Slashdot Mirror

i-Opener?

Now I can finally run my I-Opener with its native OS!

The I-Opener FAQ is at http://fastolfe.net/2006/iopener/faq if you don't remember the device. It had a very high "cool factor" for its time.

You could redo the I-Opener today. In fact, you could even get the latest version of QNX with the new embedded browser and load it into an I-Opener.

Something like that should be in every hotel room, where you really want a stateless client machine.

I didn't know what it was, so Googled for it. It is produced by the "Digital Lifestyles Group", apparently the same who also made the more-or-less famous I-Opener

Als see: http://www.hip-e.com/

I COMPLETELY agree. First, the rant: DNS names are designed to give an administrator-friendly label for an IP address (or other network-related record). Domains are there to define an administrative scope within DNS. The top-level domains are there to define, very broadly, some different types of administrative scopes within DNS. The original designations seemed very logical.

DNS DOMAINS ARE NOT FUCKING CONTENT LABELS. DNS IS NOT A FUCKING INTERNET KEYWORD.

Now, with the rant portion of my post concluded, here's the reality:

There is no unique, persistent "keyword-style" web site lookup mechanism on the Internet. All attempts to create one have been plagued with litigation, jurisidicational, and cross-industry trademark ambiguity problems. The best we have is DNS, and something needs to fill that role. ICANN seems to think that continuing to warp DNS is the best way to do that.

A proper solution might entail a "proper" directory mapping real-world names to DNS domains (and letting SRV records do the rest). Then we can throw all of the intellectual property issues and the full weight of America's mighty litigation tendencies onto this directory service and keep it out of DNS. The directory service itself could be architected across geopolitical boundaries and thus tailor its regional scope/namespace to whatever country's laws happen to be in effect there (much like others' suggestions of eliminating the generic TLDs entirely in favor of ccTLDs). A directory like X.500 or LDAP, in conjunction with a country's trademark/service mark scheme, could offer users a guaranteed way to persistently and uniquely identify a mark's owner or an organization by name on the Internet. It would even allow for multiple organizations with the same name (as is allowed in the US for companies of different industries), which is impossible with DNS (and another whopping reason why DNS is unsuitable for this role). There remain some usability issues with an approach like this, though, so maybe that's why no one's figured out a way to make it work and take off.

But once DNS is taken out of the picture here, it can revert to being a simple host label and none of these stupid TLDs will matter. But that isn't going to happen any time soon. DNS will continue to be (ab)used as a content label and an Internet keyword, so long as there are companies willing to pay to keep/make it that way and so long as there are organizations out there willing to put those interests ahead of others.

Cool! I am still fiddling with the I-Opener from several years ago. Now something else to splice into the Jeep :)

Maybe I could use it for the OBD-II display?

Of course, I realized, any software outside of the OS maker's control (even in a department that is nearly closed off from the OS department, i.e., Windows and MS Games, which are usually only published by MS) could cause problems. QNX is stable because it uses software that has been tested for as long as 20 years and has been proven to not be buggy. It's also not a consumer OS (but, it can be used as one...)

I would agree with you, except search engines carry no authority. You could easily manipulate your own pages and things to make search engines "think" that your pages are more relevant for a given topic (or company name) than the company itself.

An authoritative search engine might be a good place to start worrying about trademark and service marks, though.

You still need that central authority if you need the ability for your labels to carry IP weight, but these labels must be scoped within political boundaries for that to be feasible.

DNS could actually still function in that capacity through the elimination of the GTLDs, and enforcement of location-specific hierarchies.

Some of these ideas are covered in a small paper I wrote last year at http://fastolfe.net/features/directory-service/.

It doesn't look like Unicode has a single-quote character that just goes straight up and down. The ' character is an apostrophe in Unicode. The only single-quotes that are there are paired (left/right), though there is a double-quote that goes straight up and down. *shrug*. Here's what I could find:

http://new.fastolfe.net/reference/charsets/unicode -search?query=39+34+8216+8217+8220+8221&type=d ec

Then you're willing to get rid of your over-wrought, self-absorbed web site?

Just wondering...

t_t_b
--
I think not; therefore I ain't®

All you need to do is dial the unit up using its native QNX (either to the Netpliance-provided ISP or, if you've wriggled your way into the internals, by using pppd itself with your own ISP), FTP a compressed boot/root filesystem image, and write that image to the raw SanDisk device.

Poof. Instant Linux installation. It's been done with BSD and there are already Linux "distros" (images) available to do the same. Check out their web site and the FAQ.

Most of the attention out there at modifying i-openers has been towards Linux, but a lot of the information is applicable to any x86 operating system, really. *NIX systems are just easier to install and get working, since the hardware setup is weird.

i-opener-linux.net and a FAQ.

We've taken some pictures, wrote up some text and released the software we're using:

http://fastolfe.net/features/telecam/

Firstly, legOS is a really cool project. They've totally re-written the firmware for the RCX and built a fully pre-emptive multitasking environment running programs you can write in C or C++ and compile with a gcc cross-compiler. Very cool stuff, though the networking support (IR) doesn't seem very usable just yet.

NQC uses the standard firmware I believe, and is a bit more solidified. You write programs in a pseudo-C language and compile/upload it using the NQC utility. It also has some good IR message passing abilities.

Information about both of these can be found at LUGNET in the robotics section.

I experimented with LegOS a while back but ended up using NQC and a bunch of server-side Perl to build myself a telerobotic camera mount for my webcam.

There are definitely tools available out there for some extremely flexible Mindstorms programming.

But then again, Iraq's got nukes, and we ain't exactly friends with them..... THEY are the ones I am worried about, not the Russians or, hell, even the Chinese.

You forget that while a country may or may not have weapons of mass-destruction, they also need the delivery vehicle to bring that weapon to its enemy. Iraq does not have the missile technology to hit us or most anyplace in Europe.

But my other point is that even though I am trying to be optimistic, I am quite the survivalist and will be heading for the hills - and I am heading up the Y2K section of my consulting firm right now!!!!

That's pretty sad.. What's even sadder is that you'll end up convincing your friends and family of their impending Y2k-related doom and they'll do the same thing, tell their friends, etc.

If there does end up being a meltdown of the government or financial institutions, it's going to be due to attitudes like yours and not any direct result of a Y2k-related bug.

It'll be the panicky nature of society. There will either be a mass of bank withdrawals shortly before Y2K or one or two relatively minor Y2K-related problems will cause widespread panic.

So long as the media is hyping the Y2K problem as the "end-of-the-world" bug, capable of detonating all nuclear arsenals of the world, capable of toppling buildings and governments, eliciting riots and mass hysteria, society as a whole will be very sensitive when the time comes.

For a more comprehensive look at my thoughts regarding at least the financial side of things (which aren't the only sociological threats I can forsee for the arrival of next year), read about it.