name: usenet/spam-faq Posting-Frequency: weekly Last-modified: 1998/11/10 URL:

snipped-for-privacy@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Original-Author: snipped-for-privacy@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)

Current Spam thresholds and guidelines.

This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam thresholds and ensure that the definitions of these terms are available and consistent. It is believed that most, if not all, spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work; however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which leads to confusion in discussions. This is an informal FAQ aimed at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term "spam" usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory. EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively identical article."

"Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is sufficiently similar to construe the same message. The signature is included in the determination. These are examples of substantively identical articles:

- byte-for-byte identical messages - otherwise identical postings minimally customized for each group it appears in. - advertising the same service. - articles that consist solely of the same signature - articles which consist of inclusions of other user's postings, but are otherwise identical.

Cross-posting means that a single message appears in more than one group. Most newsreaders allow you to specify more than one group in a posting.

Excessive Crossposting (ECP) refers to where a "lot" of postings to more than one group each have been made.

Some people think cross-posting is "bad". In and of itself, it's good behaviour - it allows you to reach more groups with less impact on the net. Especially if you set the Followup-to: header to one group. It is "bad" when it's done to attack newsgroups or provoke flamewars (like cross-posting how to cook a cat between alt.tasteless and rec.pet.cats), but this is beyond the scope of this FAQ.

This author considers the term "spam" to mean excessive postings of EMP and/or ECP variety. That is, "spam", is a generic term for several different things. The term was originally supposed to mean EMPs only, but most people use "spam" to mean "any excessive posting".

A spam, EMP, or ECP therefore refers to a posting that has been posted to many places. There is a consensus that there is a point at which it is abuse, and is subject to advisory cancellation.

A formula has been invented by Seth Breidbart which attempts to quantify the degree of "badness" of a spam (whether EMP or ECP) as a single number. The Breidbart Index (BI) is defined as the sum of the square roots of n (n is the number of newsgroups each copy was posted to).

Example: If two copies of a posting are made, one to 9 groups, and one to 16, the BI index is sqrt(9)+sqrt(16) = 3+4 = 7.

The BI2 (Breidbart Index, version 2) is an experimental metric, which may eventually replace the BI. It is calculated by computing the sum of the square roots of n, plus the sum of n, and dividing by two. Eg: one posting to 9, and one to 16 is

(sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 16) / 2 ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 16 ) / 2 = 32 / 2 = 16

The BI2 is more "aggressive" than the BI, intended to cut off the "higher end". BI allows about 125 newsgroups maximum. BI2 allows a maximum of 35.

A slightly less aggressive index is the SBI (Skirvin-Breidbart Index); it is calculated much the same as the BI2, but sums the number of groups in the Followup-to: header (if available), rather than the newsgroups. Eg: one posting to 9 groups, and one to 16 with followups set to 4 is

(sqrt(9) + sqrt(16) + 9 + 4) / 2 ( 3 + 4 + 9 + 4 ) / 2 = 20 / 2 = 10

Except in nl.*, where the SBI is followed, the BI2 and SBI are not used to determine whether a spam is cancellable.

The thresholds for spam cancels are based only on one or more of the following measures:

1) The BI is 20 or greater over a 45 day period. 2) is a continuation of a previous EMP/ECP, within a 45 day sliding window. That is: if the articles posted within the past 45 days exceeds a BI threshold of 20, it gets removed, unless the originator has made a clear and obvious effort to cease spamming (which includes an undertaking to do so posted in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet). This includes "make money fast" schemes which passed the EMP/ECP thresholds several years ago. This author recommends one posting cross-posted to no more than 10 groups, no more often than once every two weeks (a BI of 3).

A single posting cannot be cancellable - to reach a BI of 20, it would have to be cross-posted to 400 groups. This isn't possible due to limitations in Usenet software.

These thresholds nominally apply to all hierarchies - not just the Big-8 and alt.*. Many hierarchies have more restrictive rules, which are decided upon and enforced by their users and administrators; they may also opt out of the cancellations, at the discretion of the same users and admins.

These cancels have nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the message. It doesn't matter if it's an advertisement, it doesn't matter if it's abusive, it doesn't matter whether it's on-topic in the groups it was posted in, it doesn't matter whether the posting is for a "good cause" or not - spam is cancelled regardless, based on how many times it was said and not what was said.

Administrators wishing to ignore spam cancels can "alias out" the site "cyberspam", and the cancels will not affect your system. This is normally done at your feed site, but patches are available for INN to allow you to reject spam cancels on your own system. Ask in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet if you need this patch.

Further literature on posting etiquette and related information:

The newsgroup news.announce.newusers

"What is Usenet", by Salzenberg, Spafford and Moraes

"What is Usenet? A second opinion.", by Vielmetti

"FAQ: Advertising on Usenet: How To Do It, How Not To Do It", by Furr

"A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community", by Von Rospach, et al

"Rules for posting to Usenet", by Horton, Spafford & Moraes.

"Emily Postnews Answers Your Questions on Netiquette", by Templeton et al

Numerous books and publications on Usenet, such as O'Reilly's "Stopping Spam" (Schwartz and Garfinkel), the "Whole Internet Guide and Catalog" (Krol), "Usenet Handbook" (Harrison), etc.

"Cancel Messages: Frequently Asked Questions", by Skirvin

RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines

The above FAQs are also mirrored at various sites, including as ftp.sunet.se, mirror.aol.com, ftp.uu.net, ftp.uni-paderborn.de, nctuccca.edu.tw, hwarang.postech.ac.kr, ftp.hk.super.net etc.

A mailing list has been set up to assist those wishing to post commercial advertisements on Usenet in a responsible fashion. Email your questions to snipped-for-privacy@acpub.duke.edu.

Nope. XSI is a software package. Mostly used for rendering and animation. Do your research.

Rhino is not using someone else's "kernel". They have indeed written their own.

--moi

Wrong again, Cliff. PowerSolids is (actually WAS) an add-on (plug-in), not part of the base version of Rhino. You also might want to check dates and such before you post outdated info - note that the latest version of PowerSolids offered was for the previous version of Rhino (V3) and doesn't exist for the current one (V4).

The IntegrityWare "kernel" is being used however for MoI3D as far as I know...

--moi (no relation with MoI3D)

I know which "kernel" they are using... It's their own.

Find and post some accurate current info that indicates otherwise. Otherwise, I'll just take your silence as a tacit admission that you have no idea what you're talking about.

--moi

Nope.

And that free/open nurbs kernel... who do you think wrote that?

What's a "kernel"...? :-)

To have complete control over its development.

I don't need to. I know what's going on there pretty well.

YOU find any mention that they're using something else...

--moi

Rhino.http://www.opennurbs.org/background.htm> The openNURBS Initiative was founded by Robert McNeel & Associates

McNeel use to license the AG LIb geometry kernel from Alias. A good deal of Rhino was built on this kernel. There came a time when Alias didn't want to license it to McNeel anymore and because Bob McNeel signed a bad contract with Alias, McNeel had to yank out all the code from AG Lib. Now McNeel is scared to license any components for Rhino so Rhino develops at a snails pace as they try and do it all themselves. Dumb move. So is ignoring the mechanical market.

Jon Banquer San Diego, CA

To no one in particular. I'm trying to figure out what's going on, not tell anyone what is.

I remember seeing quite a lot of discussion at the, v2~v3, time regarding the loss of Alias purchased AGLib usage and development of their current geometry engine on McNeel's Rhino forum. Efforts to search for any of those old discussions have been fruitless. Archives hosed? Unfortunate if so.

If you can find any of the old discussions ...?

Regarding OpenNURBS, I've never paid much attention to it.

openNURBS is an open source toolkit for reading and writing models in the 3DM format. Our full-featured development platform is Rhino. The openNURBS Initiative was founded by Robert McNeel & Associates in January 2000, with the sole purpose of providing CAD, CAM, CAE, and computer graphics software users reliable methods for transferring 3-D geometry between applications. Who is funding the openNURBS Initiative and why? Robert McNeel & Associates. They feel that the 3-D market is stifled because of the inability to reliably transfer 3-D geometry between applications. The problem is too big for us to solve alone. By funding the operating cost of openNURBS, others will get involved in the toolkit design and development. It will be a much cheaper and effective way to solve the problem.

It would appear that it is not intended to be a "kernel", e.g. geometry creation and manipulation functions. True? ...

news:404f5ffd$ snipped-for-privacy@news.mcneel.com The openNURBS toolkit does not contain any functions or classes to assist in calculating intersections of curves or surfaces. You will have to come up with your own intersector or find a 3rd party product to use. Dale Fugier Robert McNeel & Associates

I don't know that not planting a worn out mechanical field is dumb.

Why is it every wino with a dialup is an expert analyst? Sad commentary on the species.

Wino's like you aren't very articulate and are hard to understand.

Yes you do have comprehension problems, nitwit.

You can barely put two words together that makes sense nitwit so who knows what you asked.

If you're asking what Rhino uses now it's mostly their own stuff with a little help from IntegrityWare.

Jon Banquer San Diego, CA

Wino's repeat the same nonsense over and over.

Winos have comprehension problems. I didn't ask what kernel Rhino "use to use".

Winos can't follow complex sentences.

Rubbish. Or not, depending on what you mean. Who owns the core function code? Is it licensed? Written 'in house' or contracted out? If you can't be more concise just shut up.

Because everybody and his dog develops a "mechanical" modeler. They are being given away.

Winos have a poor sense of ... whadayizzit? ... time ...

and comprehending tetetetechnology.

Winos don't have any business messing with customer furnished models. Leave the cerebral work to someone capable of working with complex concepts and sentences and, yep, maybe even CAD software.

Winos shouldn't operate machinery. Oh! That's right. You don't.

Winos repeat themselves a lot. The names may change but the nonsense is the same.

NO, CATIA is not equal, it has much more it's a CAD/CAM program where Solid Edge is not.

Tom

I rest my case.

Need a place to sleep it off, buddy? Maybe take a bath and wash those clothes? I know a group that can help.

You don't want a massive learning curve learning stuff that seems stupid to you.

You realize that you don't want to waste hours using a rollback bar to try and understand some pick your nose engineer's design intent just so you can modify their solid model to machine it.

You have to work with other people's solid models.

You have to work with non-native solid models.

You use Mastercam and realize you want more powerful CAD.

You have seen SolidWorks and don't wish to be a CAD expert.

You use SolidWorks and realize it leaves a lot to be desired.

You use Pro/E and realize it leaves a lot to be desired.

You use Surfcam and realize Surfcam CAD leaves a lot to be desired.

You use Featurecam and realize Featurecam CAD leaves a lot to be desired.

You use Rhino and want a modeler that's much better for mechanical modeling.

You use Mecsoft Visual Mill 6 and want a better CAD program.

You use an old version of BobCRAP, hang up on their telemarketers and refuse to downgrade your old copy of BobCRAP to BobCRAP 2007 / V22 and give these lying Scientologist slime balls another dime.

I have some good news for you:

I can show you a better way to model!

If you are in the following categories you're a brain dead idiot and I can't help you:

You use AutoCAD and think 2D is good enough.

You use Gibbscam and think it's CAD and CAM are just fine and have no clue that Mastercam X2 blows Gibbscam away in most areas.

You use BobCRAP 2007 / V22.

You use Alibre.

You think Matt Lombard is a genius and actually knows something about manufacturing.

You think Franco Folini is a genius and actually knows something about manufacturing.

You think Novedge actually adds value to the CADCAM products they sell.

You think that CATIA is an affordable answer.

You think CATIA has the equivalent of what Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology has.

You think SolidWorks has the equivalent of what Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology has.

The Jon Banquer blog has linked to a new video which makes it very clear how much better thought out Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology is and how much easier it is to model with their new tools.

Jon Banquer San Diego, CA

______________________________________________________

I don't know what to think OpenNURBS is. It appears, to me, to simply be a library of functions that will read / write native Rhino 3dm. A tool or hook for 3rd party developers? I don't know. The extent of my knowledge ends with what I posted. _ _ _ _ _ _

"Rhino started out as a surface modeler, not a solids modeler (which use kernels to produce BREP solids from such as NURBS surfaces). You don't need a kernel to create curve or surface either."

What is a "kernel"?

Seriously. Is that wino bait? Are we just playing with semantics? It looks like a serious statement, with which I can't agree, so I'm lacking some knowledge or the terms used mean something inconsistent with my understanding of them or the statement is incorrect.

First: What is a "solid"? It's a concept, a database entity.

Unless something's changed since I last looked Rhino (v3) can create and manipulate nonmanifold boundary representations, it can boolean add or subtract two closed shells where there is an intersection. It can calculate and report the volume represented. It can not create a "solid" with an internal void. It can create the closed shell representations. It does not have a database structure to contain them, call it a "solid" and manipulate it as such; i.e. report the "solid" volume or boolean subtract its volume from an encompassing volume yielding two disjoint "solids".

In my mind THAT is what makes Rhino a "surface", vs. "solid", modeler more so than its lack of all the typical Solid Modeler sequential function call macros that create surface geometry, perform intersect, trim, join operations consistent with the user defined boolean operator and validate the manifold solid b-rep object without additional user input.

To create a curve you need functions that accept two or more user defined points at minimum, possibly tangent direction, curvature and rate definitions and from that input return; usually, a graphic representation and coordinate values for any point on that curve.

To create a surface you need functions that extend curve creation, query and manipulation from one (U) dimension into the second (V) dimension.

To create a shell you need a database entity to contain one or more surfaces, their supporting (curve) entities or pointers to discrete database entities that define them and any additional attributes that may be associated with the object, and you need functions that will manipulate the shell entity as a single object.

To create a solid you need a database entity to contain ... yadadada ... and functions to manipulate the entity as a single object.

So what is a kernel? Parasolid, ACIS, Granite, ... Is C(atia) A(pplication) A(rchitecture) a kernel? Is Rhino's geometry engine, e.g. it's core creation, query, manipulation function library a kernel? _ _ _ _ _ _

"But what of the current Rhino solids "kernel"?"

Obviously I can't answer that question.

To the best of my knowledge, the extent of which was gleaned from the previously mentioned and presumably lost forum discussions which McNeel tech and development personnel participated in; their geometry and database creation and manipulation functions are their own and were written 'in house'.

If they have "solid" capabilities in addition to what I've described above I have no idea if they are 3rd party add-on, core product, licensed, owned, ...

I'd be tickled if I knew if they have a "kernel". ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________

Who said it does? And, what in this specific context does "enclosed" mean? Generally speaking a volume is not defined by surfaces but by "shells". It's the "topology" that makes the difference.

Reread what I wrote. I indicated that, in my opinion, the ability to create a shell, define a volume, ..., whatever does not a "solid modeler" make.

And let's be specific: what we are talking about is b-rep modelers. Some have the ability to create and manipulate (the volume with internal void) "solid" (database) objects, some don't. Some have the ability to create and manipulate "disjoint solid" objects, some don't.

Rhino does booleans. That's been stated.

Ummmmm....

They are still there. The surface definition remains unchanged. Interior trim boundaries were added to shell (or whatever; some database entity defining the trimmed surfaces) definitions. Ref IGES type 144 Index 5 (PTI).

We'll have to agree to disagree that "automatic" does not a solid modeler or a kernel make.

Putting that aside though: Rhino does booleans, therefore "automatic" trimming. Does Rhino have a kernel?

Is this getting a little soft around the edges? Where else would the definitions be?

Rhino has database entities containing ("deals with") topology definitions. Does it have a kernel?

Thanks for the links. I'll check 'em out. Wiki I take with a grain of salt. I assume, since you made the recommendation, you're vouching for technical accuracy.

I confess. When I entered this phase of the discussion I brought with me the opinion that "What is a kernel?" resides with "Why is there air?" Your statement took me by surprise.

What are Parasolid, ACIS, Granite but libraries of functions and supporting data structure definitions? What is the scope of each? When do application developers pass user input to library function calls and when must they write their own functions and pass the results to licensed library functions or simply integrate the results in the data set? Who maintains the history and parametric relationships? Varies. Correct?

(Now that it's been mentioned; what "kernels" do maintain history and parametric relationships? I might lose my nickle but I'd bet that is always the application developer's responsibility.)

I see no distinct difference between SchmoCAD passing user input to an ACIS or Parasolid function and Rhino passing user input to its 'home grown' function.

If you run across a nice, clean definition of "kernel" ... maybe I'll buy it, maybe I won't.