Today, I have data (and code) that confirms the distribution is sorting-algorithm-dependent.  For each sorting algorithm, 1,000,000 instances of the list {0,1,2,3,4} were sorted with a random comparison function and the relative frequencies (rounded to the nearest whole percent) of each number in each position were computed.

The distributions are significantly different among these sorts.  QuickSort appears to provide a uniform distribution.  I believe that this is because QuickSort will only compare a particular pair of elements once, whereas each of the other sorting algorithms may compare a given pair of elements more than once (and with a random comparison function, receive a different result from one time to the next).

Here is the Mathematica notebook I used to generate this data: Randomize by Sorting.nb.  As noted in the file, some of the code for the sorting algorithms was taken from other locations and may be/is subject to their copyrights and/or license terms (I reasonably believe that this use complies with their licenses and/or constitutes fair use.  Also, some algorithms exhibited improper behavior when trying to sort lists with duplicate entries using a normal comparison function as noted in the file, though this should have no effect on the data above.

The second result in a google search for “javascript sort” says:

To randomize the order of the elements within an array, what we need is the body of our sortfunction to return a number that is randomly <0, 0, or >0, irrespective to the relationship between “a” and “b”. The below will do the trick:

//Randomize the order of the array:
var myarray=[25, 8, "George", "John"]
myarray.sort(function() {return 0.5 - Math.random()}) //Array elements now scrambled

This is almost exactly the method of randomization used in the browser ballot javascript.

To test the results of this randomization technique, I applied it 1,000,000 times to the list {0,1,2,3,4} in Mathematica and tabulated the relative frequencies of each number in each position. (Rounded to the nearest whole %).

At a glance, it appears that the distribution is far from uniform.  My quick attempt at re-learning how to use the Χ² test gave a probability less than 1×10^-100000 that this data matched a uniform distribution (if someone can confirm/fix that, please comment).

I used the Mathematica Sort[] command to do the sorting.  I don’t know what algorithm that uses.  It appears that the algorithm used by Javascript’s sort() varies from browser to browser, though the browser ballot would be displayed in IE8 by default.  I suspect that the distribution is highly dependent on the sorting algorithm used, though I cannot readily verify it [edit: I verified it].  Regardless, this seems to be a very poor way to generate a random ordering.

Want to get someone off IE6? Put these 11 characters into the address bar and hit enter: ms-its:%F0:. The browser will instantly crash. Better yet, set it as their homepage.

The packaging is simple and elegant, a clear plastic shell, though it would have been more elegant without the huge white label added by the Apple Store along one long side, which covered the seam in the box and made it much harder to open than intended and left all sorts of sticky gunk behind.  Batteries are included and pre-installed.  Swapping it in for my bluetooth Mighty Mouse was as simple as turning it on, asking my Mac to set up a bluetooth device, clicking a few times, and turning off the old mouse.  The Magic Mouse is lighter and flatter than the Mighty Mouse (though heavier than the USB version).

Left and right clicking (once enabled) work just like on the Mighty Mouse.  Scrolling is nice and the momentum is a nice add-on.  Forward/backward swipes for navigation work, though I find the gestures a bit awkward (I played with these in the store when I first laid hand on the mouse).  I’d long ago disabled the side buttons on my Mighty Mouse, so I don’t miss those one bit.  As for middle-clicking (clicking on top of the scrollball), had the Magic Mouse hit about 3 months earlier, I wouldn’t have cared at all, but somewhere in the past few months I’ve gotten in the habit of using the middle click to open links in new tabs and close tabs, both in Firefox and in Chrome, so I wasn’t looking forward to losing it.  A quick search led me to this program (actually, this version, as the other one doesn’t seem to work as consistently) which works like a charm—once set up, physically click with 3 fingers on the surface to middle-click (the program defaults to a 3-finger tap, rather than physical click, and is supposed to work on multitouch trackpads as well).

So, my first-hour opinion: worth it to me, may or may not be worth it to you.

… or “why I let myself get carried away reading from one blog post to another.”

After discovering free and cheap SSL certificates, I was playing with some sites over HTTPS to see what different browsers would show for the security.  Very quickly, I noticed that having any elements on the page that aren’t loaded over HTTPS causes the whole page to be marked as not secured.  One element in particular on one page was this “valid” icon from w3.org.  Note that the URL, http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10-blue,  doesn’t have any file-type extension on it.  Since w3.org doesn’t provide the icon over HTTPS (though they are fine with hotlinking the HTTP version), I needed to move it to my own server.  I went to look for the image file and didn’t find a “valid-xhtml10-blue” file with no extension.  What I found were several files with that base name and different extensions.  I couldn’t find any information in the w3.org docs or in the source for the validator, which includes all the validation icons, as to how this was achieved.  I googled to no avail.

Not long after that, I noticed an update for Bad Behavior was available and went to read the release notes.  After reading the release notes, a post about the future major version of Bad Behavior caught my eye.  In that post–no, actually in the comments on that post–there was a mention of getting rid of Apache for performance reasons.  In reading that post, in the discussions of the pros and cons of nginx versus Apache, “content negotiation” was described, and suddenly I understood how to serve the multiple image file types at one type-extension-less URL, like w3.org did.  A quick googling led me to MultiViews.

One line in an .htaccess file and it’s done:
Options +MultiViews

It is now possible to log in with OpenID, automatically creating an account, and to associate an existing account with an OpenID for future logins.

Personally, I suggest MyOpenID (from JanRain) because it gives the option of using PhoneFactor’s phone-call-based 2-factor authentication.

Need to generate an mbox out of a Maildir mailbox? Formail helps:

cd $MAILDIR/cur
for i in * ; do cat $i | formail -c >> $MBOXFILE ; done

My experience thusfar with PTXL is that while they sent me login info almost immediately upon registration yesterday, they didn’t actually activate that info until about 20 hours later, so I couldn’t even *buy* the thing until today.  Now, I go to buy it and find that I have to add the money to my account, then use it to buy and that I can only add money through PayPal and that they charge a fee to add money through PayPal.  This makes their advertised price deceptive, though their quarterly pricing, even with the PayPal fees, is still quite reasonable.  Once I navigated the payment mechanics, the VPS turnup was almost instant.

My experience with Budget VPS/Web Wide is a bit different.  While the Web Wide site refers you to the Budget VPS site, the Budget VPS site kicks you back to Web Wide to actually transact business.  Strange.  Account creation was essentially instant, payment via PayPal was simple (no extra fees), and almost immediately yesterday, a VPS appeared in my account panel with status “pending.”  After a few minutes of this, I went digging through their knowledge base and it was suggested that while turnup is generally quick, it may take up to 24 hours or longer and that if it’d be over 24 hours, they’d email.  I was not thrilled with this, but I’d already paid and I’m not in all that much of a rush.  I came home tonight, about 30 hours after creation, to find it still “pending” and no email from them, so I’ve filed a support ticket.

Just for comparison, RapidVPS charges what they say they charge, no extra fees, deals directly with payment, no PayPal, and account creation and turnup are both really instant, no messing around.  I’ve also been using them for a while and they don’t seem to be vanishing into the mist anytime soon.  Oh, and when I was just starting out and had a few total n00b questions, they were really nice and helpful (at no extra charge!).