Slashdot Mirror

This place our dungeon, not our safe retreat
Beyond his potent arm, to live exempt
From Heaven's high jurisdiction, in new league
Banded against his throne, but to remain
In strictest bondage, though thus far removed,
Under th' inevitable curb, reserved
His captive multitude.

Paradise Lost, Book II, Lines 317-323

Fighting from our dark places isn't really going to win this battle for Freedom. I appreciate what Freenet is doing. It's securing our fallback position. We need that, but we need more a willingness on the part of our citizenry to take the fight to the day-lit streets of the Mall in Washington D.C.

I'd rather be free by liberty and than free by obscurity.

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/linux.html

...Did you mean Apple Computers or Apple Corp. I get them confused all the time.

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com

P.S. Yes, it's a joke. Laugh now.

Aren't you going to make one for IE? How about IE7?

Yes. You can get the plug-in at http://www.ubuntu.com./ Install the software you find at that site and your IE will work with all those great Firefox scripts. Trust in me. Would a stranger on slashdot lie?

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com

The only way that war becomes "fair" is if both sides incur the same 'cost' of the war

"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his."
  - General George Patton

I was gonna make a comment about the goal of making war fair, but Patton said it better than I would have.

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com

The information is collected from various sources rather than a direct feed from the stock exchanges, making it probably less useful for buy & sell decisions.

Yes, but the nature of the data collected and the way in which it is presented (the clear connection between event and price change and other things) makes it quite useful for planning investment strategy for a given company.

As with any such site, more research would have to be done for a given long term investment, but this does make a great starting place for that research. That is the great benefit to being the aggregator rather than the source. They pull together a lot of data from some other great sources and put it together in a way that makes the whole better, in some ways, than the sum of the parts. (C.f., Google News for another example)

At risk of sounding like a GOOG fanboy, they've batted another home run. We get a solid resource for long term investment, and they get access to our portfolios. Everyone wins (excepting the privacy concerns that are a legitimate tangent to nearly every google story).

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/

True story:

I am an independent consultant. CBN (Yes, that CBN) is locally-based. They also have some very interesting and cool tech projects going on. Their IT group (a spin off of CBN called Compass) is working with some great stuff. Anyway, I happened to get a lead on an assignment there that I might be able to fill.

In the phone interview, I was gold. "You sound like just what we are looking for."

In the follow up technical phone interview, same thing. "We want you to meet the manager you'll be working with for this project."

The in-person interview is going great too, until I get this question:

"Have you ever worked with XSLT and related technologies?"

To which my dumb ass replied:

"Sure that's what I've based my blog on."

And I immediately saw the stupidity of my answer. Why? Because not a week earlier, I was having a discussion with a friend about Christianity's reputation. The result of that conversation is found in an entry on my blog here:

http://tom.digitalelite.com/2005_08_23_08_01_00.ht ml

After I mentioned my blog, every one of the interviewers asked for the address. I gave it to them, knowing that entry was still on the front page at the time. I knew it was over. Sure enough, within 6 hours I get the call from HR telling me they needed someone with more c# experience. Hmmm, my c# experience was discussed in two interviews before the in-person interview and wasn't a problem then. Oh well.

Two things of note about this:

1) I don't censor my blog. If someone doesn't like the content on the blog, we probably wouldn't have gotten along anyway. It's a sort of self-selecting barrier for people without a sense of humor.

2) There are plenty of good IT consulting gigs out there. I'm on one right now. Redoing a .com site for a major company. In C#.

Note that I'm not speaking ill of CBN here. I really don't care one way or the other about them. It must not've been a good fit. No big deal to me. I've heard that that are a great place to do a short-term gig, but it just wasn't the best place for me in the end.

The 90's called. They want their joke back. ;-)

And just to head the smart replies off at the pass...

The Jerk factory called. It wants me back. I'm outtie.

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com

Here's my wishlist for a Wireless AP hardware solution:

1) the ability to easily set up a DMZ. I can firewall off my internal network easy enough, but if we want Joe User to do it, it needs to be easy and obvious to set up a free area that is distinct from the walled off internal network.

2) Bandwidth throttling based on the above mentioned DMZ. If you are in the DMZ, you may use x% of the available bandwidth. If you are on the internal network, regular rules apply.

3) Hot chicks in every box.

4) Mesh network capabilities. Each unit should seek out other units in range and create an ad hoc mesh network. This would be the first step toward taking the Internet back from the corporations currently in control.

5) Real range. I mean like at least 50 yards, but I'd prefer a lot more. When it comes to range, there is no "too much" only "not enough".

That's what I want to see in a next-gen wifi router. I guess I shouldn't hold my breath. :(

- Tom Caudron
- http://tom.digitalelite.com

I really do want an answer and I'm especially interested in a comparison to western European countries.

As the nation that holds the uncontested top position of military might on this planet, we enjoy certain benefits that come with it.

Specifically, we are not now and not likely in my lifetime going to need to fear enemy combatants (which is one of the reasons I see this "Do out of fear of terrorists" thing as a sham and a crock!). We simply will not ever see a Red Dawn scenario in this country. Given our current lead and the rate at which we are improving our lead, there isn't a nation on this planet that can challenge us.

Now how does this bring tangible benefits to us as citizens? I think that part of the problem here is that when I say "benefits" I get the impression you are hearing "rights" when what I mean is "priviledge". Let me explain.

Our scientific and technology lead isn't going anywhere. I explain this in more detail elsewhere. Moreover, much of our technology and science is spent on increasing our military might. Now, while I agree with the original poster that I'd like to see more spent on social issue than is currently spent, I don't think that our military spending is without benefit to me.

To put it in the basest terms, only people who haven't lost don't see the benefit of always winning. In scholl were you the biggest, toughest kid? I wasn't. What does that mean? It means negotiating from a position of subordination in all things. It means not having the power to say "fuck it" and take what you need. This is a power that the biggest, toughest kid in school had. It's the power we have in the US. That's not to say it isn't stupid, unfair, and wrong (it's all those things and more) but it's true. We have the ability to negotiate from the postion of power in every situation. In so far as we court the world's opinion it's just to make ourselves feel better about our final decision. Don't beleive me? Look at Iraq. We didn't need to ask anyone. We asked, and when they all said no, we said too bad. In that case, our power was abused without benefit to us (sadly without much penalty either in the bigger picture...which kinda sucks, I think). But our position of absolute authority is used to our advantage daily all over the world. We get better trade deals, better treatment, better everything than everyone else. Sure Britain and Germany aren't hurting, but they also know that they aren't the biggest kids in school. Any negotion they enter into with us is done from a position of weakness. Given that the majority of Brits disagreed with th eWar in Iraq, why do you think the Blair agreed to join us? It incurred our favor. The fucked up reality is that Britian sucked up the the school bully and in the real world the bully gets his way and you can either join him or always fear that he'll turn on you. Note that this is also why, for all their "The war is wrong" rhetoric, it's now coming out that behind the scenes the Germans fed us intelligence to help our ground troops. Worlkd leaders, especially those of developed nations like in Western Europe, are ultimately pragmatists not idealists. When you hear them making an idealists' stance, know that you are being lied to. Sorry. Germany wanted to side with us without pissing off their own citizenry so that's how they played it. It won't be the ladt such story we hear coming out about the so-called objectors. I'm an objector too, but I understand why they helped us, even if privately. They don't want to piss off the school bully, because you never know when he'll turn on you.

Think I'm being too bleak and pessimistic about how the world works? Just remember that from the dawn of time it has been the guys with the sharpest swords and the biggest barrels that decided what was done and when. We've moved into a world were we are that guy, and the link I included above explains why it won't be easy to put us out

if you ask should I major in CS or whatever for good job opportunities, the answer is still no.

So, your solution to the perceived problem of us losing the edge on highly skilled tech workers is to concede that front entirely?

Well, I could disagree all day about that point, but I'd rather point out that we are not losing the batle on the high tech worker front. I've linked to theis in the past, but I'll continue to until people get it. We are still the science and technology leaders by a HUGE margin and right now it doesn't look like we are going to lose that edge in the foreseable future.

America is a good place to be if you are a scientist, regardless of what you may have heard to the contrary. So, if you want to major in CS or any other science, I say go for it!

As I've said in the past, the gap in US engineers and scientists is not actual, and studies suggesting otherwise are often biasesd and based on shady statistics.

Senior Party Leaders Join Battle Against Chinese Censorship.

This idea that the Chinese government is entirely pro-censorship is a bit untrue. There are those within China---even some who are high up the political food chain---who see this as a bad idea.

I wonder how it'll all turn out?

...No

In a blog entry: http://tom.digitalelite.com/2005_08_11_08_02_00.ht ml

You want life fullfillment, do it after work. Don't buy into that "enriching career" crap. The employment contract is a simple one: You are trading time for money. The more you can get that ratio to favor you, the better.

If you want to have an life that is more enriching, fullfilling, rewarding, interesting, or actualizing, volunteer somewhere after work with a group that really needs you, like a homeless shelter, a food bank, or hell even an open source software project. Don't spend yourself on Corporate America. I promise you that it will never pay you back!

Never.

Do your job, do it well, but just do it and go home to your family and friends where life really matters.

And to answer to obvious next question, yes, my clients love my work. I'm not preaching laziness or sabotage, just perspective. You can write the best code on the planet, with the least bugs, that runs the fastest, the the users adore and cheer, and in the end what happens? A couple of corporate fatcats are a little richer this year than they were last year. w00t? No.

The 'net makes it easier for developments to procreate throughout the globe in many areas, for example business pratices, innovation culture, etc; which don't attribute them to a geographic reigion.

I agree. That's one of the reasons why I'm not willing to say others can't catch up, just that they will have a great deal harder time than is normally suggested. Indeed, even with the globalization effect of the Internet, I'm not sure anyone could catch up at this point.

Set aside all the media hype about fundamentalists running the country and just look at the numbers: The heaps of money we in the U.S. spend on research. The amount is truly staggering. According to UNESCO's 2005 Report on Science and Technology Statistics, China spends about 1.23% of it's GDP on R&D. In the US, we spend 2.67% of ours on R&D and we have a a much higher GDP. Put in apples-to-apples comparison: China spends $72,014,408 in adjusted (ie standardized) currency on R&D. A lot? To be sure, but in the U.S. we spend $275,095,956. If we rounded down to the nearest 100 million dollars the rounded amount we drop would be more than China spends in total. That's not including U.S. and Chinese Defense budget spending, granted, but the amount of money the U.S. throws at military R&D is legendary and those numbers would only server to widen the gap. And it's a sort of snowball effect, too. We make these advances in-house (so to speak) and those advances bring us both profit and more advances more quickly. It's very hard to compete with that. China (a country I have a great affection for!) can't just throw bodies at that problem to see it solved. They simply cannot muster the technological resources to stand toe-to-toe with us in that way, and by the time they get to where we are now, we will have advanced significantly.

Please don't take this as some sort of Pro-USA chest pounding. I am one fo the few people in my field here who sees outsourcing as a good thing (for the world if not for me) and, again, China has a special place in my heart, but unless and until the nature of our situation as a species changes drastically it's unlikley that countries like China or India will ever catch up.

The 'net makes it easier for developments to procreate throughout the globe in many areas, for example business pratices, innovation culture, etc; which don't attribute them to a geographic reigion.

I agree. That's one of the reasons why I'm not willing to say others can't catch up, just that they will have a great deal harder time than is normally suggested. Indeed, even with the globalization effect of the Internet, I'm not sure anyone could catch up at this point.

Set aside all the media hype about fundamentalists running the country and just look at the numbers: The heaps of money we in the U.S. spend on research. The amount is truly staggering. According to UNESCO's 2005 Report on Science and Technology Statistics, China spends about 1.23% of it's GDP on R&D. In the US, we spend 2.67% of ours on R&D and we have a a much higher GDP. Put in apples-to-apples comparison: China spends $72,014,408 in adjusted (ie standardized) currency on R&D. A lot? To be sure, but in the U.S. we spend $275,095,956. If we rounded down to the nearest 100 million dollars the rounded amount we drop would be more than China spends in total. That's not including U.S. and Chinese Defense budget spending, granted, but the amount of money the U.S. throws at military R&D is legendary and those numbers would only server to widen the gap. And it's a sort of snowball effect, too. We make these advances in-house (so to speak) and those advances bring us both profit and more advances more quickly. It's very hard to compete with that. China (a country I have a great affection for!) can't just throw bodies at that problem to see it solved. They simply cannot muster the technological resources to stand toe-to-toe with us in that way, and by the time they get to where we are now, we will have advanced significantly.

Please don't take this as some sort of Pro-USA chest pounding. I am one fo the few people in my field here who sees outsourcing as a good thing (for the world if not for me) and, again, China has a special place in my heart, but unless and until the nature of our situation as a species changes drastically it's unlikley that countries like China or India will ever catch up.

Indeed, countries like China and India will be where the 21st century will take place.

Sure it will.

Seriously though. While that link is a bit tongue-in-cheek, the reality is that while it seems logical on the surface to assume that China and India will take the technological lead, reality is likeely to prove counter-intuitive.

It may be non-PC to point this out, but China and India are incredibly backwards countries by Western standards. You think America has problems because some vocal minority wants to rant about evolution? Remind yourself that America spend more money on research than any other country on the planet...bar none...and by a VERY wide margin. Much of that research money gos into military research, which again might suggest to you that we will lose the edge elsewhere, but you should not underestimate the usefulness of military research to the civilian world (the Internet being the most common example) and you should not underestimate the power of a nation whose biggest advances come from the military sector in terms of world power.

It's cool lately to compare America to decaying Rome, but the fact is that the world is a different place than it was during the Roman Empire and our lead is enrenched in a way the Romans could not conceive.

The problem for other countries is essentialy that while they are making advances, we are too and we are starting from a position that all but ensures victory. It is possible but unlikely that anyone could not only overtake us. We aren't a sitting target, regardless of what you may have heard in the media (that sells more papers with prophecies of doom that visions of a bright future).

Sorry, but the best we can all hope for is that America grows into a leader that respects other nations fully and seeks to lift them up rather than knock them down.

The world is not fair. We are in the lead and right or wrong, China and India will have to do A LOT more than they are currently if they hope to compete. As I said, not impossible, just highly improbable.

Does Windows work as well on older hardware as Linux?

To quote an old SCotUS Justice, "Common sense revolts at the idea."

I am running several domains on an old Toshiba laptop with a 233 PII and 96MB RAM. Specifically, I am running the most recent version of Ubuntu Linux (Ubuntu Server Edition 5.10). It handles 4 web domains, 5 mailing lists, dns, and a horde of other responsibilties.

My challenge to Microsoft? Do the same thing on the same hardware with their latest OS. I'm waiting.

For anyone curious about what is set up and how, you can see my how-to page on the topic of installing these services in Ubuntu on the laptop..

So what kind of setup do you have? Were the digital receiver and HD-capable TV very expensive?

Price-wise, mine is a bad one to compare to, since I designed and built a full home theater:

http://tom.digitalelite.com/0704_blog.htm#28
http://tom.digitalelite.com/caudroplex/index.html

My cost was around $20k. ...But the real entry price for an HDTV set is FAR less. Spend around $80-100 on a good HDTV-optimized antenna, around $100-200 on an HDTV receiver, and buy a TV that can display 1080i and 720p without downgrading to a lower res (sometimes they downgrade, but still /claim/ to be "HDTV-Ready") and you are done. The TV can cost anywhere from $500 to $Shload.

In TV's, the best bang for your buch is in DLP rear projection systems. Trust me, you WILL be pleased. Avoid Plasma. It's cool and gimmicky, but in the end it costs way more for far less, not to mention the problems you'll have with burn-in and picture fading.

Before you spend one single penny, however, go find out what channels you can get at home:

http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx

Enter your address there and it'll give you a good idea of which channels are available and where they are wrt your home. Always a good place to start.

So what kind of setup do you have? Were the digital receiver and HD-capable TV very expensive?

Price-wise, mine is a bad one to compare to, since I designed and built a full home theater:

http://tom.digitalelite.com/0704_blog.htm#28
http://tom.digitalelite.com/caudroplex/index.html

My cost was around $20k. ...But the real entry price for an HDTV set is FAR less. Spend around $80-100 on a good HDTV-optimized antenna, around $100-200 on an HDTV receiver, and buy a TV that can display 1080i and 720p without downgrading to a lower res (sometimes they downgrade, but still /claim/ to be "HDTV-Ready") and you are done. The TV can cost anywhere from $500 to $Shload.

In TV's, the best bang for your buch is in DLP rear projection systems. Trust me, you WILL be pleased. Avoid Plasma. It's cool and gimmicky, but in the end it costs way more for far less, not to mention the problems you'll have with burn-in and picture fading.

Before you spend one single penny, however, go find out what channels you can get at home:

http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx

Enter your address there and it'll give you a good idea of which channels are available and where they are wrt your home. Always a good place to start.