Slashdot Mirror

Corporates are Sociopaths!

You mean survival of the fattest, don't you?

All right. I'll take the challenge. Four years ago: 1999... Lets ask google for some 'proof'.

You learn something new every day uh?

I'm not sure what technical literature you've been reading, but every bit of prediction that I've read would do nothing more than perpetually claim the end of Moore's law, not the continuation of it.

Absolutely; and we know what happens next. Somebody comes up with a new and improved process or a better substrate and, boom, another round of improvement. Then the same thing happens N months down the road. Now, I think the fact that many people are missing here is that the *perception* of what is going on here can be different from the reality. The perception is that the people claiming limits we're about to hit will stop Moore's Law dead are seen as Chicken Littles who are then steam-rolled by the onslaught of new technology. In other words, the naive view is that Moore's Law is repeatedly tested, and passes the test each time. The truth is, people have such vague and inconsistent notions of what Moore's Law really is that there is no real test. An even more striking truth, made in the article quite clearly, is that there is no long-term exponential growth seen in any more concrete formulation of Moore's Law. I think some people would be surprised that Moore's Law isn't right even for the specific original case of the number of components on a minimum cost per component silicon chip.

I recall in the 386 to 486 transition days when already they were ringing the death knells for the then nasceant "Moore's Law", assuring us all that transistors were hitting some magical limit and computing power had peaked.

I remember those days, too. To my eternal chagrin, I even believed some !@#$!@#$ pundit and bought a 486/33 system on the premise that faster systems would be unstable and that chip prices would go up and stay up. Oops... Now one point here is that Moore's Law (called that) seems to be an idea that took off in the 80s, and instantaneously morphed into a bunch of non-equivalent and inconsistent statements. Even the transistor version is not the original one! And the computing power version (which the article covers in detail, by the way) is a real stretch.

This same cycle has continued for years. This idea that "Moore's Law" has sold us all on some endless progress is absolutely, positively ridiculous: We've had progress in spite of the constant cries of the death or Moore's Law.

See my reply above; I really do think many or most non-engineers do have the kind of magical thinking you suggest is ridiculous. In particular, it is the fact the constant cries of the death of Moore's Law *seem* to be just cries of "wolf" that make the "truth" of Moore's Law appear stronger to many people, particularly including the pundit class (e.g., check out the writings of Cringely) and also to many economists (see the paper for more cites). Now the real news here is that when you do look carefully at any concrete data set, you do *not* see an exponential growth curve. In other words, Moore's Law has not really been tested since it was never really true at all.

Now, this is not to say that we will not continue to have progress, or that progress will not be at some times fairly rapid (but note that progress to date has been far less smooth than many people assume). I think it is important to note that it does *not* make sense to make assumptions about the future rate of progress.

How you curve balled the somewhat humorous and loose observation by Gordon Moore into Worldcom baffles me.

I'll explain the segue more carefully below. But please read the article in question; I do not really believe your contention that Gordon Moore was trying to be either "somewhat humorous" or "loose". In the presentations he made on the subject, there were real graphs with real data; in the years after, he has made a point of correcting people's statements about the law (e.g., he never said anything doubles in "18 months" but rather first "1 year" and then later "2 years". I think he is whimsical about it being called a law and named after him.

Worldcom had nothing to do with rational thought, but rather outright fraud and irrational pyramid scheme exhuberance. I highly doubt that anyone was thinking "oooh, if Moore's Law has held true, then therefore this stock will go up forever!".

OK, there are two points going on here. One is that Worldcom, the company, was a corrupt and fraud-ridden organization whose stock price went way up in a bubble economy. And you're right, that part has nothing to do with my argument. :-)

That said, there were huge numbers of companies, old and new, that suddenly saw what they believed to be a nearly limitless opportunity to build out national (and global) optical fiber networks, and (separately) others saw a huge market to work on "last mile" solutions. Now, the only way the huge fiber roll-outs would make sense is if internet traffic was increasing really, really fast. In particular, these business plans were toast unless there was a period of fast exponential growth. Worldcomm certainly did make this claim. You could see this in a number of places, but let's go for this one in Worldcomm's 1999 annual report:

Internet bandwidth demand doubles about every three to four months!

Interestingly, that was a true statement at one time...but I believe only for a six-month period in about 1994 or 1995. The doubling rate has slowed way down now (which means, of course, that we are not talking about an exponential growth process, and probably never were). But, as they say, the rest is history. Now I claim the connection between Moore's Law and internet traffice (or networks) was made early and often, and you can google up the number of hits for "moore's law" and any of "optical fiber", "internet" or "last mile" and get thousands of hits. Try it and see. (Don't follow any of the links if you have a weak stomache...)

Now, wasn't this all particularly witless? Sure it was, since nobody much bothered to pay attention to the actual traffic data and say "wait a minute...". But, irrational though it may sound, people thought they had a previous piece of empirical truth about the *possibility* of exponential growth in technology, namely Moore's Law, which seemed to hold true (NOT!) for 40 years. Heck, you could even be "sophisticated" about it and claim that the fastest doublings would only hold for a period of 5 years...but of course it didn't come close to that. That's the problem with assuming an exponential.

Anyway, I hope I've cleared some stuff up. People have big troubles reasoning with exponential growth scenarios. They underestimate how badly they are being hurt by credit card debt, but do not appreciate how rare true (even temporary!) exponential growth is in many other situations.

Next year they'll float a rumor of thinking of acquiring Lockheed Martin, KFC, and Kiwi Shoe polish.

Now there's an idea, perhaps Microsoft should buy up bankrupt airlines, phone companies, or energy traders.

Lord knows they've got the cash and the companies in question could use the help. For a few billion Microsoft could be an airline or telecommunications monopoly as well.

This is generally itemized as "Goodwill and other intangiables". For Worldcom it can be seen on the most recently available quarterly/yearly report as $37.2 billion dollars. This can be seen at this link.

Cheers.

Bigger than WorldCom's IP network ? Heh...I don't think so...
AT&T versus WorldCom

You want http://www1.worldcom.com/us/tools/noc/status.xml

News Performance: Normal
DNS Service: Normal
Backbone: WorldCom is currently experiencing an interruption of service in various hubs in the U.S. We are working to restore service as quickly as possible.
Dialup: Normal
Hub: Normal
Outages: Normal

One of the big problems here is that Woldcom still operates various units as separate entities, virtually no integration has been done to get UUnet working with MFS working with MCI. It's a lot of fun troubleshooting a circuit and having techs tell you "the problem is with MCI, I work for MFS." !!!!! They all work for Worldcom!

Okay, rant mode off.

Dr. Cerf,

1. According to your bio, you like science fiction. How much did sci-fi books/movies influence your career choices? Which particular book/movie did you like the most / had the most influence on you?
2. For a 'net link between here and Mars to exist, we would first need some kind of human presence there. How soon do you see this happening? As far as I know from popular press, we are still MANY MANY years away from such a goal. Do you have some inside info that we don't? ;-)

In your bio, it is clearly indicated that you work at WorldCom. As an insider, though, it seems likely you might have a little more info about the whole deal than what the big media conglomerates tell us. What is your opinion of the company, and/or could you shed a little more light on the big scandal involved?

A reply on the same thread: For geeks, you slashdot kids display an embarrassing lack of knowledge about a principal subject of geekdom. Kleinrock is indeed considered one of a handful of people who literally and truly invented the Internet. Others were Vint Cerf, Jon Postel, Bob Kahn, and Lawrence Roberts. The Internet didn't come from a vacuum: buy a book, take an hour, and learn about its history.

A little less, lately, but it's because I'm busy writing them in my spare time, since I work full-time.

I do get the occassional evening of Wipeout Fusion or Twisted Metal Black out of my PS2, though. Whee!

I don't have kids, yet, though. :^/

This was talked about by Vint Cerf himself on June 18, 2002 live on The Screen Savers on TechTV. Watch the video (encoded in WindowsMedia) (part one and part two) of the interview if you dont believe me, as nothing is stated in the text of the article. He mentioned that a new protocol would be needed as the ping time to Mars would be much longer and packet loss might occur frequently.

Come on guys, Worldcom?

I know the folks at LinuxGames.com call me 'prolific' every time they mention my name, since I churn out so many titles...

But this OSNews article (I'm mentioned at the top, before the actual interview with Michael) was a surprise! Cool!

And don't worry, I'm keeping it up, despite worrying about my job and my wedding this October. :^)

WRT your #2 point, WorldCom has been delisted. It is now traded over-the-counter as WCOEQ.PK . See this for more information.

I myself would just see about buying a used system. Try here or here.

*

-S

• WorldCom, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Properties, Inc.
• Com Systems, Inc.
• E.L. Acquisition, Inc.
• Healan Communications, Inc.
• Intermedia Communications Inc.
• MCI Communications Corporation
• MCI WORLDCOM Brands, L.L.C.
• MCI WorldCom Management Company, Inc.
• Military Communications Center, Inc.
• SkyTel Communications, Inc.
• TransCall America, Inc.
• TTI National, Inc.
• Wireless One, Inc.
• WorldCom Broadband Solutions, Inc.
• WorldCom International Mobile Services, Inc.
• WorldCom Wireless, Inc.
• Access Network Services, Inc.
• Access Virginia, Inc.
• ALD Communications, Inc.
• BFC Communications, Inc.
• Bittel Telecommunications Corporation
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Arkansas, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Bakersfield, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Connecticut, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Fresno, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Massachusetts, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Michigan, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Minnesota, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Mississippi, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Missouri, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Nevada, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of New England, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of New Mexico, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of New York, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Ohio, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Oklahoma, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Rhode Island, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Sacramento, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of San Jose, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Stockton, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Tennessee, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Texas, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Tucson, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Tulsa, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications of Utah, Inc.
• Brooks Fiber Communications-LD, Inc.
• BTC Transportation Corporation
• Business Internet, Inc.
• Chicago Fiber Optic Corporation
• COM/NAV Realty Corp.
• Cross Country Wireless, Inc.
• CS Wireless Battle Creek, Inc.
• CS Wireless Systems, Inc.
• Express Communications, Inc.
• FiberNet Rochester, Inc.
• Fibernet, Inc.
• ICI Capital LLC
• Intelligent Investment Partners, Inc.
• Intermedia Capital, Inc.
• Intermedia Communications of Virginia, Inc.
• Intermedia Investment, Inc.
• Intermedia Licensing Company
• Intermedia Services LLC
• Jones Lightwave of Denver, Inc.
• Marconi Telegraph Cable Company, Inc.
• MCI Canada, Inc.
• MCI Equipment Acquisition Corporation
• MCI Galaxy III Transponder Leasing, Inc.
• MCI Global Access Corporation
• MCI Global Support Corporation
• MCI International Services, L.L.C.
• MCI International Telecommunications Corporation
• MCI International, Inc.
• MCI International Telecommunications Holding Corporation
• MCI Investments Holdings, Inc.
• MCI Network Technologies, Inc.
• MCI Omega Properties, Inc.
• MCI Payroll Services, LLC
• MCI Research, Inc.
• MCI Transcon Corporation
• MCI Wireless, Inc.
• MCI WORLDCOM Brooks Telecom, LLC
• MCI WORLDCOM Capital Management Corporation
• MCI WORLDCOM Communications of Virginia, Inc.
• MCI WORLDCOM Communications, Inc.
• MCI WorldCom Financial Management Corporation
• MCI WORLDCOM Global Networks U.S., Inc.
• MCI WORLDCOM International, Inc.
• MCI WORLDCOM MFS Telecom, LLC
• MCI WORLDCOM Network Services of Virginia, Inc.
• MCI WORLDCOM Network Services, Inc.
• MCI WORLDCOM Synergies Management Company, Inc.
• MCI/OTI Corporation
• MCImetro Access Transmission Services of Virginia, Inc.
• MICmetro Access Transmission Services LLC
• Metrex Corporation
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Arizona, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Baltimore, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of California, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Connecticut, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Dallas, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Delaware, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Denver, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Detroit, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Florida, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Houston, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Indianapolis, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Minneapolis/St. Paul, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of New Hampshire, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of New Jersey, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of New Orleans, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of New York, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Ohio, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Oregon, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Philadelphia, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Pittsburgh, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Seattle, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems of St. Louis, Inc.
• Metropolitan Fiber Systems/McCourt, Inc.
• MFS CableCo U.S., Inc.
• MFS Datanet, Inc.
• MFS Telecom, Inc.
• MFS Telephone of Missouri, Inc.
• MFS Telephone of New Hampshire, Inc.
• MFS Telephone of Virginia, Inc.
• MFS Telephone, Inc.
• MFS/C-TEC
• MFSA Holding, Inc.
• MobileComm Europe Inc.
• Mtel Asia, Inc.
• Mtel Cellular, Inc.
• Mtel International, Inc.
• Mtel Latin America, Inc.
• Mtel Microwave, Inc.
• Mtel Service Corporation
• N.C.S. Equipment Corporation
• National Telecommunications of Florida, Inc.
• Netwave Systems, Inc.
• networkMCI, Inc.
• Northeast Networks, Inc.
• Nova Cellular Co.
• NTC, Inc.
• Overseas Telecommunications, Inc.
• Shared Technologies Fairchild Communications Corporation
• Shared Technologies Fairchild Telecom, Inc.
• Shared Technologies Fairchild, Inc.
• SkyTel Corp.
• SkyTel Payroll Services, LLC
• Southernnet of South Carolina, Inc.
• Southernnet Systems, Inc.
• Southernnet, Inc.
• Telecom*USA, Inc.
• Teleconnect Company
• Teleconnect Long Distance Services & Systems Co.
• Tenant Network Services, Inc.
• Tru Vision Wireless, Inc.
• Tru Vision-Flippin, Inc.
• UUNET Australia Limited
• UUNET Caribbean, Inc.

WorldCom now has an official bankruptcy site. So far, there's nothing there but happy talk press releases.

Coincidentally Vint Cerf, currently the ICANN Board of Directors chairman, is a WorldCom Vice President.

WorldCom (via UUNet) handles 50% of US internet traffic

yeah, but if they would only enforce their acceptable use policy, the amount of traffic would only be 10%... ; )

Check out Vint Cerf's principles on the WorldCom website. Given the story above, it all seems a little hollow (and given the site hosting these principles, one could argue that "honesty and integrity" were in fairly short supply at his employers too).

Some tidbit of information that I didn't know about: Vint Cerf happens to have some STRONG ties to another mayor news-item: WorldCom: WorldCom: Resources: Cerf's Up (Check out the date on this piece) Since I didn't know this, I guess other people might not know it either.

Many Slashdot readers are "liberal" or "left-leaning" and are opposed to the War on Drugs and drug laws in general. If you don't like the government telling you what you can and cannot put in your body, why are you so eager to have the government tell you what it thinks the best and worst products are? Let the private sector handle this.

An excellent point, my "conservative" or "right-leaning" friend!

I, for one, trust the private sector to make important standards decisions in a just and unbiased manner. I know that can count on private enterprise to interact with the public an an open and honest fashion, and think that your average board of directors has a much better handle on what's going on with their company than some hare-brained committee of bureaucrats has over some bloated, complex government scheme.

Besides, I don't want such important things left up to some government agency that could disappear from the face of the planet in an instant--no, thank you, I'll take private enterprise any day. They're really looking out for what's best for me.

...perhaps we should look to Europe for examples of how to do things properly...

Worldcom is MCI and UUNET. MCI is the first of the competitive long distance companies and the second largest telecom. UUNET is the first commercial ISP and one of the largest. Both may just go away now.

93,000 network route miles, including terrestrial and undersea cable
More than 67,000 buildings worldwide connected to WorldCom network

Worldcom is MCI and UUNET. MCI is the first of the competitive long distance companies and the second largest telecom. UUNET is the first commercial ISP and one of the largest. Both may just go away now.

93,000 network route miles, including terrestrial and undersea cable
More than 67,000 buildings worldwide connected to WorldCom network

Their stock is definately in the toilet. Their own inverstor relation website is showing how poor of a company they are to invest in.

The complete quote, which is referenced in this article, was, "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." Vint Cerf says that Gore would "be quite correct to say 'I helped create the Internet' - because of his work to provide an environment of support for research ... so fundamental to the Internet today."

My local ISP started with dialup and moved into DSL--they still do DSL, but only for business. (I use them for both, dialup and business DSL) They were doing residential DSL, but stopped for the exact reasons described--BellSouth dragging heels, BellSouth impeding colo equipment, BellSouth being real shits.

They halted residential DSL for that reason. It sucked, because as I've used BellSouth DSL and Netdoor's DSL service, Netdoor kicks their ass sideways.

You overlook the main point--the very regulation that opened the local loop to DSL providers also provided for the fines if the RBOCs didn't do so. (I have some experience with this topic through my former job)

The argument can be made that the regulation wasn't good enough, that the regulation can be fixed, and I'd agree. The *possibility* of perfect governance is always there--the *liklihood* is that the regulation will be a dog's breakfast of loopholes, bad wording, or plain-old idiocy. From my experiences, I would rather depend on something other than the vagaries of the government.

And, in fact, the solution to the DSL/broadband problem isn't government. It's the private sector doing an end-run around the slow and quirky government regulators.

Use their POP finder to seek out dial up access points for wherever you may be going.

Not an uptime guaruntee per se but my SLA with uunet provides for a full month's refund for as little as 15 minutes of unscheduled downtime. Seems like quite a motivating factor. We also pay >$1200 for service each month, so we're not talking low-revenue residential here.

For those like me who have only one broadband option and need a definite backup plan, think about Starband or even uunet's VSAT service as a backup. Sure latency might be fun but it will give you access when nothing else will.

thousands, five, what's the difference?

No, seriously... I realize there are at least two (and possibly as many as four) other providers that cover more than ten square miles with something resembling recent technology.

Good thing The Market has provided us with all these choices, eh?

Well, yeah - in a way: a "vaccine"...

Although not strictly "good" - because vaccines are typically (always? I am not a virologist) made from weakened or dead viruses, which basically give the immune system time to build up a resistance as it fights this lesser threat (and yeah, sometimes even a vaccine can cause the illness it tries to prevent).

But I am not sure it would be accurate to describe a virus-killing/patching virus a vaccine or not...

Besides, all the points you made are valid, and are things that really keep this kind of idea on a back burner...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Right! As others have said, wait for the BSA audit. What I can't understand is why all those machines even need modems? Throw some cheapo network cards in them, add a hub and put a good modem in one machine acting as a modem gateway (I tend to doubt each machine has it's own phone line, too)...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Damn sick...but funny in a twisted way :)

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Hey! Drop the whole OpenRacer junk, get Tux off his belly, up onto his fins, and on a snowboard! Take the TuxRacer code and do it, or pull out and retweak the TTPAQFH code (which I think is where TuxRacer originally came from). Throw some cool sunglasses on our favorite friend - take it and run!

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

However, I doubt a box set will ever appear - and I bet you won't see it running on FX for any real length of time, unlike X-Files.

There are also shows that I wish I could watch again, if just for the laugh factor - two that I would love to watch again are "Whiz Kids" (now I know that one is syndicated on some channel - not sure which, though), and "Automan" (cheesy, cheesy, cheesy). There was another one I wouldn't mind watching (called "Lost World" or something, about a family that wanders through parallel universes, going through these warping devices shaped like pyramids I believe - and no, it isn't "Land of the Lost" I am thinking about - it was like a family of four or five people).

Anyhow - these devices could cause the prevention of any such watching of this nature...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

I looked up Klatt, like the AC mentioned - here are some links for the rest of us...

GPL'd Klatt Synth Source

RSynth Speech Synthesizer - Klatt based synth - go to /soundapps to download gzipped code

KPE80 - A Klatt Synthesiser and Parameter Editor

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Actually, I probably am good enough to do this under Windows - but I hate M$'s business practices, and their software is shit.

I am a Linux "convert" - I run SuSE Linux 7.2 at home, currently learning Perl. At work I do VB and Java coding. I have seen the code of the ILoveYou virus - it is dead simple. I am certain these other "viruses" are similar in scope. I am aware of various virus coding sites, and I keep up from time to time on the "underground" - side hobby of mine.

I could probably patch together such a "virus" as described, and even release it without leaving behind a "trail". The only thing keeping me from doing anything like this is that I know ultimately it wouldn't benefit anybody, not even myself - and would be unlikely to affect Microsoft, either. All it would cause would be anger, lost time, and money. So why do it? Of course, all of these other viruses out there do the same thing - so someone either is really fucked up in the head, or there must be some kind of motive.

Boggles me...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Yes I would - If there was a series of speakers, heck - even one speaker (hell, I would volunteer to speak!) - I would be willing to attend.

If such a thing ever occurs, I propose that we do an actual march/walk to the site where the rally would be held - say over the course of 10-20 miles. Hold the rally for a couple of days - camp out if need be.

I am tired of all this shit - I want my rights - all of them!

What the hell, people? Why aren't more people replying to this comment? Do any of you really care? WTF??!!

I have written my congressmen about this issue - I will be participating in the Saturday meet in Phoenix (missed last saturday, and can't get off work for today's meet - but I will be there this weekend!).

What does it take?

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

You know it and I know it, and I am certain that most people here on /. know it, too.

I tend to wonder if these "viruses" we have been seeing are merely "shots across the bow", so to speak. I mean - why hasn't a virus as you described come out yet?

Most of the source code to these viruses is available for free, if you know where to search.

It is obvious that MS products are buggy, full of holes to exploit, and rarely patched - not to mention that users of the systems tend to be lazy and ingnorant about security precautions - constantly clicking to see the next naked Brittany Spears image - so why haven't we seen true chaos yet?

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Sure, right now they are all hackable...

But really - there is no way to easily increase storage, or put shows "off-line" or to an external array...

Think about it - why do VCRs exist? The law says that time-shifting is legal. So many of us "time-shift" shows to a tape - so we may watch them again and again - including shows that we may never see again! I have all the episodes of X-Files on tape, as well as all the episodes of Millenium. Which one will most likely go into syndication? X-Files. Millenium will never be seen from again - but I have a copy I can watch again if I want to (including the pilot episode - which has never been rerun, AFAIK - due to the graphic violence portrayed in it).

Guess what? With these PVRs - time-shifting is still allowed - but archiving goes out the door. Slap the DMCA on top of encrypted content - disallow recording shows that you have to pay for (if you can record them at all) - and force subscribed content - and you have a televisions exec's wet dream.

Furthermore, you will never be able to watch those old shows - only what they want to allow you to watch.

This is why I am keeping my VCR as long as I can - at least until HDTV becomes standard - when that occurs, I might just chuck my TV.

Unless we can build an open homebrew platform for movie and TV watching, at-home TV entertainment is screwed as we know it.

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Prior to this, the best sounding speech synthesis I had heard was from the Festival system, which is still pretty good - epecially considering it has an open source license, something the AT&T system doesn't.

Another good speech synthesizer, no doubt an early version of the AT&T one (possibly?), is by Lucent.

Still, I am amazed at the quality of the AT&T system - it sounds almost perfectly natural. To the naysayers that say "No, it isn't natural" - what all of you have to realize is that this simply demo doesn't allow you to tweak all the variables that would really allow the inflections or type of voice (like whispering, etc) to really come through - it is too bad they don't give an advanced interface with a FAQ or some other form of documentation to allow this, but I imagine that if they did, it would probably take quite a while to compose even a simple sentence (I remember the hell you had to go through with an old Radio Shack speech synth for the Color Computer, specifying individual phoenomes (sp?) just to get proper speech to come out - it could pronounce many words, but others it just fell flat on its face).

Finally - something I want everyone to ponder. Take a look at this old article (it was about Square redubbing FFTM) - once it loads, search for "cr0sh" and "I dare say" - you will come across a series of comments about what I think may happen in the future - what is funny is that the comments in reply to my take on things sound like your typical naysayers. How many computers were we supposed to only need back in the 60's? How much memory would people "only" need again Mr. Gates?

What I predict will come about - probably sooner than we can all imagine. It may not be cheap enough to do it now, at a quality that people would watch, fast enough to be done quicker than what can be done with live actors - but it is all software and hardware - this stuff will get faster and cheaper. Anybody who has been in this business long enough knows that it will happen. There might still be a need for actors, and voice artists, and such - but they probably won't have the "god" status society seems to confer on them now (with the exception, perhaps, of stage acting - which will probably enjoy a huge comeback).

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Remember the computer history books - a large collection of these is essential to any library, to see where this all started from, and where it may be heading to.

There are a few good recently published "History of Computers" books, but honestly, the best way to get a history of computers is to find older computer reference books (ie, books which when sold presented "state-of-the-art" information about computers - I have some real interesting ones from the 40's and 50's).

Books on Babbage, Pascal, Lord Kelvin, Ada Lovelace, Alan Turing, etc - would also be welcome additions to such a section. Throw in books on Hollerith, as well. Add recent stuff (hacker history - like the Jargon File, etc - and others), as well as more "popular" stuff - like "The Media Lab" and Steven Levy's "Hackers"...

Gotta know where all this came from, and where are roots are, as well...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Do not even attempt to try to do ANY of this stuff until you have read up and fully understand the consequences of failure! Once you understand that, start experimenting, and take as many precautions as you can to protect your body.

I had an email conversation with this guy on Friday (7/27), and I can tell you that I still have a ton of questions. He did say that a pulse jet engine could probably be built using off the shelf parts (steel piping and exhaust piping) - but it wouldn't last as long as using stainless steel piping (read: expensive) - but that much of the rusting and corrosion could be slowed by using high temp engine header paint.

Typical pulse jets use a form of spring steel (or blade steel) reed or flap valves - that tend to wear out after a while (because of the flexing). In his conversations, he told me that he had hit upon a way to make a new type of valve (in both design and materials used) that actually lasts many times longer than common designs - in effect, advancing the state of the art for pulse jet engines.

These devices can be dangerous - he shows one engine that he built that "exploded", but ripped down the side of the exhaust pipe as planned (he welded it to fail that way). Even so, it caused a lot of surrounding damage - buckling a nearby garage door. Had he not designed the pipe to fail (say, instead he had used common steel pipe) - it most likely would've caused significantly more damage - possibly lethal damage.

Valved pulse jet engines are harder to build, mainly because of the machining of the valve. The valveless designs are much easier to construct - I am willing to wager that such a design could be built using common pipe and parts found at an Auto Zone and Home Depot. Probably take a few hours to put together (weekend project?), then a little longer to tweak and "tune" the engine to running resonance (once more, I must mention that reading up on how these engines work is important - better to build an engine than a potential bomb).

Realize that pulsejet engines tend to glow red, sometimes near-white hot (actually, if built from standard, non-stainless steel pipe, it will fail before it gets that hot - blowing apart in a shower of hot steel first) when in operation for an extended (>5 min) period of time. They are LOUD - louder than you can possibly imagine. Being around one of these running engines for too long can desensitise your nerve endings - then when they resensitise afterward, they become hyper-sensitive for an extended (> 3 days) period - where every sound/touch/etc - is PAINFUL. Just ask Mark Pauline from SRL (I helped him set up for a pulsejet demo here in Phoenix last year - that engine was valveless as well - and quite powerful).

So, in short - learn about them as much as you can, see one in operation first to know what kind of power you are dealing with (I heartily recommend an SRL demo, if at all possible), then learn some more - finally, buy the best parts, take the right precautions, keep a fire extinguisher and another person nearby in case of emergency - work outside or in a WELL ventilated large area. Know what you are dealing with - and maybe, just maybe - you will only walk away with a few burns, if you are lucky.

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

The article most likely could have been summed up as:

"If you run a system without a firewall and it is hooked up to the internet, be prepared to be cracked at some point, sooner rather than later."

All I have to say about this is "Duh!".

Actually, learning the techniques and tools used could be helpful - I will give it that much.

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

Well, I know they aren't real firewalls - but that is how they are typically marketed. And your point about static routes is well taken (I actually plan at some point to try to set up a web server for bookmarks, and FreeSco makes it pretty easy to select a port and route it where you want - but it definitely won't be to my main box).

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

I don't know about a penny, but I have seen what happens when a bolt fall off the top of an oil derrick and hits someone's helmet:

Think 2 inch deep impact mark.

Fortunately, the helmet was steel, and the person I knew who had this happen to him (I was a kid at the time) didn't get killed...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

In theory, I could walk out of my employer's office with a few ZIP disks filled with their code.

But why bring a ZIP drive to work when I can go down to supplies, grab a box of CD-Rs, find a machine with a burner, and burn away?

The whole issue is trust - I trust them not to watch me, and they trust me not to use their own equipment to scam code...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!