Slashdot Mirror

> Get to know about John Harrison, who made the first 'accurate'
> timekeeper, for use at sea to measure longitude.

Nova has a great show about John Harrison and the creation of his timekeeper, called Longitude.

> Get to know about John Harrison, who made the first 'accurate'
> timekeeper, for use at sea to measure longitude.

Nova has a great show about John Harrison and the creation of his timekeeper, called Longitude.

Why can I never find what I'm looking for on the web?..

Found something similar...

Frontline did a piece on musicians and the "industry machine". They profiled acts like ICP and Limp Bizkit as two relatively mediocre and unknown groups who were absorbed by the 'machine' and now are well known (at least LB is, ICP remains crappy).

Farooq

Yassir El-Sirri

Liberia

Take a look, especially the Liberia one. If you need any more proof, go to Google and search for "plots to rig elections". You'll get a whole lot more reading material. :) It happens.. all the time. No power goes without its abuses.

How long will it be before we will outlaw children using their thumb and index finger to make a "gun" to play cops & robbers? Oh yeah, a child was suspended for school for that already.

If guns (and therefore video games, TV and movies that depict guns) are the root of our violence problems in america why the hell didn't my fathers generation kill each other at record rates? Have you SEEN this roy rogers guy? He carries a gun and used it several times! How about that show gunsmoke? EVERYONE carried a gun, and someone got shot in EVERY episode! Not like todays "Charlies Angels" where none of the heroes are allowed to use guns. It wouldn't be PC, and god knows that if Cameron Diaz used a firearm in a movie I might go Columbine on your ass!

I remember a frontline article that compared the affects of media on young people to a feedback loop. What our PC culture accepts as normal is so narrow in it's focus that normal behavior that has been in children and teenagers since the dawn of time is now somehow so aberrant that you have to drug you kid out of his mind

If society as a whole can't stand simple age appropriate behavior, we are all in for a rough ride. Outlawing video games is just a silly step that some very misguided people are taking for political expediency. If you truly want to stop the violence you have to start early you have to

1. Have both parents involved (which is hard if they both have to work 70 hours a week to make ends meet. Some parents are additionally pretty heavily medicated at that!)

2. You must have a have school system that actually cares about something besides how good the football team is and how fashionable dressed the students are. Not all student problems can be taken care of with a "magic pill"

3. Have a society that kicks silly politicians out on their can when the pull these knee jerk reactions

I don't hold out much hope

How long will it be before we will outlaw children using their thumb and index finger to make a "gun" to play cops & robbers? Oh yeah, a child was suspended for school for that already.

If guns (and therefore video games, TV and movies that depict guns) are the root of our violence problems in america why the hell didn't my fathers generation kill each other at record rates? Have you SEEN this roy rogers guy? He carries a gun and used it several times! How about that show gunsmoke? EVERYONE carried a gun, and someone got shot in EVERY episode! Not like todays "Charlies Angels" where none of the heroes are allowed to use guns. It wouldn't be PC, and god knows that if Cameron Diaz used a firearm in a movie I might go Columbine on your ass!

I remember a frontline article that compared the affects of media on young people to a feedback loop. What our PC culture accepts as normal is so narrow in it's focus that normal behavior that has been in children and teenagers since the dawn of time is now somehow so aberrant that you have to drug you kid out of his mind

If society as a whole can't stand simple age appropriate behavior, we are all in for a rough ride. Outlawing video games is just a silly step that some very misguided people are taking for political expediency. If you truly want to stop the violence you have to start early you have to

1. Have both parents involved (which is hard if they both have to work 70 hours a week to make ends meet. Some parents are additionally pretty heavily medicated at that!)

2. You must have a have school system that actually cares about something besides how good the football team is and how fashionable dressed the students are. Not all student problems can be taken care of with a "magic pill"

3. Have a society that kicks silly politicians out on their can when the pull these knee jerk reactions

I don't hold out much hope

I'm not certain what exactly they planned to do with the information that they were collecting but, you appear to be concerned that they were planning to block or restrict your access to porn.

But, take heart because here is a very interesting bit of trivia. AT&T Broadband, the new operators/owners of Comcast, is the single largest distributor of porn. Here's a Fronline episode on PBS that recently discussed this. They (AT&T) do not advertise this fact in any way but, distributing porn generates millions and possibly billions for AT&T Broadband. For this reason, AT&T Broadband is actually very cozy with the porn industry and is not eager to damage that relationship.

In short, regardless of Comcast's actions, your porn would have been safe.

So a post-mortem analysis on what happened, and why it happened, has no merit? As the old and incredibly wise saying goes, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

I don't vouch for this book whatsoever (haven't read it), but learning from the .COM bubble is extraordinarily valuable, both from a "herd mentality" investing example, and from a "rich get richer" perspective (i.e. a lot of banks and big investors made and kept an incredible amount of money when every average Joe rushed in to free them of those stocks at ridiculously inflated prices, all the while being urged on by "analysts" paraded as impartial while being employed by a company that depends upon boisterous IPOs). The whole system is grossly flawed.

There was a very good PBS special on a couple of weeks ago, and it was very enlightening (at least for me). Of course it, too, was called dot.con, much to the consternation of many on here (I think the slamming of the name is a little ridiculous. It isn't a literal domain name so semantics on whether or not it's redundant are absurd, but putting .CON makes it a tad difficult to find in the card catalog).

There was a rather fascinating program on PBS a few weeks ago entitled "Dot Con". The thesis of the program alleges that investment analysts had an awful lot to gain by offering "hot buy" advice on stocks that their employers had vested interest in.

Ultimately, this led to consumers/investment speculators getting screwed, and unripe companies being shipped off to IPO land for quick cash.

This site has much more detail, including interviews, stats, etc. - including the program itself on quicktime:

___

Has SiriusBlack read cringley's article or original one, or followups, none of which no where say he's increasing the power of his Linksys ?

Has SiriusBlack read cringley's article or original one, or followups, none of which no where say he's increasing the power of his Linksys ?

Has SiriusBlack read cringley's article or original one, or followups, none of which no where say he's increasing the power of his Linksys ?

This is not DSL, it is wireless broadband - probably not unlike the Nokia Rooftop system that Cringely mentioned not too long ago...

Jeff

On PBS

Well isn't this what Robert X. Cringely was talking about in this article?

Well isn't this what Robert X. Cringely was talking about in this article?

Their has already been progress in this area sans head wounds. Instead of jacking your head full of wires, sensors detect the electric activity of the brain through the scalp. The USAF was experimenting with flying planes this way but gave up after a few very promising results concluding that it would take too long to train pilots in this manner to be effective. There was also a few PBS specials about this last year. http://www.pbs.org/saf/1107/resources/resources-5. htm RHh "Moon's milk spills from my unquiet skull" -Coil

We see one of these things every few years, and only a fraction of the tech makes it into reality. Cooltown doesn't even seem to have any thing new in it, just the same old ideas rehassed over again. Hometime used to build a house of tomarrow every couple of years on their show. It would be much more interesting if someone built a modle home that had actual, realistic, tech built into it. Not a house that would warm the gararge 30 min before you got home (Billy Boys), but something that was helpful like an intigrated network for voice/data/whatever, smart lighting that turned on when you entered the room (and saves energy by turning itself off), that sort of stuff. Build a house that is technologicaly advanced and doesn't cost $1mil.

I suppose it could be that there is enough room for a few big e-retailers since the really big ones get free customer awareness since they have more mind share, but those numbers speak to a real difficulty to get a sustainable business online due to low customer loyalty inherent when there is no geographic locality and hence no physical reality to such retailers. It could be that Amazon is merely reaping the high advertising costs in previous quarters and will tank once that mind share that cost so dearly to develop wears off.

PBS does receive tax dollars, although you have to follow the money a bit to find out where it comes from. According to this page, PBS receives "grants" from The Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Dept. of Education. Anyone with half a brain ought to understand that "grants" from DOE are direct taxpayer money. Now, where does CPB receieve its money? Congress.

And we all know where *they* get their money. Out of my paycheck twice a month. So, yes, I'm forced to support my competition.

And to top it off, PBS runs commercials, too. According to the report I already linked, they received $176 mil. in "Program Underwriting." That's the Archer Daniels Midland spot you see going into each segment of Newshour with Jim Lehrer.

Flame away.....

I think the Public Broadcasting System would disagree with you ..

So if /. does ever decide to get that much needed Cringely icon may I suggest this!

As long as you can prove that you're working from pure deduction, you should be fine.

Check out this Cringely piece on reverse engineering.

nz

Cringley has a good piece up on this as well.

Watch some TV.

...but, it's old news...

It's called the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR). It can run for years on a single supply of fisile material, augmented by uranium filtered from sea water. Not only is it, "an energy source that is unlimited," to quote its head of the project, Dr. Charles Till, but it is possibly the safest nuclear reactor ever designed. Unfortunately, anti-nuclear power activists bringing false claims before Congress in 1994 lead to the decommissioning of the project by then President Clinton.

The unofficial IFR site

A wonderful interview with Dr. Charles Till

Article here.

Microsoft says that it does not have lobbyists pushing its interests in the pending antitrust case, but that stance probably glosses over the indirect influence its lobbyists have had on the current administration.

Link to US DOJ.

Article by Cringely

Dont forget to send in comments to the US DOJ

How can anyone argue with this simple expression of capitalism?

you are only right on this:

they add their own tech too, which is why they get different results.

quote

Now, the Athlon processor is made by a rival company, AMD. They have
basically reverse engineered the Intel processors and tried to make a
processor that operates just like Intel's processors, and then sell them
cheaper than Intel does.

This makes it a little more difficult to compare them to the Pentium
processors. Some things the AMD Athlon actually does faster than a Pentium
III, some things it does a little slower, and some things it can't do at
all, while other things the Intel can't do, the Athlon does do.

quote

Had AMD had a design ready when Intel released their Pentium, their market share
wouldn't have dropped to 10%. In the days of the 286, 386, and 486, AMD, Cyrix, and other "clones"
reverse-engineered the Intel chips. In a sense, it was Intel's design (with maybe a few improvments),
but it was reverse-engineered so it did not violate patents.

quote

But nothing lasts forever. The companies that had built Intel chips under license eventually reverse-engineered the chips and built them license-free. Intel copycats including Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Cyrix (a division of National Semiconductor) used the courts to validate their right to copy Intel's chip architectures. And PC manufacturers like Compaq and IBM used these clone chips as a weapon to force Intel prices down. Now the best way for Intel to stay ahead is to simply run faster. Running faster means shrinking product cycles from three years to 18 months by running parallel product development teams and spending more money faster than the other guys. Since Intel has more money to spend, this keeps them in command, but shorter product cycles mean less time to recoup R&D expenses. Hence, those lower margins.

someone better mod me up for all my work

pbs:frontline

boston herald

That said, he's all for seeing it again as a bunch of us do a men's night this week ... provided we can get tickets!

BTW, here's a review I read on Epinions that includes some quotes and some of the order of battle from the book, Black Hawk Down ... that make for some informative reading for potential movie-goers.

epinions:black hawk down

Hmmm... I wouldn't have thought Cringely's articles are flamebait.

He continues this week with Well, then here's What's Really Behind Microsoft's New Commitment to Data Security

Hmmm... I wouldn't have thought Cringely's articles are flamebait.

He continues this week with Well, then here's What's Really Behind Microsoft's New Commitment to Data Security

In Steve's mind, he has won. Why? Because -- as the Woz said, "every computer today is essentially a Mac." And because every computer tomorrow will look like the new iMac. And because Windows XP tries to look like OS X. Microsoft is always following Apple. They will always be following Apple until they actually start ... ahem ... innovating.

Microsoft may have the lion's share of the market, but that doesn't matter to Steve Jobs. As Cringley said, Jobs has already won.

Microsoft wants to replace TCP/IP with a proprietary protocol -- a protocol owned by Microsoft -- that it will tout as being more secure.

Microsoft wants to replace TCP/IP with a proprietary protocol -- a protocol owned by Microsoft -- that it will tout as being more secure.

Bob Cringley says it is a Challenger 604.

...between Gates and Jobs, I refer you to Robert Cringely's terrific article released upon the creation of the new iMac: "The Best Revenge: Why the New iMacs Will Be Successful No Matter What They Look Like." While largely non-technical, it's much more interesting a read than Katz's post, which seems to go pretty wide of the mark, in my view.

Sorry I don't remember where I caught the original link. Could have even been here on /. .

Gates understands something Jobs and media don't.

When was the last time someone said 'wow, I had a great burger yesterday?' - Mickey D's might make more money, be in more cities, may even be the staple food of millions, but no-one can ever say that THAT is the sole benchmark of success.

Jobs has a very different view of success, as was pointed out in a very insightful article by Bob Cringely. Mac & Linux users (deluded though we may be) choose not to use PCs or Windows because we prefer something which is different.

And let's not forget, you use a computer to do a job, you eat food to do a job (keep you alive). Linux or Apple may be a niche market, and might stay that way - but don't accuse Steve Jobs of FAILING, or of NOT UNDERSTANDING what he does, anymore than you criticise your favourite restaurant for not being a huge multi-national burger bar.

According to Bob, "...that no matter how cool these new computers and their software are, they won't be enough for Apple to "win."

See Cringely's piece on how Jobs defines 'winning'. It's not how Katz defines it.

Read Robert X. Cringely's lates column on why (at least) Steve Jobs might not care if it doesn't sell like hotcakes.

Anyway, PBS tends to re-run Nova episodes quite a bit where I live, so check your local listings - you might be able to catch it again real soon if you missed it the first time.

I'd like to think that GM foods can be safe, but the doc shows a nice ad of a happy family underneath a birds nest promoting DDT(which is from the 50's) before they knew the real dangers.

Getting back to the irradiation, this step was more for easing the general public opinions of anthrax letters. We all wanted to see action, and this was the best idea used. Now that we know that the side affects are worse than the prevention, it's time to scrap it and start over. Maybe we can genetically modify canaries to die whenever they detect anthrax spores(kinda a throwback to the coalminers)

I've already given a good impression of what I think is right and wrong. Let me continue - what happened in Rwanda was wrong and evil.

I didn't know all the details: here are a few.

Basically, Hutu civilian and army extremists began a campaign of genocide against the Tutsis. They set up roadblocks and went from house to house raping and killing enemies. The most common weapon was a simple machette. In 100 days, an estimated 800,000 Rwandans were murdered. A huge refugee crisis is created, and the entire region is destabilized.

The worst part is, there were armed U.N. troops on the ground the whole time. They weren't allowed to intervene. They were there because the Rwandan President was about to sign a peace accord creating a coalition government and allowing refugees to return home. The extremists shot down his plane, and the slaughter began that night.

These were often unorganized civilians, armed with machetees, few with firearms. All that would have been required is for the world leaders to call it genocide (it was), and put a larger police force on the ground, and set up a basic rule of law (a simple curfew, and one law - "Don't murder"). Instead, they discussed and debated behind closed doors, and avoided bringing the issue in front of the U.N.. There is a great deal of evidence that the world community knew that a slaughter like this was emminent, and decided not to get their hands dirty.

That is evil. The extremists who did this were evil, and their leaders mostly follow your pattern of "fighting for some kind of gain". The world leaders who ignored the signs beforehand and tried to ignore it while it happened allowed this evil to occur. They should have intervened - if they were looking for some gain, the only gain availible is "to prevent genocide, and to stop a huge crisis that will haunt this country for 100 years". We were WRONG not to do anything. I hope the world leaders that did nothing are haunted by the events of those 100 days on their deathbeds.

That's what I think is right and what's wrong. That's what I think is good and evil. I'm willing to fight for these things, and to pay whatever taxes it takes to stop these sorts of things. My only worry is that the moral fiber of this country will be so weakened by comfort, that when the next Rwanda, the next Bosnia comes along, we'll have to have the whole "what is truth" discussion while people are raped and murdered and kicked out of their homes.

Sure, there's no absolute black and there's no absolute white. But there are shades of grey that are damned near close to black, and others damned near close to white. We as a people need to have a good idea in our mind how white is white enough and how black is black enough, so that we don't have to argue about shades when the time comes to do something about it.

That's true, but it won't be around forever, and as it is we have to go to a bad neighborhood to get it.

Hydrogen is the way to go. It's clean, it's portable ( gas, liquid H2 or NaH ) and it can be made easily from water, which literally falls from the sky. The problem , to state the obvious, is where to get the energy to make it.

Nuclear power. From an energy density standpoint, turning mass into energy is as good as it gets. The Integral Fast Reactor was a program that was canceled during the mid 1990's that has a few of the following advantages:

• coolant flow is necessary to keep the reaction going. Loss of coolant shuts the reactor down, unlike Chernobyl/TMI.
• it can run on a "lower grade" of fuel than other reactors - in fact it can run on waste that is now being stored on-site at many plants because there is noplace else to put it.
• its final waste products are less toxic with shorter half-lives.

The Tick is gone?!?!?

I bet its because PBS put Frontline against it!

Well, you're certainly un-american...

This is a link to Cringely talking about rolling your own DSL