Slashdot Mirror

Wait... what am I saying? Why not just buy a PC with an ATI All-in-wonder card?

Or the Hauppauge PVR-250/350 cards.

The only downside is that the software is still somewhat immature.

Having spent a *lot* of time on PC-based PVR project, and having tried a number of hardware/software options, I think the PC solution is only about 90% there.

However, it's absolutely brilliant for creating archival copies of programs broadcast on TV.

The PVR-250 in particular does an excellent job of capturing to MPEG-2 format (SVCD or DVD) in realtime and once you've edited out the ads you can fit a 1 hour program (or two half-hour ones) onto a single 700MB CDR in SVCD format.

Movies are easily fitted onto two CDRs or a single DVD +-R/RW and the quality is excellent.

Tapes suck for long-term storage -- some of the recordings I made on top-quality VHS tape just five or six years ago are alread showing signs of degrading. In theory, CDRs should last ten times that (normal storage caveats).

Tapes are also a hugely inefficient use of space. By switching to CDR I can now fit more than four times the amount of material on the same shelf.

Whether you intend to use your PC as a PVR or not, a decent capture card is a worthwhile investment these days.

Hell, with the right capture card you can even get all the music and movies you want for free without downloading from the Net.

What are the real barriers to creating a modern gas turbine powered
hybrid?

Gas turbine engines can burn just about any reasonable fuel, including
methanol/ethanol, methane, CNG, diesel, gasoline, and soforth. They do
it efficiently, probably similar to diesel. They have fewer moving
parts, and are more amenable to computer control. They work best at
constant speed, and therefore are great when used in hybrid
configuration.

Ceramics research since the 80s or so have produced high quality high
temperature ceramics materials that require little machining for
example at ORNL (at one point I wanted to be a ceramics engineer).

Gas turbine engines need not make a lot of noise. In fact you can buy
them as smallish backup generators.

The main thing as far as I can tell is that the infrastructure isn't
in place (parts, repair centers, etc). But it would be a lot easier to
ship out some parts and run some repair training than to convert every
gas station in america to something other than petroleum products.

In terms of emissions, efficiency, power, and ability to use multiple
fuels (an hence oil independence), the gas turbine and hybrid electric
drivetrain seems like the way to go.

Chrysler built some back in the 50s and 60's but as near as I can tell most
of the problems would be solved with ceramic parts and a hybrid
electric configuration.

I wonder why the guy runined a great concept by fitting a two-stroke engine?

Two-strokes not only create more polution but they're also significantly less fuel-efficient than a four-stroke engine of the same power.

I mean, if you're after thrills rather than efficiency then why not just build a scooter like the one on this page? :-)

So they will improve the safety of the shuttle and go on with it. Until a third accident proves the unsafety of the shuttle

Hey, despite the fact that fourteen lives have so far been lost in two shuttle accidents, it's still a whole lot safer than driving your car on a "lives lost per mile travelled" basis.

There's no way to change the fact that flying into space (even a low earth orbit) is always going to be an activity that carries a degree of risk.

If the astronauts are prepared to take that risk then I don't think some crazy belief that this should be 100%, absolutely, perfectly, flawlessly safe should get in the way.

Ultimately, the choice should belong to those who put their lives on the line. Has anyone (including the media) actually bothered to ask all those NASA astronauts still waiting in the wings whether they'd be prepared to fly the shuttle gain without modifications?

Imagine if we could only drive cars that were proven 100%, absolutely, perfectly, flawlessly safe... the roads would be empty and we'd all be walking from place to place. Even Segway's would be considered "too dangerous" to risk a single human life.

Come on folks, life is risky -- if it wasn't then where would the fun be?

Case in point

Here is an interesting editorial on the future of online publishing and why the Slashdot model is far better suited to the Net and today's competitive environment than Salon ever was.

I guess you could build a harmless rocket that shoots up into the air a few hundred feet, or better yet... you could build your own cruise missle ... which do you think is the bigger threat?

Green envy and spam

I covered this story yesterday (Sunday US-time) in my daily interent commentary and also highlighted the crazy situation taking place in Europe right now.

It seems that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has succeeded in obtaining a injuction from a Hamburg court that forbids a UK newspaper from pubilshing details about an alleged extramarital affair.

The UK newspaper have basically thumbed their nose at the order, as did another UK paper which went a step further and published not just in print but on the Web as well.

My column on this matter can be found here if anyone's interested. Check out today's edition as well: When Microsoft Owns Your ISP

I covered this story yesterday (Sunday US-time) in my daily interent commentary and also highlighted the crazy situation taking place in Europe right now.

It seems that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has succeeded in obtaining a injuction from a Hamburg court that forbids a UK newspaper from pubilshing details about an alleged extramarital affair.

The UK newspaper have basically thumbed their nose at the order, as did another UK paper which went a step further and published not just in print but on the Web as well.

My column on this matter can be found here if anyone's interested. Check out today's edition as well: When Microsoft Owns Your ISP

About a week ago in my daily Interent column I predicted that Microsoft would launch its own flavor of Linux sometime in the next 18 months.

I still think it's a very real possibility for the reasons I listed.

I published this commentary less than a week ago which puts the case for a "music media" (as opposed to a data media), the price of which includes a recording industry levy.

This would allow all those people with "stolen" music to legitimize their collections at a relatively low cost.

At the very least, it would test the claims that people don't want to steal music but aren't buying CDs simply because they're too expensive.

The Solotrek was at best, an ill-conceived concept with many drawbacks and a long list of flaws that doomed it from the start.

Firstly, it offered few real benefits over earlier options such as the Hiller flying platform.

Most of us will have seen archive footage of these platforms that were so stable that a regular foot-soldier (or man in the street) could learn to fly one in just a few short minutes.

Hiller poured a lot of money into these devices in the 1950s but ultimately they were deemed to be impractical for numerous reasons -- most of which are shared by the SoloTrek.

Actually, the Hiller might even have been superior in a number of areas -- such as being far simpler in design and construction. Remember -- when you double the complexity of something you reduce its reliabilty by more than an equivalent amount. When my life is dependent on a piece of technology, I want that technology to be as simple and reliable as possible!

I plan to build my own flying platform when time/funds allow but have no illusions that it will be anything other than a curiosity. There are certainly no plans to turn it into the personal transporter of the 21st century.

Moller's Sky Car falls into the same category as the SoloTrek -- it's an overly complicated, hideously expensive and completely impractical device.

That the SoloTrek and Moller Skycar managed to get any external funding amazes me.

And, if you're interested in personal VTOL transport then check out this ambitious amateur jet-pack project which may be very ambitious, but is also astonishingly impressive in its engineering.

They have photos of the flight:
of the plane:
and of the man itself:
yes, he also is santa claus.
(there even is groundshaking video footage of this historical event)

They have photos of the flight:
of the plane:
and of the man itself:
yes, he also is santa claus.
(there even is groundshaking video footage of this historical event)

They have photos of the flight:
of the plane:
and of the man itself:
yes, he also is santa claus.
(there even is groundshaking video footage of this historical event)

Back in 1998, I discovered that my 7am.com website was generating some pretty heavy traffic and decided that I needed a decent US-based provider on which to host it.

I chose Tierranet and was certainly never disappointed.

Within a few short years, 7am.com grew to become the world's most widely syndicated web-based news service, delivering news headines through its Java-based news ticker more than two million times a day across a network of more than 200,000 third-party webpages -- and it really started gobbling up bandwidth.

From memory we were doing 15GB-20GB and servicing 2-3 million HTTP requests per day on average.

TierraNet has always provided exceptional service, outstanding performance and brilliant support.

Although I'm no longer involved in the day-to-day operation of 7am.com, I still have several smaller sites hosted with TierraNet and I'm just as happy.

When my Jet-powered gokart page was slashdotted a while back, the service had absolutely no problems keeping up with the load. There were around 40,000 visitors in just a few hours and even though most of these downloaded videos and other large objects, the server didn't blink an eye.

All the usual diclaimers apply -- I don't work for Tierranet, I'm not a shareholder, I don't get a commission, I have no relationship with them other than as a very satisfied customer for about six years now.

They're not the cheapest -- but if you're looking for bullet-proof hosting with great support then I'm damned if I've seen better value anywhere (and yes, I've looked :-)

The problem with this guy's effort is that he's doing things the hard way.

My own Tivo-like PC project has so far taken a more pragmatic approach and evaluated a number of hardware and software options.

It would seem that Windows, given the proliferation of PVR hardware and software available for it, is the better option for such a task. (Yeah, I hate to say it).

As part of my project development I've reviewed two capture/tuner card options: a dumb BT8x8 card which relies on the host PC's CPU to do all the hard work, and an affordable tuner/capture card that has an onboard MPEG1/MPEG2 encoder in hardware.

The differences can be quite dramatic when you're looking to build Tivo-like functionality on a PC platform -- but there's no clear winner because both have pro's and con's.

However, using the card with the hardware encoder I can capture at 720x576 or so with no dropped frames while the host CPU sits comfortably at about 12%-18% utilization.

I can even carry on using the PC for other tasks without any real perceptable effect on either the recording or the interactivity of the desktop.

I've been working on a PC-based Tivo-like system for a couple of months now and have published some (hopefully) useful information here.

One critical factor is the choice of a "smart" or a "dumb" capture card and deciding whether you want to be able to export your recordings to DVDR/CDR disks in DVD/SVCD/VCD format.

If you just want plain Tivo-like functionality then you can use DivX as your compression method and get reasonable results with a software-based realtime encoder.

I've compared the two options and reviewed the Pinnacle PCTV card (dumb BT8x8 capture) and the Hauppauge PVR-250 (smart -- it has onbard hardware MPEG encoding).

Is this stuff any good? Here's a clue -- hardware companies should stick to making hardware and leave the software writing to software professionals. This clearly hasn't happened in the tuner/capture-card industry.

Most of the work to date has been done under Windows but I'm currently working on using this hardware config under Linux and will update the project site accordingly.

However, if you want to then export your DivX files to DVD/SVCD/VCD you're going to get sub-optimal quality because you're transcoding between two lossy formats. Since the stuff I like to keep for posterity on CDR/DVDR is more than likely going to be material like good movies or music concerts, I have opted to use an MPEG1/MPEG2 encoder and avoid re-encoding.

There are also a couple of video samples demonstrating the differences between the three most popular options:

1. Realtime MPEG capture using a dumb card
2. Non-realtime encoding using TMPGenc
3. Realtime MPEG capture using a hardware encoder.

There's a heap more to do on this project but it's coming along quite nicely.

Check out this Aardvark Daily column which shows another commentators view of just how silly the RIAA are for going after P2P network operators when, simply by adding a cheap card to your PC, you can get all the RIAA-sanctioned free top-20 music you want (at the equivalent of 200Kbps or better).

How long before they realize that they're just bitching about cracks in the windows while the door has been left wide open??

(yeah, I submitted this a few days ago and it was rejected -- but I'm not bitching ;-)

The biggest problem with integrating the PVR into TV sets is that you can almost guarantee such devices will include powerful DRM capabilities.

As I pointed out in my daily column, the arrival of totally digital TV will see us relinquishing control of our VCR and television set to broadcasters.

If Fox, CBS, NBC or whoever don't want you to record a program, they'll simply enable and disable that function at will -- the button on your remote simply won't work unless they allow it.

Remember who makes many of the TV sets we buy -- Sony and many others who are also content creators with a vested interest in protecting and limiting your ability to copy their intellectual property.

If the PVR is integral to your TV set then it becomes a much harder task to circumvent or ignore any of the draconian DRM that broadcasters might decide to inflict on us.

Oh sure, there'll eventually be a few mod-chips available to help in this process -- but the stand-alone PVR manufactured by indviduals or "offshore" companies who care more about market share than enforcing DRM will be a more common option.

Try this link.

I'm planning to update the site with all my latest findings later this week -- including a review of a Haupaugge tuner/capture card that has onboard hardware MPEG1/MPEG2 encoding.

Linux-based options are also being reviewed as I type this ;-)

I'm the guy who posted the story and I'm documenting my experiences and the project at aardvark.co.nz/pvr/.

What you say has some merit -- SVCD is certainly streets ahead of VCD in terms of image quality.

However, DivX is not quite the ogre you make it out to be.

For a start, it takes no more CPU to encode DivX format as it does to do a *good* job of multi-pass MPEG encoding.

On a 1.8GHz P4, TMPGenc takes around 6-8 hours to encode a 100 minute movie into an MPEG2 file to SVCD standards using multipass variable-bit-rate encoding.

You can get faster multi-pass MPEG2 encoders but they are *expensive* -- TMPGEnc is free for MPEG1 encoding and costs (from memory) just $49 for the version with MPEG2 capabilities.

By comparison, the same machine usually does a multi-pass DivX encoding in just a fraction that time.

In respect to playback, the DivX codec is quite nice insomuch as it allows some optimizations and post-processing to be performed as the video is played. This means you can create a video file that is able to be played back on a variety of different machines with different CPU-powers -- such that the faster machine will produce a better result but the slower machine will still play without pauses or stuttering.

In the past couple of months I've downloaded and evaluated hundreds of MB of applications, drivers, documentation, etc for all manner of commercial and freeware PVR solutions. These will all be compared on my site shortly.

I'm also about to publish my findings on the Haupaugge PVR card which does hardware-based MPEG1 and MPEG2 encoding -- thus freeing up the PC's CPU and allowing more "headroom". This is important when you're trying to do things such as timeshift or concurrent record/playback.

Linux-based software solutions are also being evaluated but unfortunately (damn it!) there are only two or three that appear to have much merit.

Given Microsoft's agenda to hog-tie all video and audio with DRM I'd really like to come up with a Linux based (and preferably OSS) option that is reliable, functional and ergonomic.

The truth will (eventually) be revealed :-)

Yes, the flaw in MS word continues to potentially expose a huge amount of sensitive information on the web (including as many as quarter of a million US Government documents).

Check out this story I wrote back in May for the chilling details.

I was one of those "bright entrepreneurs" who built an online business (7am.com)with great traffic and an even better future.

Unlike so many of the flash-in-the-pan wondersites that no longer exist, it wasn't built on millions of dollars in VC funding and didn't have large offices filled with geeks on scooters or a carpark filled with Porsches and BMWs.

Started in 1997, it was very much a "one-man band" for two years, during which time it grew from a good idea into one of the most widely syndicated web-based news services on the Net.

Getting it from zero to two million hits a day by 1999 meant working 18-19 hours per day, every day for two straight years and living on the smell of an oily rag.

Suffice to say that I recall quite vividly the day my eardrum burst while I was typing up a breaking news story. I'd gotten an inner ear infection but was too busy to go to the doctor.

I should also point out that 7am.com didn't have the benefit of being US-based. Instead, it was located in rural New Zealand -- half a world away from its target marketplace.

This meant that my workday started at around 11pm and finished at 6pm-7pm the next day.

It also meant that I had to use sweat-equity and innovation to replace a large workforce and lots of capital. 7am.com was a real groundbreaker in the area of syndicated news content on the Web and to this day continues to deliver content through a network of over 200,000 websites.

In 1999 I was approached by a group of local (NZ) "suits" who wanted to buy in and take 7am.com to the NASDAQ.

Remember that by this time the webserver was tracking over 2 million hits per day, the syndication network was about 125,000 third-party websites in size, I had regular advertisers, and Nielsens/NetRatings had rated 7am.com as being more popular than news.bbc.co.uk, CNNfn, Playboy.com and a raft of others.

So, at the peak of the dot-com boom, what would you pay for a site with these respectible figures?

Unfortunately I didn't have a whole lot of other suitors banging down my door and I knew that in order to maintain or improve my position in the market I had to pour more capital into the operation -- so beggars can't be choosers. (The lack of other investors was/is a sad indictment on the state of the VC industry in New Zealand).

I ended up accepting a figure that was (in US$ terms) just in the six-figure bracket.

After paying back the money I'd borrowed to start up the business, some tax, and catching up on the mortgage I was left with just over $10,000 in cash.

I was also left with 34% of the company but I was promised that that I could now slow down my own pace of work, take weekends off and maybe even enjoy a vacation.

Most importantly to me was the promise that the investors would bring skilled business management to the enterprise.

Now I'm the first person to put up my hand and admit that I'm not, and don't aspire to be, a great business manager. I'm an "ideas guy" and I'm also quite competent at marketing -- but crunching numbers and brokering multi-million dollar deals just doesn't spin my wheels I'm afraid.

So here I was -- my bills were up to date, I had a few thousand in my back pocket, I had 34% of (at the time) the world's most widely syndicated web-based news service, and the future looked rosey!

What's more, an independent valuation of the business (made in 1999/2000) suggested that it was worth at least US$40 million

Unfortunately I soon learned that the promises of the new investors were pretty hollow and that they figured they knew the online news business better than me -- despite the fact that none of them had any experience in this field whatsoever.

I was working harder than ever and while everyone else was partying, I had to do 36-hours straight during the millennium eve/day celebrations so as to provide the site with around-the-clock coverage. That promised vacation never eventuated either.

I also gave up trying to provide input and direction because what had been a dynamic, exciting, innovative operation with ultra-low overheads became just another corporate monolith.

By mid-2000 I resigned my positions as director, board-member and news director -- it was simply too frustrating.

To cut a long story short -- I still have a 34% interest in 7am.com, the company continues to trade and remains a significant player in the syndicated news-content market -- but I've never seen another penny.

This annoys the snot out of me because I have since had a number of
good ideas but can't afford to fund them.

So, if anyone wants to buy my 34% of 7am.com for a song -- just drop me a line and we'll talk. I've got better things to do with the money than leave it tied up in a large, slow-moving corporate beast.

I was one of those "bright entrepreneurs" who built an online business (7am.com)with great traffic and an even better future.

Unlike so many of the flash-in-the-pan wondersites that no longer exist, it wasn't built on millions of dollars in VC funding and didn't have large offices filled with geeks on scooters or a carpark filled with Porsches and BMWs.

Started in 1997, it was very much a "one-man band" for two years, during which time it grew from a good idea into one of the most widely syndicated web-based news services on the Net.

Getting it from zero to two million hits a day by 1999 meant working 18-19 hours per day, every day for two straight years and living on the smell of an oily rag.

Suffice to say that I recall quite vividly the day my eardrum burst while I was typing up a breaking news story. I'd gotten an inner ear infection but was too busy to go to the doctor.

I should also point out that 7am.com didn't have the benefit of being US-based. Instead, it was located in rural New Zealand -- half a world away from its target marketplace.

This meant that my workday started at around 11pm and finished at 6pm-7pm the next day.

It also meant that I had to use sweat-equity and innovation to replace a large workforce and lots of capital. 7am.com was a real groundbreaker in the area of syndicated news content on the Web and to this day continues to deliver content through a network of over 200,000 websites.

In 1999 I was approached by a group of local (NZ) "suits" who wanted to buy in and take 7am.com to the NASDAQ.

Remember that by this time the webserver was tracking over 2 million hits per day, the syndication network was about 125,000 third-party websites in size, I had regular advertisers, and Nielsens/NetRatings had rated 7am.com as being more popular than news.bbc.co.uk, CNNfn, Playboy.com and a raft of others.

So, at the peak of the dot-com boom, what would you pay for a site with these respectible figures?

Unfortunately I didn't have a whole lot of other suitors banging down my door and I knew that in order to maintain or improve my position in the market I had to pour more capital into the operation -- so beggars can't be choosers. (The lack of other investors was/is a sad indictment on the state of the VC industry in New Zealand).

I ended up accepting a figure that was (in US$ terms) just in the six-figure bracket.

After paying back the money I'd borrowed to start up the business, some tax, and catching up on the mortgage I was left with just over $10,000 in cash.

I was also left with 34% of the company but I was promised that that I could now slow down my own pace of work, take weekends off and maybe even enjoy a vacation.

Most importantly to me was the promise that the investors would bring skilled business management to the enterprise.

Now I'm the first person to put up my hand and admit that I'm not, and don't aspire to be, a great business manager. I'm an "ideas guy" and I'm also quite competent at marketing -- but crunching numbers and brokering multi-million dollar deals just doesn't spin my wheels I'm afraid.

So here I was -- my bills were up to date, I had a few thousand in my back pocket, I had 34% of (at the time) the world's most widely syndicated web-based news service, and the future looked rosey!

What's more, an independent valuation of the business (made in 1999/2000) suggested that it was worth at least US$40 million

Unfortunately I soon learned that the promises of the new investors were pretty hollow and that they figured they knew the online news business better than me -- despite the fact that none of them had any experience in this field whatsoever.

I was working harder than ever and while everyone else was partying, I had to do 36-hours straight during the millennium eve/day celebrations so as to provide the site with around-the-clock coverage. That promised vacation never eventuated either.

I also gave up trying to provide input and direction because what had been a dynamic, exciting, innovative operation with ultra-low overheads became just another corporate monolith.

By mid-2000 I resigned my positions as director, board-member and news director -- it was simply too frustrating.

To cut a long story short -- I still have a 34% interest in 7am.com, the company continues to trade and remains a significant player in the syndicated news-content market -- but I've never seen another penny.

This annoys the snot out of me because I have since had a number of
good ideas but can't afford to fund them.

So, if anyone wants to buy my 34% of 7am.com for a song -- just drop me a line and we'll talk. I've got better things to do with the money than leave it tied up in a large, slow-moving corporate beast.

The model described in the article isn't any kind of real terrorist threat due to its limited payload capacity and slow speed.

However, that doesn't mean that creating a low cost cruise missile isn't beyond the means of even the smallest terror group or nation.

Check out The Low Cost Cruise Missile for a pointer to where the real danger lies.

How high are Microsoft's ethics?

Here's a satirical insight into Bill Gate's strategies and plans:

Palladium, More Precious Than Gold

At least this time those clever scientist types remembered to bolt the test vehicle to the rocket engine.

Anyone remember the poor Japanese SSTV model a few weeks ago?

But seriously (did I just say that?), one of the problems with SCRAMJETs is their gobsmackingly high fuel consumption.

This is one of the reasons that scientists are also exploring pulse detonation engines as an alternative super/hypersonic propulsion engine.

It is rumored that the PDE-powered craft are responsible for those "donut on a rope" contrails seen by some high above the USA.

For more proof that the recording companies expect special dispensation when it comes to engaging in otherwise illegal acts check out New Zealand's copyright law and Sony's blatant flouting of them.

According to Section 37 of the NZ Copyright Act, the importation, sale, hire or in some cases mere possession of any device "specifically designed or adapted for making copies" of copyrighted works is a breach of Copyright Law.

However, in the advertising for their Mini Disk player, Sony claim purchasers can "quickly and easily connect Net MD directly to their PC in order to download music files from the Internet or their CD-Rom drive"

Now excuse me -- but since Section 30 of the NZ Copyright Act clearly states that "The copying of a [copyrighted] work is a restricted act in relation to every description of copyright work", then it is obvious that Sony are promoting a device that is designed to break the law.

However, do you think the local recording industry has lodged a complaint about Sony's law-breaking?

Hell no!

Could it be because the head of Sony Music NZ is also the guy the recording industry has given the task of heading up their anti-piracy campaign?

For more information on NZ copyright laws you can check out the article on Aardvark.

Sometimes it seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I consider myself to be one of the pioneers of news aggregation and linking -- having done this on a number of my own sites since 1995.

Back in 1998 I came into conflict with the Nando Times when my 7am.com news site over the use of their headlines and links on the syndicated Java news ticker and news-aggregation pages.

Nando tried to claim that use of its headlines and links to its pages were a breach of copyright and that anyone wishing to do this would have to pay $100/month for
the privilege.

I told them to go take a hike and they threatened to sue for breach of copyright. Suffice to say that once they checked with their legal department as to the validity of their claims they decided to back down.

Although they were one of the first news sites on the Web, Nando simply didn't get the concept that links drive traffic and traffic generates ad revenues -- or at least it did when there were advertisers willing to pay for placements.

The stupid thing about this whole situation was that the 7am.com News Ticker became so popular and drove so much traffic to the various sites included on it that if I decided to remove the links to a particular news site I'd often get an email complaining that I *wasn't* linking.

Around the same time I had similar problems with my Aardvark site and found myself battling a long list of local news publishers who threatened legal action if I continued to deep link to the stories they were carrying.

As with Nando, these sites eventually worked out that traffic = revenues and withdrew their stupid threats.

I should make it clear that I have a very ethical and honest linking policy which I advertise on my sites so that both the linkers and linkees know what I expect and offer. It's a shame that more sites don't do the same so as to avoid confusion and conflict.

I've been deep linking for some seven years, been threatened with law suits over my linking activities by much bigger publishers on no less than six occasions -- but never had to spend a day in court and never backed down.

Some people just take longer to learn that the WWW is *made* from deep links and that to disallow them will effectively destroy the fabric of the web.

Sometimes it seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I consider myself to be one of the pioneers of news aggregation and linking -- having done this on a number of my own sites since 1995.

Back in 1998 I came into conflict with the Nando Times when my 7am.com news site over the use of their headlines and links on the syndicated Java news ticker and news-aggregation pages.

Nando tried to claim that use of its headlines and links to its pages were a breach of copyright and that anyone wishing to do this would have to pay $100/month for
the privilege.

I told them to go take a hike and they threatened to sue for breach of copyright. Suffice to say that once they checked with their legal department as to the validity of their claims they decided to back down.

Although they were one of the first news sites on the Web, Nando simply didn't get the concept that links drive traffic and traffic generates ad revenues -- or at least it did when there were advertisers willing to pay for placements.

The stupid thing about this whole situation was that the 7am.com News Ticker became so popular and drove so much traffic to the various sites included on it that if I decided to remove the links to a particular news site I'd often get an email complaining that I *wasn't* linking.

Around the same time I had similar problems with my Aardvark site and found myself battling a long list of local news publishers who threatened legal action if I continued to deep link to the stories they were carrying.

As with Nando, these sites eventually worked out that traffic = revenues and withdrew their stupid threats.

I should make it clear that I have a very ethical and honest linking policy which I advertise on my sites so that both the linkers and linkees know what I expect and offer. It's a shame that more sites don't do the same so as to avoid confusion and conflict.

I've been deep linking for some seven years, been threatened with law suits over my linking activities by much bigger publishers on no less than six occasions -- but never had to spend a day in court and never backed down.

Some people just take longer to learn that the WWW is *made* from deep links and that to disallow them will effectively destroy the fabric of the web.

Bruce Simpson of Aardvark thinks that Freon&copy is an attempt to put MS in the position of being the worldwide arbiter of digital media rights.

Read about his thoughts

That would be this article linked to from slashdot some weeks ago. It is beginning to sound like the voice of prophecy.

I recently found myself in a similar situation when my Daily self-published internet column [aardvark.co.nz] finally became just too much of a drain on my finances and I was faced with shutting it down after seven years of work.

Maybe you were funneling to much cash into your hobbies :) All kidding aside...I had a "blast" of a time reading about your Jet-Kart

I recently found myself in a similar situation when my Daily self-published internet column [aardvark.co.nz] finally became just too much of a drain on my finances and I was faced with shutting it down after seven years of work.

Maybe you were funneling to much cash into your hobbies :) All kidding aside...I had a "blast" of a time reading about your Jet-Kart

I recently found myself in a similar situation when my Daily self-published internet column finally became just too much of a drain on my finances and I was faced with shutting it down after seven years of work.

The subscription option was considered but in the end, just 2% of the regular audience said they would subscribe -- a number far too low to support the site.

However, I was very lucky insomuch as I managed to obtain a 12-month sponsorship from a local ISP which, while not covering all the costs, at least pays for the cofee, power, phone and some of the other outgoings.

Given the sad fate of so many great online publications, it strikes me that perhaps the secret to longevity and (ultimately?) profit may well be KISS - that's Keep It Small & Sponsored.

It strikes me that too many online publications focus on building empires rather than simply creating and publishing good content at minimal cost.

For example -- does Salon rent office space?

Why?

Surely a "new media" publisher would realize the enormous savings to be made by having writers work from home and email in their copy.

When I launched 7am.com, I ran the entire operation (2 million hits per day and a network of 200,000 third-party websites) on a completely virtual basis. No rented offices, no conference room, no company cars, no scooters -- just a group of hard-working people staying in touch and coordinating their efforts over the Net.

The Net may be a great medium for publishing content -- but it's an even greater way to slash your operating costs -- if you use it properly!

This is what I saw when I read this as well as well:

"Protects information. The system uses high-level encryption to "seal" data so that snoops and thieves are thwarted. It also can protect the integrity of documents so that they can't be altered without your knowledge."

Can you say "public key tampering?" If this 'black box' chip encrypts everything to your own public key, how do we know it's not encrypting everything to the joint NSA/MSFT/(RI|MP)AA/etc key as well? Um, we don't.

"Stops viruses and worms. Palladium won't run unauthorized programs, so viruses can't trash protected parts of your system."

I wonder how many windows users STILL have not installed the Root Certificates Update Patch on their machines? This patch was issued because someone faked their identity as microsoft and verisign gave them a Microsoft named digital certificate. What's to stop them from doing this to Palladium and running any code they want?

Furthermore, they say this won't run unauthorised programs - but who authorises them? Many people think they control their hardware, but remember when TiVo boxen were forced to record a certain program? What if this black box allows the NSA or MSFT or ... to force your computer to run their code? It seems to me that if your machine has a Palladium chip, firewalls and patches mean nothing -- you are r00t3d from the very start. Nice.

"Cans spam. Eventually, commercial pitches for recycled printer cartridges and barnyard porn can be stopped before they hit your inbox--while unsolicited mail that you might want to see can arrive if it has credentials that meet your standards."

Really. How can a chip that is designed for encryption and authentication prevent someone from sending spam to you@yourisp.com? I think that this one is just baseless hype. Has ANYONE heard of a hardware solution for micromanaging spam? (Note: Micromanaging does not imply pulling out the RJ45.)

"Safeguards privacy. With Palladium, it's possible not only to seal data on your own computer, but also to send it out to "agents" who can distribute just the discreet pieces you want released to the proper people. Microsofties have nicknamed these services "My Man." If you apply for a loan, you'd say to the lender, "Get my details from My Man," which, upon your authorization, would then provide your bank information, etc. Best part: Da Man can't read the information himself, and neither can a hacker who breaks into his system."

Do you believe that MSFT wants to safeguard your privacy and r00t your box at the same time? See my point about public key tampering. I think they want to do to (gnu)PGP what they did to Netscape by including their own 'encryption' in the OS and Hardware. Of course once you start using their encryption, who knows WHO will be able to unlock your data? Remember the Scarfo Case. The FBI simply cannot break PGP with a high number of bits effectively on a large scale. They need to be able to read your encrypted files at will. That is what this will provide.

"Controls your information after you send it . Palladium is being offered to the studios and record labels as a way to distribute music and film with "digital rights management" (DRM). This could allow users to exercise "fair use" (like making personal copies of a CD) and publishers could at least start releasing works that cut a compromise between free and locked-down. But a more interesting possibility is that Palladium could help introduce DRM to business and just plain people. "It's a funny thing," says Bill Gates. "We came at this thinking about music, but then we realized that e-mail and documents were far more interesting domains." For instance, Palladium might allow you to send out e-mail so that no one (or only certain people) can copy it or forward it to others. Or you could create Word documents that could be read only in the next week. In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies."

See previous point. Remember Life on the net in 2004? Remember: "Another warning appears -- "Your license for this recording has expired, unable to play." Damn -- another $49 if you want to listen to that music for another year. You wonder, if as they claim, these new measures significantly reduce piracy, why music is now so much more expensive?"

They say the next windows release is slated for 2004. (I predict 2005.) This is exactly what the article's author predicted. But it is being touted under the guise of a product for protecting users.

In reality, this is a product for exposing the every private doings of regular people to MSFT, American Secret Services, the (RI|MP)AA and being able to remotely control their machines and shut them down if desired.

[Insert 'opensource-protects-users' plug here.]

This is what I saw when I read this as well as well:

"Protects information. The system uses high-level encryption to "seal" data so that snoops and thieves are thwarted. It also can protect the integrity of documents so that they can't be altered without your knowledge."

Can you say "public key tampering?" If this 'black box' chip encrypts everything to your own public key, how do we know it's not encrypting everything to the joint NSA/MSFT/(RI|MP)AA/etc key as well? Um, we don't.

"Stops viruses and worms. Palladium won't run unauthorized programs, so viruses can't trash protected parts of your system."

I wonder how many windows users STILL have not installed the Root Certificates Update Patch on their machines? This patch was issued because someone faked their identity as microsoft and verisign gave them a Microsoft named digital certificate. What's to stop them from doing this to Palladium and running any code they want?

Furthermore, they say this won't run unauthorised programs - but who authorises them? Many people think they control their hardware, but remember when TiVo boxen were forced to record a certain program? What if this black box allows the NSA or MSFT or ... to force your computer to run their code? It seems to me that if your machine has a Palladium chip, firewalls and patches mean nothing -- you are r00t3d from the very start. Nice.

"Cans spam. Eventually, commercial pitches for recycled printer cartridges and barnyard porn can be stopped before they hit your inbox--while unsolicited mail that you might want to see can arrive if it has credentials that meet your standards."

Really. How can a chip that is designed for encryption and authentication prevent someone from sending spam to you@yourisp.com? I think that this one is just baseless hype. Has ANYONE heard of a hardware solution for micromanaging spam? (Note: Micromanaging does not imply pulling out the RJ45.)

"Safeguards privacy. With Palladium, it's possible not only to seal data on your own computer, but also to send it out to "agents" who can distribute just the discreet pieces you want released to the proper people. Microsofties have nicknamed these services "My Man." If you apply for a loan, you'd say to the lender, "Get my details from My Man," which, upon your authorization, would then provide your bank information, etc. Best part: Da Man can't read the information himself, and neither can a hacker who breaks into his system."

Do you believe that MSFT wants to safeguard your privacy and r00t your box at the same time? See my point about public key tampering. I think they want to do to (gnu)PGP what they did to Netscape by including their own 'encryption' in the OS and Hardware. Of course once you start using their encryption, who knows WHO will be able to unlock your data? Remember the Scarfo Case. The FBI simply cannot break PGP with a high number of bits effectively on a large scale. They need to be able to read your encrypted files at will. That is what this will provide.

"Controls your information after you send it . Palladium is being offered to the studios and record labels as a way to distribute music and film with "digital rights management" (DRM). This could allow users to exercise "fair use" (like making personal copies of a CD) and publishers could at least start releasing works that cut a compromise between free and locked-down. But a more interesting possibility is that Palladium could help introduce DRM to business and just plain people. "It's a funny thing," says Bill Gates. "We came at this thinking about music, but then we realized that e-mail and documents were far more interesting domains." For instance, Palladium might allow you to send out e-mail so that no one (or only certain people) can copy it or forward it to others. Or you could create Word documents that could be read only in the next week. In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies."

See previous point. Remember Life on the net in 2004? Remember: "Another warning appears -- "Your license for this recording has expired, unable to play." Damn -- another $49 if you want to listen to that music for another year. You wonder, if as they claim, these new measures significantly reduce piracy, why music is now so much more expensive?"

They say the next windows release is slated for 2004. (I predict 2005.) This is exactly what the article's author predicted. But it is being touted under the guise of a product for protecting users.

In reality, this is a product for exposing the every private doings of regular people to MSFT, American Secret Services, the (RI|MP)AA and being able to remotely control their machines and shut them down if desired.

[Insert 'opensource-protects-users' plug here.]

Life On The Net in 2004

A perfect example of the difficulties facing online publishers is the fate of Aardvark in New Zealand.

This is one of the longest-running online Net-news and commentary publications on the web, having started in 1995 and been published without a break ever since. During that time it has developed an enviable reputation for frankness and insight, and scooping important stories, while attracting an audience that is the "who's who" of the NZ Internet and IT marketplace.

At one time in the late 1990s it was even profitable -- but that was when advertising dollars flowed like water.

Now, despite having a regular readership of around 5,000 people (mainly IT/Net workers and decision-makers) and scoring over 80,000 visits to the front-page every month (not too bad in a country of just 3.8 million people), the crunch point has been reached.

It costs more than $30K a year (mainly the writer/publisher's time) to produce on a daily basis and, given the general downturn in the Net marketplace since 2000, that's a figure which has become hard to justify.

Attempts to generate revenues by soliciting donations produced no more than a few hundred dollars over a period of several months and finding a corporate sponsor appeared impossible. The very blunt and uncompromising nature of the commentaries may well have contributed to this -- after all, who wants to sponsor a publication that will jump all over you if you mess up? :-)

Once it was announced that publication would cease, almost 100 readers came forward and offered to pay a subscription -- but that would still only return an hourly rate of less than $6 (US$3) on the time invested in its writing and publication.

Since late 2000, advertising hasn't been an option. The low prices, cost of soliciting, scheduling, reporting and chasing debtors means that there's no profit to be had even if advertisers can be found.

So, who's going to work for US$3/hr?

Who can afford to work for US$3/hr?

Despite the fact that publishing to the web is a whole lot cheaper than print or broadcast, it's still a difficult medium in which to turn a profit.

For example, what if Microsoft, instead of
South Africa, demanded a particular TLD?

That prospect has already been mooted some four years ago:
http://www.aardvark.co.nz/av980202.htm

As others have said here, it's very likely that the dual-layer disk being contemplated would have a very poor quality version of the recording -- maybe even with voice-over ads at the start and end of each track -- who knows?

It's also a shame to see the RIAA trying to charge more for what is effectively the same material. Even if it's being offered at a higher digital resolution, it shouldn't cost them that much more to provide it -- besides which, does the average music listener really want to pay more for higher quality?

Hell, the quality of CD music sounds just fine for my heavy-metal-abused ears anyway - all those extra bits (and the money I'd pay for them) would just be wasted.

And here's an interesting article which provides some rather nice evidence to support allegations that Sony is being hypocritical in respect to CD ripping and downloading music from the Net.

As someone who qualifies as a "lonely inventor" (see my latest invention) I can say with some authority that there are occasionally some definite advantages to working outside the huge corporate structure.

For a start, many of those working within the corporate machine have obtained their position as a result of a splended array of formal qualifications and their academic background.

Now, while such a background is extremely important, there are occasions when it actually makes the act of "inventing" an awful lot harder.

Some of the most interesting (and practical) inventions are the result of someone who didn't know (because they hadn't been taught) that something was impossible -- so they just went ahead and did it.

An unfortunate effect of gaining a depth of knowledge is that one's field of vision is often reduced as a result. Sometimes an important innovation comes as a result of applying knowledge gained in a totally different field to a problem.

It's been my experience that occasionally the "experts" get so close to the problem that they can't easily see the bigger picture -- a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees so to speak.

Of course the reality is that if "the lone inventor" does have a good idea, they're then left with no choice but to solicit the help of a large corporation and the resources that such an organization can bring to bear. There's usually a huge void between an idea or a working prototype, and a commercially successful product.

The inventor and his invention are just one piece of the puzzle.

Of course (as I well know), the biggest problem faced by many inventors, regardless of the quality or viability of their ideas, is getting the right "big corporation" interested enough to provide those missing pieces.

I shudder to think about just how many great ideas have never seen the light of day -- not because the inventor couldn't invent, but because (s)he simply had no luck in attracting corporate or investment interest.

Of course anyone wanting to invest in my X-Jet engine is welcome to contact me :-)

Using model airplanes as a military tool is very popular these days and some of the more sophisticated ones (such as the X-45) may well be the future of "safe" combat.

However, don't fall into the trap of thinking that the US is the only force to have such combat tools or that this "off the shelf" technology can't be used against targets with the borders of the USA.

Check out The Low Cost Cruise Missile scenario for some insight into the opportunity this stuff gives to half-smart terrorist groups.

The really worrying thing about the way that technology has advanced at an ever-increasing pace is the fact that it now places some similar powerful offensive capabilities well within the grasp of terrorists and smaller countries.

UAVs, RPVs and cruise missiles are a perfect example of a technology that is well within the reach of such foes of the USA.

The ready availability of low-cost GPS units with computer interfaces, small and efficient low cost high powered computers, advanced composites such as kevlar and carbon-fiber, solid-state gyros, high-power servos and cheap but powerful jet engines (such as this or maybe this) has lowered the barrier to entry significantly.

Up until now the might and technical superiority of the US defense arsenal has proved a mighty deterrent and (when used) a mighty effective tool in battle.

The only response that terrorists and small factions have had to the US's superiority has been to offer suicide bombings and attacks such as those of September 11.

However, now that just about anyone (or group) with access to some readily available knowledge and equipment can produce their own cruise missile , RPV or AUV, things could begin to change -- for the worse.

Imagine the effect that such a craft would have if it were programmed to fly over NYC and dispense a payload of anthrax or other bio-agent over a wide area as it went?

Such a remotely piloted or autonomous vehicle could be built for as little as US$10,000 and could be launched from the roof of a van or SUV at a location which might be several hundred miles from the intended target.

The use of a fairly small airframe built from composites would mean a low radar profile and the onboard computer operating in concert with an onboard GPS receiver and small radar distancing system would allow a low-altitude pre-programmed flight path to be followed with relative ease.

That good numbers of these machines could be built using "off the shelf" materials and components that would not ring any bells in the way that the training of Al Qaeda pilots did, is worrying.

Imagine the effect of 20 or 30 of these missiles being launched simultaneously at NYC or LA on a warm summer's day when plenty of people are outdoors enjoying the sun.

Just as the X-45, Tomahawk and other remotely piloted or automomous weapons can impersonalize a war for the USA, we should be aware that the same may now be true for the USA's foes. Suicide bombing may become redundant real soon now.

The really worrying thing about the way that technology has advanced at an ever-increasing pace is the fact that it now places some similar powerful offensive capabilities well within the grasp of terrorists and smaller countries.

UAVs, RPVs and cruise missiles are a perfect example of a technology that is well within the reach of such foes of the USA.

The ready availability of low-cost GPS units with computer interfaces, small and efficient low cost high powered computers, advanced composites such as kevlar and carbon-fiber, solid-state gyros, high-power servos and cheap but powerful jet engines (such as this or maybe this) has lowered the barrier to entry significantly.

Up until now the might and technical superiority of the US defense arsenal has proved a mighty deterrent and (when used) a mighty effective tool in battle.

The only response that terrorists and small factions have had to the US's superiority has been to offer suicide bombings and attacks such as those of September 11.

However, now that just about anyone (or group) with access to some readily available knowledge and equipment can produce their own cruise missile , RPV or AUV, things could begin to change -- for the worse.

Imagine the effect that such a craft would have if it were programmed to fly over NYC and dispense a payload of anthrax or other bio-agent over a wide area as it went?

Such a remotely piloted or autonomous vehicle could be built for as little as US$10,000 and could be launched from the roof of a van or SUV at a location which might be several hundred miles from the intended target.

The use of a fairly small airframe built from composites would mean a low radar profile and the onboard computer operating in concert with an onboard GPS receiver and small radar distancing system would allow a low-altitude pre-programmed flight path to be followed with relative ease.

That good numbers of these machines could be built using "off the shelf" materials and components that would not ring any bells in the way that the training of Al Qaeda pilots did, is worrying.

Imagine the effect of 20 or 30 of these missiles being launched simultaneously at NYC or LA on a warm summer's day when plenty of people are outdoors enjoying the sun.

Just as the X-45, Tomahawk and other remotely piloted or automomous weapons can impersonalize a war for the USA, we should be aware that the same may now be true for the USA's foes. Suicide bombing may become redundant real soon now.

Over five years ago I wrote this column in which I offered Bill Gates a "billion dollar" idea to help him achieve his goal of taking over the Internet.

Perhaps the situation with RealNames is just a precursor to the implementation of this plan by Billy-boy?

I bet if they weren't so worried about anti-trust laws, Microsoft would have already done this.

Yes, it's true -- the very single-opt-in mailing lists that are used by spammer scan be used to fight back.

Spam Can Be Fun

The most expensive stage of any orbital or even suborbital launch is the first 30 miles or so.

At these low altitudes, air resistance is a major factor and, due to the heavy fuel-load still onboard, a great deal of power is required.

Conventional rocket motors suffer from the need to carry their own oxidizer (O2) but if the first stage of flight used air-breathing engines then far less of this heavy fuel element would be required. The result would be a lighter "wet" vehicle that required less power to fly.

This is why NASA and other researchers are spending such huge amounts of money on things such as the SCRAMJET and Pulse Detonation Engines.

Unfortunately it appears that there's still a big gap between laboratory and launchpad as far as these new engine designs are concerned.

Liquid-fueled rocket engines will always be risky and fuel-hungry. The magnitude of improvement in safety and price-performance being sought will probably have to wait until they're perfected.

Looks like there'll be another DSL story to go with the long list of others including: Telecom's Shocking DSL Admission.