Science Project Quadruples Surfing Speed - Reportedly

johnp. writes "A computer browser that is said to least quadruple surfing speeds on the Internet has won the top prize at an Irish exhibition for young scientists, it was announced on Saturday. Adnan Osmani, 16, a student at Saint Finian's College in Mullingar, central Ireland spent 18 months writing 780,000 lines of computer code to develop the browser. Known as "XWEBS", the system works with an ordinary Internet connection using a 56K modem on a normal telephone line. " A number of people had submitted this over the weekend - there's absolutely no hard data that I can find to go along with this, so if you find anything more on it, plz. post below - somehow 1500 lines of code per day, "every media player" built in doesn't ring true for me.

Basic maths.

[psychofox (92356)]

780,000 lines of code in 18 months is approximately 1500 lines per day every single day. I'm skeptical.

Re:Basic maths.

[SHiVa0 (608471)]

CTRL-C then CTRL-V...

you see, it's not that hard to make 1500 lines of code per day!

Re:Basic maths.

[Pentagram (40862)]

Maybe he's a big fan of whitespace?

Re:Basic maths.

[(bore_us) (640738)]

Sure 780,000 lines is a lot, but of course he used his own editor which quadruples his programming speed.
I wonder what ever happened to reading webpages while surfing... Ooohh, right, so that's what you call surfing :-))

Re:Basic maths.

[sql*kitten (1359)]

780,000 lines of code in 18 months is approximately 1500 lines per day every single day. I'm skeptical.

Indeed. I remember reading that IBM reckon that, including design, coding, testing, debugging and documentation, a programmer's doing well to get 10 lines of code per day, averaged over the life of the project.

Also depends how he's counting lines. In C, because that can vary so much depending on individual formatting style, a good rule of thumb is to count semicolons. And even then it won't tell you if programmer A is writing fast but hard to read code and programmer B is checking the return value of every system call (as you're supposed to but few ever do), adding lines and robustness with no extra actual functionality.

Re:Basic maths.

[Angst Badger (8636)]

Still, sustaining 1,500 LOC per day for a year and a half ... that's beyond the productivity level of anyone I've ever seen. I personally have managed 4,500 per day for a period of about a week on occasion ... but I wasn't sleeping much during that period.

I broke 1,000 LOC per day for about a week while working for an unnamed gigantic CPU monopolist. I was behind schedule, over budget, and had a hard deadline, and the code itself was fairly repetitive and not terribly efficient. Ordinarily, I'd figure I produce closer to 250 LOC per day during a normal coding period.

Provided this story isn't complete hogwash, my guess is that the reporter asked the boy about the writing the program and he answered that it consisted of 780,000 LOC and took him a year and a half to build. He probably neglected to mention that 90% of those lines were in libraries written by other people. He may not have even intended to be deceptive in any way, figuring that any fool would know that was the case, but not realizing that the reporter was a fool.

Re:Basic maths.

[angel'o'sphere (80593)]

well,

when I had "software engineering" in my computer science courses, we got this figures for LOC per say:

Application programs: 25 - 100
Service programs: 5 - 25
System programs: 1

Application programs are things like an editor (albeit some editors are rather complex), service programs are things like cc and ld or asm (albeit some of them are not "that" complex) system programs are stuff like the kernal itself or, dynamic link loaders, device drivers etc.

Well,
we all know that LOC is not a defined "value" but people working a lot with that "measure" just define it :-)

E.g. if you work with COCOMO or with PSP(personal software process) the typical LOC is defined as a single definition, a single expression(some even say every part of an expression), an argument to a function call, every include, every define and so on:

fprintf(stderr, "this is an error number: %ld", errnum);

That would be 4 LOC, one LOC for the "statement" and 3 for the 3 arguments. Consider you can make an error/bug in every argument or 'misstype' fprintf for fscanf ....

LOCs do not realy get interesting in comparing hero programmers (10 to 20 times more effective) with standard programmers, but by comparing programming languages!!!

The VERY INTERESTING point about LOCs is that the noted rules of thumb above are independend from programming languages!!!

A programmer writing lets say 12 LOC per day C also writes ~ 12 LOC per day in assembler, in LISP in PERL or what ever language is appointed for the project.

So: the more expressive and the more abstract a language is the more "algorithm" or "computation" is defined in the lines of code.

In other words: 10 lines of C are far more calculation than 10 lines of assembler, while 10 lines of LISP, SQL or Prolog are even more than C.

Bottom line: the number of statements the average programmer can write depends far more on the problem domain than on the language choosen!

Well, the productivity of the so called hero programmer is in general not in lines of code, but in "abstractions" he implemetns. Or in number of features he implements. And that is often acomplished by choosing the right language constructs(not by writing more lines) ... e.g. using auto_ptr templates in C++ instead of manual exception management and manual allocation and deallocation inside of a function lets you "work" much faster and yields more maintaneable code. More readable, less to think about and faster ongoing to the next feature.

angel'o'sphere

Re:Basic maths.

[jimfrost (58153)]

Some of the issue may be in exactly what counts as a "line," and I don't really care to argue that issue, but...

I am not surprised you don't believe me. It's hard to believe it myself, and I'm the one that has done it. I do not suggest that that level of productivity is typical of either myself or others nor sustainable over a long period of time. My long-term average is less than a tenth that (and dropping as I get older).

The state I'm in when coding like that is best described as a fugue state. My mind is racing and everything else just gets ignored. Meals. Sleeping. I call it "going under" because that's what it feels like when I come out of it. The productivity that I see during such periods is prodigious to say the least.

But it's absolutely brutal on the body. You used a 16 hour day in your calculation, but that's understating it by nearly 50%. Because, in that state, I'm not sleeping at all. I'm incapable of sleep. Nor am I taking regular meal breaks. This allows coding for about 23 hours per day.

Typically when I get into that state it only lasts for about two days (40-50 hours), but there have been a handful of times when it has lasted longer ... as many as five days straight.

As for whether or not the code produced was trivial, the last such time I did this I wrote a Java debugger from scratch. Mostly that was UI code (Swing didn't exist at the time so I had to write a lot of rendering and layout components) but the class disassembly and debug engines were fairly complicated (but nowhere near the complexity of a JPEG or MPEG decoder!). It took 96 hours to write almost 14,000 LOC.

Now, there are two other interesting productivity data points. When coding in C or C++ (doesn't really matter which) my productivity maxes out at around 1,500 LOC in a day. Java triples it! And the bug rate falls by ~90% in Java. I love Java.

Anyway, that's my story, believe it or not. And, as such, it's not entirely unbelievable to me that someone could do 1,500 LOC/day for at least a few days at a shot. Doing it for 18 months straight though? Doesn't seem likely.

Re:Basic maths.

[ergo98 (9391)]

I dono, maybe me and my co-workers are some kind of gods, but I don't see these "one week" numbers as outrageous. We're all gods when we don't need proof though, right? I code 100,000 lines per day and sleep 15 minutes on my commute to work (it's a straight section of the highway). I am a GOD! Of course then there's that silly old thing called reality. Here are some simple facts. Feel free to disagree.

• Heroic coding is almost always destructive. Read The Mythical Man Month for a little background on this: Basically when people start putting in those 20 hour days then it's either the beginning of the end (which in some cases as the beginning of the beginning as well. See many well know .com cases). People, even gods like yourself, have a finite amount of problem solving cerebral ability per day, and extending that is generally counter productive.
• The human body can go a couple of days with minimal sleep, but it is absolute folly to extrapolate that and presume that it'll keep going for even a week: Instead you'll either require a massive sleep "make-up", or you'll become mentally dull while your immune system collapses (this is presuming you don't have a medical condition).
• A line of code per 16 seconds again sounds good and we can all easily do it by reimplementing something that we've already done (ooh look at my reversing a string function!), but it is astoundingly unlikely that someone could continue such a rate beyond even an hour. If coding were so trivial we would have tools to generate the code.
• Ah the number of projects I've worked on where someone has given optimistic numbers, presuming that they'll magically create line after line after line...and then a subtle bug hits. Days later their half a day of coding is eclipsed by days of problem solving. I'm sure this doesn't affect Gods, though.

Re:have you ever been 16

[dubstop (136484)]

Yes. For a year during my mid-teens.

I don't deny that it's possible to write 10,000+ lines of code in 5 days but, unless you're some sort of prodigy, I would have serious reservations about the quality of that code.

All of us who chose development as a career because we love to write code, rather than just because it's a well-paid and relatively easy-going job, have at some time cranked out amazing amounts of code in a short time. My doubts are caused by the duration. I don't believe that it's possible to sustain that sort of output for that period of time.

Re:have you ever been 16

[mark_lybarger (199098)]

and some days you just read /.

10-20?!

[autopr0n (534291)]

You can't be serious, if the average software engineer could type out just 10-20 lines of code in a day, a program like Apache, or the Linux, kernal, or windows would have taken a team of 100 programmers decades to write.

A good software engineer should be able to write at least a few hundred lines of code in one full day

Re:10-20?!

[entrox (266621)]

That's 10-20 tested, documented, reviewed and functional lines of code excluding tests. A Software Engineer (as opposed to a code monkey) should spend most of his time testing and documenting his code - besides, don't forget code reviews - they also take some time.
Of course, if you only spew out code and do nothing else, then yes, 10-20 LOC is not very much.

Besides, how many programmers does Microsoft employ? How long are they working on Windows now? Let's assume the Windows source code contains about 10 million LOC - that's 500.000 days if one programmer writes 20 lines a day. Let us further assume, that 100 programmers are working on Windows. That's around 1.400 man-years or 14 years in our case. That's not unreasonable, is it?

Re:Basic maths.

[Zeinfeld (263942)]

We'll probably find he's just compiled Phoenix and put his own name in the title bar...

Most likely he has taken an open source browser and added in his own extensions. This is the type of innovation that making the browser open source is meant to support.

As for speeding up browsing by a factor 100% that is pretty easy. We did a lot of work on HTTP-NG and you can speed up downloads a lot just by compressing the headers so that they fit into a single packet. HTML is also very compressible. The biggest mistake we made in the original Web code was not putting a lightweight compression scheme into the code, although it did make it into the specs.

Of course the reason this did not happen was the LZ patent GIF fiasco and the then state of the GNU compression libraries. Even so Microsoft has supported compression in IE for some time.

I am rather more skeptical about the 500% claim. I don't think that there is that much redundancy unless you have completely artificial examples.

Hmmmm he even admits it crashes

[grahamsz (150076)]

"At seven times it actually crashes so I have limited it to six."

This isn't a microprocessor - the speed it runs should be completely unrelated to it's caching.

I'm very very skeptical that this is anything more than a browser with precaching.

It also makes other ludicrous statements about how blind people can now access the web. I'm not sure how they do it presently, but i know that they do.

Warning! Your internet connection is not optomized

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone finally clicked that damn pop-up

Re:Hmmmm he even admits it crashes

[byolinux (535260)]

Many Windows users use Jaws [freedomscientific.com] a popular screenreader.

There is also BLinux [leb.net], a project to make Linux accessible for blind users.

Jaws is pretty cool, I use it at work sometimes to test sites.

Re:Hmmmm he even admits it crashes

[Rolo Tomasi (538414)]

I have a theory - if he feeds the processor the right series of commands, he could create a resonance cascade that would create a bubble in spacetime which would cause all time inside it to pass at a faster pace than normal.

The downside on this would be that you age four times as fast while surfing, but hey, there's always something ...

Re:Hmmmm he even admits it crashes

[cuyler (444961)]

"At seven times it actually crashes so I have limited it to six."

Neat! I never thought that a web page would have a terminal velocity. Guess it's between 6 and 7 times the normal speed of web pages.

suspicious

[g4dget (579145)]

If nothing else makes you suspicious about that story, this should:

He wants to study computer engineering in Harvard University and eventually set up his own Internet or computer company.

(For people who don't get it, Harvard's CS department, while reasonably good, is not exactly the obvious top pick among CS hotshots.)

Re:suspicious

[rcs1000 (462363)]

Yes, but he is in Ireland. I'm not entirely sure how aware the average Dublin 17 year-old is of the relative rankings of Ivy League US universities.

I'd be suspicious about the alleged speed of writing code. (That's thousands of lines a day!) It seems to be like this is just a browser which loads up links ahead of displaying them. Which, amazingly enough, is what all those "Your Internet Connection Is Not Optimized!!!" programs do.

How doing this faster can make the computer crash is a bit of a mystery to me. (I can't think of a single program with a speed dial, and above a certain speed, the computer crashes... ;-))

Re:suspicious

[Sycraft-fu (314770)]

Onw would think that even someone not from the US would have hear of Caltech and MIT if they were in the computer field. They are, quite literally, world famous.

No this is either total bullshit, or a huge exearation. Remember, with real science, computer or otherwise, the MOST important part is subjecting work to peer review. Anyhting which can only be demonstrated in one lab in a hands-off, no-details demonstration isn't science and the person is hiding something.

Re:suspicious

[sql*kitten (1359)]

Yes, but he is in Ireland. I'm not entirely sure how aware the average Dublin 17 year-old is of the relative rankings of Ivy League US universities.

He is in Ireland, but Dublin's no tech backwater. Trinity College Dublin is world-renowned for science and maths, and a short flight away are Imperial College and UCL in London, not to mention Oxford and Cambridge. A little further than that is the Sorbonne. There's no reason he shouldn't be as familiar with the rankings as anyone else.

And thanks to the Irish government's very sensible tax policy (i.e. less is better), the country has a sizeable presence of US high-tech firms, like Oracle and Sun.

As others have said, tho', anyone who claims to be able to sustain 1500 LOC/day for 18 months, is probably not to be taken seriously.

I get it...

[cca93014 (466820)]

This uses the same technology that manages to compress the entire British Museum, a DVD of "The Matrix" and the goatse weblogs into 42 bits of data and a packet of peanuts.

It then makes use of network magic. You mean no-one ever told you about the magic ?

Hmm.

[boris_the_hacker (125310)]

Well I have to confess to being mildly curious. I mean, a 16 year old school boy writing 780,000 lines of code in 18 months ? Well I am impressed, by my meagre calculations that equates to _roughly_ 1,400 lines of code a _day_ every day for 18 months. And this application makes the internet go upto 6 times faster [apparently 7 times make it crash]. Not only that, it has been a secret project for the entire time. I smell a rat, either that or a complete genius code writer.

But what really got me where the two most important features someone could ever want in a Web Browser - it can play dvd's [it incorporates ever media player!], and also has a handy animated assisant called Pheobe.

Now, I am most probably wrong, and will happily eat my hat, but I cant help but feel that this isn't an entirely accurate article.

ps. Does anyone know if it is standard compliant ?

Re:Hmm.

[Sycraft-fu (314770)]

There is simply no way a browser can incorperate "every media player" because they operte on different standards. Windows Media Player operates using DirectShow to play it's files. It's nothing more than a control program for DirectShow. Any DirectShow filter loaded onto the system with decode capabilities can be decoded. Any other program can use the same interface, and play all those file types. Fine, however this is Window ONLY, the code is proprietary to MS and not for otehr platforms. And then on Windows you have other things like QuickTime. QT does NOT function as a DS filter, it's a whole seperate way of doing things and again we have proprietary code. This continues for any other mdiea standard (Real for exmaple) that has it's own system.

I have a feeling this project is nothing but hot air.

Re:Hmm.

[WEFUNK (471506)]

Based on the level of tech knowledge exhibited by the average tech reporter (pretty low) I'd guess that "built-in" probably just means that it comes pre-loaded with standard plug-ins. Especially when it's cited in an article that seems so impressed that "Other special aspects of his browser are the fact that access to 120 Internet search engines..." - a rather useless/annoying feature that's standard in any run-of-the-mill adware/spyware package or by visiting one of those squatter's website's with all the pop-up ads (searching dmoz 115 times isn't going to help anyone...).

The claim that it's 100 to 500% faster is probably accurate in some sense, but compared to what? An old version of Netscape or Explorer? And on what kind of set-up? You can probably see that kind of variation in a single browser installation just by changing to different options and settings or by closing other windows or background applications. Personally, I often find myself switching between browsers depending on what seems to be working better on a particular day or on a particular network or machine.

On the other hand, he does sound like he's a bright kid with a good future, but probably one that just took Mozilla and turned it into snazzy looking bloatware with a bunch of extra features. Or, perhaps an even brighter kid who did the same thing from "scratch" with a lot of cutting and pasting (of his own work and from existing programs and libraries) to end up "writing" so many lines of code.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof

[GregWebb (26123)]

They've claimed that a 16 year old student has written 780,000 lines of code. That it combines a browser accelerated way beyond what anyone else has ever claimed (and that could potentially run faster, just doesn't yet), multi-format media player (actually, I don't want to watch DVDs in a little side window while browsing the web, thanks...) a meta search engine and an avatar-based help system?

That's massive work _and_ a revolutionary breakthrough. If he's that good - and in a way that others hadn't thought of despite the efforts of several of the world's largest companies going into browser and network research - then this is remarkable. But without hard evidence (or even a mention on the competition's admittedly poor website) this just sounds way too much like a scam.

Giant VB Applicaiton?

[Dr. Evil (3501)]

Prediciton: It turns out to be some Visual Basic application which uses built-in windows components such as media player... thus allowing "All media formats, and DVD playing capabilities"

Quadrupling "Surfing Speed" is so bizzare a claim that I have no idea what it could mean. Maybe he's blocking banner ads... at 56k it could make a difference.

As for the "lines of code" I strongly doubt that a kid is using the same criteria for lines of code that everyone else is using... it probably includes his html test suite, and all his test code, abandoned code and documentation added together. Or maybe he didn't know how to write a function, so it is a big cut-and-paste one-function VB program with Goto's.

It's not that I doubt that a kid can pull this sort of thing off, it is that I doubt the school teachers nor the media have enough knowledge to judge it or report it accurately.

Is that so?

[Pike65 (454932)]

Do we have any reason to believe that this has a lower bullshit quotient than that daft '100x compression of random data' story doing the rounds last year (can't find the /. link, here The Register's one [theregister.co.uk])?

Sure, you can leave stuff out (images, JavaScript, Flash), but "at least quadruple"? If the page is simple enough then you can't just ditch a chunk of it.

Ooh, AND "[at] least quadruple surfing speeds" and "they found it boosted surfing speeds by between 100 and 500". Even the article isn't making any sense . . .

Of course, if this turns out to be true than I will be the first to eat my cat (and the first to download it), but I'm sure this isn't even possible, right?

Just my 2 cents (actually, that was more like 5) . . .

What a load of crap

[Masa (74401)]

This has to be a hoax. And not even a good one.

A kid coding 780'000 lines of code in 18 months. All alone. In that time he have had to design and implement the whole shit including "every single media player built in".

It would require some sort of dial-up-server side module to compress and modify the contents of the data and this kind of system would most certainly be a lossy method for transferring data. It won't be possible to transfer binary data with this thing without corrupting the result completely.

And what kind of a piece of software would choke under the load of 7x56k modem ("At seven times it actually crashes so I have limited it to six.")?

This is just a cheap attempt to gather some attention.

Ok, let's think this through....

[orthogonal (588627)]

If this thing's really a web browser, and it runs completely on the client computer, any web pages it's requesting are coming down the line as HTML, uncompressed (except insofar as the modem's protocol might compress). Without a compresser on the other end, the speed's not coming from compression.

If it does require a server side piece, it's not a web browser, per se; but as a general question, is it worthwhile to look into "compressed" web pages, e.g., foo.html.zlib? (I tend to doubt the savings are that much for the "average" page, but shoving graphics into an archive might keep down the number of requests needed to fetch a whole page and its graphics.)

If it's not server side compression, the only thing I can think of (and fortunately smarter people than me will think of other things I'm sure) is that he's pre-fetching and caching pages to make the apparent speed faster.

So is the "secret" that he has some hueristic that sensibly guesses what links you'll click next, combined with regularly fetching, oh say, your most requested bookmarks? (In my case it might look like: slashdot -- New York Times -- slashdot -- sourceforge -- slashdot -- freshmeat -- eurekareport -- slashdot.)

In other words, is he mirroring sites locally in the background? And if so, how must bandwidth is wasted just sitting in the cache until it's stale?

(On the other hand, could I point his browser at /., refreshing every five seconds to make sure I got a local copy of pages about to be slashdotted?)

Re:Ok, let's think this through....

[reynaert (264437)]

If it does require a server side piece, it's not a web browser, per se; but as a general question, is it worthwhile to look into "compressed" web pages, e.g., foo.html.zlib?

This already exists, look for example at mod_gzip for Apache. This will compress pages before transmitting if the browser claims to support it. Mozilla does, I believe IE does too.

Apparently is was actually 1.5 Million lines...

[ReD-MaN (27321)]

According to Here [online.ie] :"It took him nearly two years and 1.5m lines of code to write it."

There is no way.

no footprint ?

[mirko (198274)]

It's curious that there is so few info about Adnan Osmani.
I however found out this thread in the news [google.com] but, mind you, it's based on the same story...
They bet that if it's possible, he may have either implemented some quick prefetch and/or pre-formatting subroutine...

Pattern matching?

[horza (87255)]

I'm surprised that the majority of posters are resorting to unimaginative "what BS" posts instead of thinking up innovative ideas. Ok, here is my idea:

Most web pages have a lot of static content in, especially menus etc. You could start rendering the page immediately from the cache from the last page and rerender afterwards as the new page starts to differ from the cached version.

As the page comes in, keep switching to the page that is closest to same structure in cache (ie predominantly on the HTML tags). Don't render the text until the initial few chars are confirmed by the version downloading, then progressively render that (ie show old version then modify words where they differ).

This would have the effect of progressively rendering the page as a whole much like those progressive GIFs. It would show a large speedup on pages that contain tables, as most browsers these days won't render a table until it has recieved the /table.

This would be a 'faster' browser with no compression or pre-caching.

Phillip.

Re:Pattern matching?

[jonathanclark (29656)]

Another possible way to speed up transfer is by using upstream traffic as well as downstream traffic. Normally when you download a web page, the server assumes the client knows nothing about the content, but as other post mention the difference between two pages or updates of the same site will likely be much smaller than a complete resend. So the client can use it's upstream bandwidth to start transmitting data it already has for that site (or partial data hashes), while the server transmits new data. This would require a change to the web servers or use of a proxy server, but in general I could see this dramatically improving download speeds for sites that have a lot of common XML/CSS/menus etc.

I think 90% of page traffic occurs on the top few websites through regular visitors, so in most cases the client will already have some data available.

So, Jim, I'm concerned with your performance...

[Spoing (152917)]

PHB: Jim! Did you fill out your TPS report?

Jim: Yes, I --

PHB: Jim...I'm concerned about your performance.

Jim: Er, wha--

PHB: You write, what, 30 maybe 80 "eL Oh Cee" a day? Right?

Jim: Well, the TPS and project plans take --

PHB: Says here, that this 16 year old kid can write 1500 "eL Oh Cee" a day. What do you think about that?

PHB: Don't laugh...this is serious.

Jim: Sorry. I ment --

PHB: Jim, maybe you need to put in more hours. Reconsider your work habbits.

Jim: I work till 10 most nights...

PHB: Jim, it's not the hours it's how efficiently you handle them. I expect todays TPS on my desk by noon, along with a status report on each programming task you've done today.

Jim: It's 11 --

PHB: That's it Jim! Keep up the good work. In the meantime, see if you can increase that "eL Oh Cee" to, say, about a hundread. It's good to make a good impression. Fine. Excellent. I knew I could count on you. I'll see you then! ... Brian...did you fill out that TPS report...

Irish Patent Office does not know about this

[klaasvakie (608359)]

Searching Irish Patent Office [espacenet.com]:

Query :
Application Date: 08/01/2003 -> 10/01/2003
Abstract: *internet*
Results: 0

Query :
Date Of Grant: 08/01/2003 -> 10/01/2003
Abstract: *internet*
Results: One Result: 2000/0717 82661 Server-based electronic wallet system

Thats it, so it doesn't seem he applied for the patent in Ireland then...

P.S. The stars around "internet" are mine, I used them to indicate that I searched all abstracts that contained the word "internet"

Then why the hell did you post it?

[kramer (19951)]

there's absolutely no hard data that I can find to go along with this, so if you find anything more on it, plz. post below - somehow 1500 lines of code per day, "every media player" built in doesn't ring true for me.

Twits who make up bullshit stories like this thrive on attention. By posting it on a major site like slashdot, you give him exactly what he wants. Just use a little restraint, and try not to post the stories that are obvioulsy fake -- like this one, and the one about Masters of Orion 3 beign out soon (grin).

1500 lines a day

[jamie (78724)]

I knew a programmer, a real hotshot, who really could write 1,500 lines of code a day.

Then he discovered loops.

Possible explaination for LoC

[Fjord (99230)]

One possible explaination for the LoC count may be that he's using Borland and trusting it's "count". At my first real job, we used Borland and I made a realtively complex program over the course of 18 months (coincidentally enough). The line count was over 1.5 million, but the reality was that it wasn't that long, Borland was counting lines processed, which included the header files, and the OWL and windows headers could add a lot to each module (of which there were over 100, since I was big on modularization).

I never really knew the true line count. I just remember the Borland one because I used to often do a global compile any time I wanted a half hour break ("Oh, the systems acting funny. Better do a global compile to make sure it's not a dependancy problem." If my boss came by and I wasn't there, he'd see the compile running on the screen).

FTL Browsing

[MichaelPenne (605299)]

Seems simply enough, this kid has obviously developed an FTL browser.

Explains why it crashes at Warp 7 too, the dilithium code just can't take, keptin!

Re:Great, yet another browser...

[Pathwalker (103)]

I wonder if he will open-source the code?

it is doubtful that he will - according to the article he has applied for a patent on it.

Re:Great, yet another browser...

[byolinux (535260)]

Sounds scarily like some of the browsers you get on PSC [planetsourcecode.com] which are just the IE control bundled in with the QuickTime control, etc etc. If he has actually made this, it'll probably be for Windows anyway...

Re:Speeding up browsing?

[srhuston (161786)]

Needless to say, I'm fairly sceptical that this is an actual speedup of browsing. If you can only fit 56Kbps down a line then you can only fit 56Kbps down a line...

Yes, unless you have one of these! [slashdot.org]

Re:Different Calendar

[byolinux (535260)]

Yes, every Jan 13th, the Irish come together to celebrate 'St Slashdot Day' where everyone gets together, drinks caffeine and then posts bogus tech stories to make Taco and Hemos look silly.

Well, okay, they don't but it'd be nice if they did... instead of the year round crap.

Re:It slices it dices

[boaworm (180781)]

Most likely you are correct, but there could be something to it. When I took classes in data communications we learned about how good ol' modems work. Increasing speed on an old modem is basically just a matter of the number of signals/second and how many different singlals you can send with a single "signal". By increasing the precision of signal detection (differentiating different signals, thus allowing more than one "bit" being sent through a single period of time you can increase the total amount of data).

The article discusses that he uses a simple modem, so that could perhaps mean that he just wrote some new method for transmitting more bits/second by a more accurate signal detection method.

Although, this has basically nothing to do with the browser at all, so it does not make any sense to me. Sounds like the article mixes apples and oranges, or perhaps the "student" is just laying out a smoke barrier so that noone will steal his ideas before he get the patent.

my 5 cents...

Re:Strong sense of deja vu

[headbonz (156721)]

Its probably not fair to characterize Sarah Flannery's work as having had, "no solid documentation." As this page at Cryptome [cryptome.org] points out, Sarah's work did not "revolutionize cryptography" because several mathematicians -- including Sarah herself -- identified a "definitive attack" on the technique described in her winning paper (which was an application of the Cayley-Purser algorithm). Her book [amazon.com] remains a good read, especially for young women, and I don't think anyone believes that the math in her original paper is anything less than exceptional for a 15-year-old.

Re:Strong sense of deja vu

[Ivan the Terrible (115742)]

I seem to recall a story about another young Irish student who had developed a "revolutionary" encryption engine a while back. That was largely all claim and no solid documentation as well, and what has become of her efforts since then? Not much, not even a single update.

Bullshit. Get your facts straight before you malign someone. Sarah Flannery

• won the Ireland's Young Scientist of the Year, and
• the European Young Scientist of the Year awards,
• was awarded a third-place Karl Menger Memorial Award from the American Mathematical Society and a fourth-place Grand Award in Mathematics,
• won Intel Fellows Achievement Award,
• wrote a paper [cryptome.org] on her algorithm, with a postscript exposing a successful attack,
• wrote a book, In Code: A Mathematical Journey, [amazon.com] on her experiences (5 stars, 13 reviews, sales rank=35K).

She used Mathematica, so the Wolfram website has review [wolfram.com] of the book.

Here's a quote from Bruce Schneier in his 15 Dec 99 newsletter [counterpane.com].

To me, this makes Flannery even more impressive as a young cryptographer. As I have said many times before, anyone can invent a new cryptosystem. Very few people are smart enough to be able to break them. By breaking her own system, Flannery has shown even more promise as a cryptographer. I look forward to more work from her.

All of this was easily found with a Google search [google.com] that garned 24,000 hits.