Slashdot Mirror
Design Hardware/Software for Global Civil Society
-cman- writes "White box builders and Gnome hackers take note! With the announcement of various oxymoronic "trusted computing" initiatives in recent week, Bruce Sterling, self-appointed Pope-Emperor of the Viridian Design Movement has announced a new design contest to design a '...genuinely trustable, cheap, well-designed, rugged, sexy, accessible computer system that is owned, manufactured and operated for, well, Global Civil Society.'" I'll buy one.
...for a $1.00
.sig
I object to the next
If you open your mind too wide, people will throw trash in it.
So who among us has visited Wal-Mart to buy the new Lindows boxen that meets this criteria?
Support your own or it will fail.
The facts expressed here belong to all, the opinions to me. The distinction between fact and opinion is yours to decide.
".Net builders and XP hackers take note! With the announcement of various oxymoronic "trusted computing" initiatives in recent week, Bill gates, self-appointed Pope-Emperor of the Republican Innovation Movement has announced a new design contest to design a '...genuinely trustable, cheap, well-designed, rugged, sexy, accessible computer system that is owned, manufactured and operated for, well, Global Civil Dominance.'"
I'll pirate one.
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
Damn the box let's just try get the "Global Civil Society" first.
You Are Being Lied To.
Sounds like windows. Well, except for the part about being genuinely trustable, cheap, well-designed, rugged, sexy, accessible computer system that is owned, manufactured and operated for Global Civil Society.
In the book called "Virus" by Grahm Watkins, ie described an OS similar to the system Bruce Sterling wants. It was called Penultimate. I'm lousy at the details tough. Anyone else read that book?
Replace one master of my system with another! Nothing better than having Gates control my system than having many people do it.
I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!
Part of the prize announcement:
"That's right! The prize is cash! And none of that flaccid, green, American funny-money, either. Instead, it's this season's rapidly escalating, crisp, brand-new, supranational, global-standard currency:
EUROS!
Yes indeed! No fewer than 150 Euros, a staggering one hundred and fifty of 'em! And that's not all!
Because if Microsoft (like so many other large American companies) turns out to have some major accounting skeletons in its closet, the value of these Euros could skyrocket overnight."
It's that last sentence that grabbed my attention. Ye Gods, can you imagine what would happen if Microsoft's UberFortune turns out to be ficticious?
Ooooooooh.....
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
What language would be the Universal Language??? Esperanto? How about a universal geek language? Klingon!
Grok et Spock baby!
i prescribe a VT220 for use by Global Civilians. if someone can't figure out how to use it, they shouldn't be allowed near a fucking computer in the first goddamn place.
Weren't they the ones with the bumpy foreheads on Star Trek? Or were they the wrinkly noses?
Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
IEEE, IETF, even the Liberty Alliance could put together a competing system.
The key here is that any proposed security standard needs to be
Anything less than this *WILL* fail on a global market. MS probably has a shot at controlling the US PC market if the government and their anti-trust proceedings don't bitch slap them
So somebody is supposed to build computers for everybody on the whole planet, but that somebody shouldn't be big enough that they are capable of doing such a thing? Maybe we should put some plans on our desks and let the computer gnomes build them overnight?
The box is one step in the process...it has been said that the design of the internet reflected certain values that as a result brought about changes in society as we know it today. With such a box as Bruce Sterling proposes, he hopes to bring about such change.
Man if he calls it the difference engine I'll be sick all over myself. That was the worst book ever. How can a man who wrote such dribble ever proport to have anything worthwhile to say afterwards.
I do blame this bruce guy for that book and not Willliam Gibson.
From the web page:
"Trusted Computing" is vaporware; it does not exist nor will it exist. Anyone trying to make money on/off it is doing so at the expense of even greedier corporations. Technology in the hands of idiots is a scary thing.
I already use a product that's free, open, endlessly customisable and cheap, it's called a PC and Linux, why the hell would I buy a product that's restricted by anyone other than myself? Be it ACME Corp or "Global Blah Blah".
Anyway, do I win the prize? Or is this money connected to making the X-Box a run of the mill PC running Linux, subsided by MS?
From the Viridian FAQ: The contests are opportunities for graphic or conceptual creativity. Logos, posters, teapots, lamps, that sort of thing. We do this to amuse ourselves, and to give some coherent form to our ideas. Images and symbols are every bit as important to the Viridian Movement as our constant outflow of rants.
Not to flame them or anything, but you'd think a site that cares as much about design as they claim would have, well, a better design themselves.
He makes Stallman look sane and Theo look congenial.
At least Theo is a person of ability.
Computing DOES need to be more secure... that is what runs, enters into or is taken from the computer is done so only with the users consent. Unfortunately, many people are happy to let big companies like Micro$haft, AOL make those decisions for them. Perhaps something like a red button on the case that cannot be triggered by software. For example you get a BIOS message saying program X is trying to install program Y to allow this. Hit the red button if you want to allow this.
Blender And Linux Fan
The answer is clearly the x86 PC, I guess this competition is the same as this one?.
We've all gotten very used to thinking that "computers == 1970s mainframe shrunk to desktop size," in that we deal with fragile hardware, fragile drivers, fragile applications, overly complex systems, and having to become system administrators. That's not how it has to be.
Some computer systems are solidly reliable, but we don't think of them as computers. We call them consoles and PDAs. But technology has advanced so much that we could easily have a PDA with more horsepower in it than was used at Boeing to design the 777, or what animators had on their desks when working on Toy Story. It's a matter of breaking free from thinking of computers as generic "PC"s running generic operating systems. Smaller is better in this case. How much performance and time do we waste just to keep running the same generic, "modern" systems: Linux, Windows, MacOS. They're all the same, and they're all missing the point.
...will wake up one day and realize they are just technicians not world saviors. Of course, actors and musicians would have to do that first. I'm not holding my breath.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I take it the think has to be biodynamic, too?
I don't get it. Mr. evironmentalist want's a espionage-free computer. And it has to look good, because it is targeted on the ever-fashion-aware Global Civil Society servants?
Why doesn't he go buy one a rugged laptop [dolch.com] and sticks linux on it? No backdoors, no espionage, all trusted computing for the field?
I probably don't get it, do I?
We, who are about to salute you, die
Whaaa??? Hardware/Software to make people civil? Globally? Can anyone else hear the echoes bouncing off the empty walls at slashdot?
--
As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.
http://www.viridianrepository.com/ was made with microsoft frontpage. bastards.
I'd guess that he wants it to cost $50 as well.
Michael Loves Me!
That is so disgusting...
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
With the idea of MS getting control of our systems, I see the same problem here as with the old NSA_KEY silliness. You can't actually use something like the NSA_KEY without giving it away.
How do you know someone doesn't have something monitoring network traffic? So if you send your magical super-key to a computer to open it up, you have to hope that they have no such software/hardware active. If they do have such hardware/software, then the 'bad guys' now have the super key of happiness that gives them total control.
I can imagine how a terrorist would love to see their system get 'hacked' by such a universal password.
Or am I totally missing something?
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
I think you need another penis colada
This is just a trick to distribute digital UN invasion markers that signal their troops and silent, black helicopters with intelligence and locator information. The so-called "Global Civil Society" is really GCS = Geolocation Centralization System. I bet they'll boot up and display the same invasion route markers that you see on the Interstate Highway system signs.
computing at the speed of government is s-l-o-w
does anyone else remember the computers that the canadian government designed and built in the late 80's and early 90's (i think they were called "icons"). they had a trackball and came with a built-in rabbit catching game. i believe that the entire school worked off of a single 5 1/2 inch drive... and it really sucked
if hardware/software is too closely regulated and controlled by the government or associations, then it will lose a lot of its coolness. i agree that some regulations are required, but don't fool yourself and let yourself think that the regulators know best.
I don't want to be here.
"Self appointed *Pope*" huh?
Sounds like he will be "praying" on young developers; cover your asses!
:)
.
Okay, so what exactly are the specs of this platform he's asking for?
1) "genuinely trustable, cheap, well-designed, rugged, sexy, accessible."
good, cheap, fast. Pick two. Seriously, rugged, cheap and accessible (presuming he means easy to use) are about the only things in this section that are actually design requirements. The "genuinely trustable" we'll look at below in the "open specifications" comment. "Well-designed" and "sexy" are not design specifications, as much as marketing pre-planning.
2) "a primarily political and social computer"
ummm....right. This isn't a design spec, it's...well....pointless, actually. We'll ignore it.
3) No corporate or national logos.
Okay. This is a valid design requirement, but probably an impossible one.
4) "The software and communications protocols in this device should be transparent. Honest. Aboveboard. Public. Public-spirited. Fair. Inclusive. Multi-culti. Legitimate. This Is What Democracy Looks Like. All that stuff that computer hardware and software never, ever is"
Right. The IEEE and the IETF are secretly planning to take over the world. Just you wait. and don't get me started on JEDEC. They never take input from the community. This is a design spec, but an insane one.
There's no way. You would, in effect, have to re-design every part of the computer to manage this. This includes a different card spec (PCI and AGP are apparently not multi-culti enough), a different CPU (they display corporate logos, after all), different BIOS (corporate logos again), etc. You would have re-design the entire computer, ignoring all existing specs. This is crazy.
Abacus
Build a machine to defeat DRM. DRM leads to centralized control of content. Content being technologically indistinguishable from expression, this leads wherever they want it to lead.
I'm sorry, but this is logistically impossible. Let's take this apart:
What we need is a genuinely trustable, cheap, well-designed, rugged, sexy, accessible computer system that is owned, manufactured and operated for, well, Global Civil Society.
What is trustable? If the computer is trusted by the owner then that means the owner must have full control in order to guarantee no shoddy behavior is going on. However, this is the exact antithesis of what RIAA wants because it wants full control to do the exact same thing-- to guarantee no shoddy behavior is going on. In system's design, all of the above terms are meaningless. Everyone has different opinions on exactly what these terms mean which is why I have learned to steer well clear of them. To me, sexy is code that is well documented, simple, and broken into intelligent behavioral pieces. I also know people who think sexy is that all sections of code larger than 50 lines must be broken into a separate procedure. To me, that's a maintenance nightmare and hardly sexy.
The real issue, something that I've been arguing for a long time is that piracy is the natural balance to capitalism. When the demand for a product outweighs what the public feels as fair for the product, then fewer people feel bound to honoring a purchase. Unfortunately, there is a law of numbers in capitalism and the number of people who do not have the expertise to make a wise decision when purchasing technical goods versus those who do are far greater in number. Thus, regardless of the number of better alternatives out there, people will buy in the way they are used to, which currently is Microsoft. The only way to prevent what is going to happen is to educate enough of the public to make Microsoft believe it would not be financially wise to attempt to go that route. The advent of XP being rent-able was foiled when enough consumer backlashes were heard. But, in some form, XP was going to sell because they are the megacorp. And, as long as we allow megacorps, they are going to do whatever it is that will give the most dollars. They are always going to attempt to strive for that perfect goal of performing no effort and collecting money for it. Microsoft figured this out a long time back. They just want to make sure for every transaction that occurs, they get paid to allow it to happen. And, we all put them there because we, as a whole, have always voted by buying the cheapest. Now, the cost is always going to be the threat of being finally utterly controlled by one of those megacorps.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
This is probably the height of intellectual mastubation for the likes of us, relatively wealthy, computer geeks. You think the millions of starving in the world care about PC's, or figuring out a way to get the local warlord to stop stealing food and medicine from the Red Cross.
While it is a worthy cause in the long run, we'd probably be better off using our time and money on more . . . immediate problems. I realize this is easier said than done, etc . . .
--What, you ain't know about them country fried sessions?
Apparently Sten Guns were not very well made, or well liked:
Ode to a Sten Gun
By Gunner. S.N. Teed
You wicked piece of vicious tin!
Call you a gun? Don't make me grin.
You're just a bloated piece of pipe.
You couldn't hit a hunk of tripe.
But when you're with me in the night,
I'll tell you pal, you're just alright!
Each day I wipe you free of dirt.
Your dratted corners tear my shirt.
I cuss at you and call you names,
You're much more trouble than my dames.
But boy, do I love to hear you yammer
When you 're spitting lead in a business manner.
You conceited pile of salvage junk.
I think this prowess talk is bunk.
Yet if I want a wall of lead
Thrown at some Jerry's head
It is to you I raise my hat;
You're a damn good pal...
You silly gat!
Source
Ya know, that's how I feel about my computer much of the time. "You are a piece of sh*t, except when I really need you."
Penny was fault redundant. She could seed herself as a trojan onto a floppy disk. This trojan would then in turn build itself into a full copy once run on an uninfected computer.
It was all fun and games until Penny started killing people.
Great book, indeed. Although I must express disatisfaction with the Doom-esqe ending.
Cheap, no DRM, owned by all, rugged, low on batteries, portable, and it computes.
anyone who has anything to do with a standards body nowadays know's that people try and hijack standards so their tech/patent gets into it
this way if you implement the standard you have to pay
you can't have an opensource MPEG 4 without paying 3million bucks when you distribute it and they call that a standard
ok real hardware and software
in terms of a kernel their is in My Humble Opinion
Linux
Open BSD
netbsd for every arch under the sun (joke included)
then we have the problem of hardware
Opencores provides some of the effort BUT my favorate is
LEON-1 VHDL model
- Functional SPARC compatible processor core integer unit. Runs on Altera, Mietec, Temic MG2, Xilinx. Developed for space missions. Implemented as a highly configurable, synthesisable GPL VHDL model.
Altera 10K200E FPGA or Xilinx XCV300 enable this you can also get a LCD and keyboard AMBA devices from www.gaisler.com
what I would like is a machine that you could say that the whole thing is opensource
regards
john jones
A most excellent post, sir! It's about goddamned time that someone measured the vast distance between reality and the rampant idealism of the Slashdot community.
"Global Civil Society"?? Care to define that? I get a little nervous when people spout such utopian stuff. It could mean anything from just "don't hurt other people" to "make sure other people don't commit crimethink".
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
Of course, doing that made some folks who ported Mosaic to Wintel a few billion bucks..
Without letting Bill & Co. in the front door it would probably be much like the current Linux/BSD/OpenSource movement, letting them in is like inviting an enraged bull into your china shop.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
When I think of global civil soceity I think of EVERYONE, not just the first worlders. In which case you'd have to make this system really cheap if not free and include a wireless network card on it for free internet access so they could communicate with the rest of us. Something tells me this is just marketting hype to create profits for another extremely wealthy luser, but I'll never read the article. I just like to post. :)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
(Going on the idea that this fantasy system will be a laptop, though that may be reading too much into it.)
:) (This is going with the idea that it *would* need one ... maybe not.)
1) the keyboard can't suck. The best keyboards on laptops (IMO) are the ones found on IBM ThinkPads, though there is some competion from Toshiba. Most laptop keyboards are are not only awful feeling to begin with, they rapidly get worse and stay worse. Unless your entry has to be ultra-ultra lightweight, please consider putting a few justified ounces into a keyboard. Make it something that will be worth typing on in 10 years, like my IBM model M keyboard is.
Also, the keys should be tilted to a sane angle for typing, not a big rectangle of keys. Only a few laptops have ever tried escaping the wrist-killer of normal laptop keyboard layouts. No matter what keyboard layout one ends up using (QUERTY, Dvorak or something else), your hands still need a break.
2) The pointer can't suck, and they all do
IBM-style pointers are my favorite, but they are probably too troublesome and breakage prone: how about an optical trackpad with a replaceable window in the event that the original is scratched / scuffed beyond use? Or an embedded trackball like in the old Powerbooks, but with an optical ball as in current desktop trackballs?
3) Modularity, ports and jacks are all-important.
Realize (or at least grudgingly hypothesize) that some or all of the computer is going to break, and view it as an inherently leaky system. The screen will get pierced by an arrow while you're traipsing through the rain forest, or the hot foreign-aid worker you're respectfully dating will cause you to pour coffee on the keyboard, or the pointer will just decide to go on permanent vacation, or a purse-snatcher will leave you holding only the detachable screen. Gone.
There must be ways built in for the thing to go on functioning at least a little bit, and if at all possible to be field repaired.
Whatever the screen configuration ends up being (conventional clamshell? web-pad? little eye-piece?), it needs to be replaceable with no more than a (makeshift, flat-head) screwdriver and some human fingers.
Provision should be built-in to use number bad or other keyboard part as an alternate pointer controller if the main one busts.
Re ports: USB / USB2 seem like good choices these days for a low-cost machine. I think it would be smarter to provide a bunch of USB(2) ports than try to provide the whole range of ethernet, firewire, serial, parallel, etc etc. Let that be taken care of by emulation and adapters, and encourage everything in the world that could grow a USB port to do so. Has some downside, but simplicity and interchangeability is important. A low-cost computer could be a micro-ISP if it had 8 USB modems and an ethernet adapter hooked to it's 4 USB ports via a couple of powered USB hubs. Or a weather station. Or a Whoooznitz Whutzall Thingamajibber. Point is, modularity should trump built-in featuritus.
Now forget I just said that and let me hypnotize you with this idea: it should have a built-in camera. Randy Waterhouse had one in Cryptonomicon, but despite this obvious hint to the hardware industry, very few laptops really have a camera, and the one on the Sony Picturebooks isn't the dirt-cheap pinhole variety of Randy's.
4) Built in software, in two parts:
a) Really, any open-source operating system would work. Some variety of either BSD or Linux seems the obvious choice right now, either would work fine. Or some other variant, so long as the software's license is open enough to enocourage unhindered distribution, modification.
b) Lots of knowledge on the hard drive.
Why do hard drives come blank? Who knows, but should they? Remember, today's "tiny" hard drive holds more written knowledge than the world possessed in sum not long ago.
I'd like to see on this thing a copy of:
- a good serious world almanac
- a good non-serious or at least non-traditional world almanac like the HG2G or similar
- lots of maps
- a simple word-for-word translator with dictionaries for many languages, so documents could be at least looked at on a very coarse level even if you don't know the language.
- the U.S. Constitution (and heck, the communist manifesto, as a "see also" reference)
- diagrams for lots of things.
- classic literature of several languages
5) Other concerns
- must be workable on world current, at low power. Look at the capabilities of today's 800MHz transmeta chip, or 400MHz Xscale, and aim lower.
- should be built with solar in mind. Casing should have attachment points for a solar panel or two. Low-power LEDs to indicate charge level. Agressive power-throttling.
Phew.
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
#ifdef RANT
So the specs are like this?:
It has to be so secure that when it's stolen it's not even worth the parts for anyone else but me.
It has to be easily searchable by law enforcement otherwise they will block the production of said box.
It has to be so simple to operate that Joe Sixpak can make it work. (He has trouble writing checks, much less balancing the checkbook.)
It has to have enough flexibility that young Ivan Hackski can make it dance and grow into a potential engineer.
It has to be cheap to make, to own, and to operate; US$99 to buy, $5 per month max to operate, and many people will want to run with no monthly cost at all.
Finally, it has to last at least seven years to be taken as a serious product. (Cars and refrigerators last seven years easy, right?)
#endif
Nice idea. Good luck.
I remember those. They used a QNX based OS. I recall using them on a winter electives course sometime around 1984-5.
juan
If you think about it, the majority of tasks done on today's computer is just a digital variation of paperwork. We read/write text, fill out forms, do mathmatical calculations, check schedules, etc. Most modern people covet the computer for letting them do all this in an efficient manner and rightfully so, but are our "digital" experiences being limited by technology itself? Is the 2-D navigation system, with window views of directories and icons, only allowing us more time to do more paperwork? Are we only allowed to do paperwork because the technology industry as a business sees "productivity" as its number one goal? What about other aspects of life like spirituality or health, should that part of the user's life not benefit from technology if possible?
If the hardware/software is to truly serve as an interface it needs to first recognize what its trying to interface. Its trying to interface people with people. Not people and information or data, those things originate from other people. The interface should serve more as a conduit rather than a storage cabinet.
I'm not sure what design I would submit for a prototype, but at this point I'm looking at the hacky-sack ball.
(This post does not contain emoticons or l337.)
I'm sorry, but did I just hear someone say that "software is never honest, aboveboard, public, public spirited, fair, inclusive, etc"? Excuse me, but has has Sterling ever read a certain vendor's social contract?
Other than that one glaring infraction, I'd have to agree with his points and endorse this as a Good Idea(tm).
Nathan's blog
So what is the oxymoron in "trusted computing"? Do you mean to imply that any kind of trustworthy computing platform whatsoever is an absurd concept or do you just not know what an oxymoron is?
Here's the basic pitch. Let's imagine you are Joe or Juanita Global-Civ. There you are, a selfless, activist policy-wonk, one civilized soul in a darkening world where ethnic throat-cutting is rising sharply and trust in the biz community has plummeted.
Like adult Sesame street, right? Where the big birds and multiculturalists play... never is heard an exclusivity word - unless you're bashing Christians and defending some gays.
Puh-lease.
While I'll have to agree that Sterling's proposal seems off the wall and not very well thought out, it's still an idea that appeals to me for some reason. Maybe it's the thought that there has to be a better way (yes, even better than Linux). Maybe I'm just not cynical enough and I still dream of seeing a world in which a paperless office becomes a reality without losing our freedom of speech.
I refuse to just let the corporations steamroll over my rights - and yours. I've been through depression, but I've never given up, and I never will.
So you say it's crazy? So you say it's impossible? Oh, well let's just not give it another thought then! Let's let the CEO's of Microsoft and Enron do the thinking for us. Surely, they have our best interests at heart, and there's nothing we can do to improve our lot.
Well, I'll tell you what: you can sit on your rump, telling the ones who are out there doing the impossible that it's impossible. If that's what you really want, you can have it. I'll leave you with one last quote to ruminate upon:
Nathan's blog
in what sense is this relevant to reality? [eof]
Interesting.
This premise of trusted computing, as seen in the TCPA link, assumes that there is some hardware inside the machine that cannot be emulated in software.
THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE!!
Just what kind of embedded hardware on the motherboard are they talking about? It takes input, runs some algorithm on it, and gives output. SOFTWARE, on a different medium.
It just comes back to a private key, which would work fine anyway. Hardware just means that the USER cannot know their private key, or have access to the software that reads it. The MANUFACTURER does know it. It has to be stored in software somewhere, in Redmond or Taiwan or Palo Alto or Armonk. It can be discovered in some obscure way, and emulated.
If the USER has control, and true ownership of what they've paid for, then they can know their key, and the manufacturer cannot. So, software would work just fine, or user programmed hardware.
The only way something like this can work and also be fair is to use software keys. A user registers a key pair, or at least their public key, and buys content and uses trusted services with it. They get a new key pair after some time interval or if their key gets stolen and then migrate their content to their new key set.
It's not anonymous either, but it's identification, so it can't be. At least the user can control when a public key is sent.
We each get a private key and do everything we can to keep it PRIVATE. There would have to be laws against stealing people's private keys to back this up, and INDIVIDUALS would be authenticated by their private keys, NOT hardware. You can't do it with hardware on an open source system, and you just can't 'trust' someone else's closed system.
No system is perfect.
So, slashdot, please tell me if I'm wrong. Is there a type of hardware which cannot be satisfactorily emulated in software, which can be used for this?
If not, it's a good thing. This means that the answer to this design contest, if the user is to have any control, is a SOFTWARE system, possibly with a nice hardware trick for storing and protecting the private key. This is very good because it means that the design winner can run on existing hardware, possibly the stuff strewn all over every american city and most others. That would be nice.
The hardware solution is just another dongle, and no more effective than any other dongle. It's not a new idea.
=rMortyH
What is the purpose of designing such a piece of hardware if you don't trust _any_ hardware manufacturer to produce it? Are we all just going to download the 6,000 page instruction manual and 8,000 page design plan and then head over to Radio Shack to pick up the needed parts? About the only people who would be interested in building their own laptop from copper plates, etching compound, and FPGAs would be students.
Russian Russian Russian RussianDollSig DollSig DollSig DollSig
Sorry to rant for my first /. post. Ive been reading /. for years silently but I gotta speak up.
The specs in this contest are beyond the fantasy of Lord Of The Rings, and beyond the science fiction of Star Trek. The computer they ask for cannot be built for many reasons.
1-To manufacture a high quality product that is also cheap and international requires all custom parts that have no logo's. That means setting up a component infrastructure all anew. Expensive..
Many vendors will sell "blank" versions of products for alot of money but just plastic and metal. Circuitry is a different matter. I worked for an un-named company that sold "blank" componets but if you inspect certain parts with a 100X microscope w/blacklight the vendor logo was still there. No sane company makes something and not either plug thier name or identify the part somehow.
2-The OS. =) Well there are many ways to go. If you start from scratch you need a whole new company to handle just that. And they will have to work closely with the hardware company if they want a solid product. Does |ntel & Micro$haft sound familiar? Linux is also a good choice but you will still need to write alot of code to intergrate it tightly with the custom hardware, but the kernel is a good foundation to build on.
Plus it has to be an easy to use GUI with a suite of custom software.
3-The human factor. Any device has a learning curve. Typically the more complex the device the greater the learning curve. Its going to have to be simple and have few external moving parts for durability. The contest hints its a laptop in thier little story. Expensive. Laptops are mostly a throw away device. That means more junk and LCD chemicals that have to be made, stored, and disposed of safely....more infrastructure and money.
4- Security....a subjective concept. If you make a lock someone will pick it. Ill leave it at that. My rant has become too long for even my taste.
I have an idea, they should just buy Apple Titanium books. =) Seriously, Its great to inspire innovation and creativity, but lets be a little less broad. Also what I want to know....IF someone wins this contest does the contestant keep the rights to his idea? Or does a budding new enterprise get a "market shaking" product handed to them for 150 euro???
A worthy contender...
http://www.simputer.org/
thi
Just add inexpensive keyboard, inexpensive mouse, LCD screen, HD and RAM. A laptop CD-ROM will work, (Case Outlet sells one) and the thing netboots anyway so that would be a possibility for installing the OS anyway without the need for a CD-ROM.
Software? Why, the Debian distribution of Linux, or maybe Slackware Linux. Debian's more Politically Correct, though.
Remember, VIA hasn't signed on to Palladium yet, and hopefully they never will.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Ok.. if Palladium get released with the features microsoft currently wants on it (DRM technology in hardware basically), then a competitor will release a computer complete with its own modified OS that can play pirated versions of software/music/movies/etc... (as with region-free DVD players, modded consoles, etc..)
What would you buy? a) Microsoft Palladium PC or b) Region/signed code free Computer that plays everything?
Basically, as I understand it, what Microsoft are trying to do is sell computers like consoles. You keep it for a couple of years and buy the next whiz-bang one that comes out. By the time someone has hacked the current "console PC" to the point where it is actually customisable and useful, Microsoft will have already released the next one.
The only way I see Microsoft winning this battle would be to sell these console PCs and their software at a very cheap price and get all the major developers behind them... hmm, aren't they already doing something similar with the Xbox?
// The fastest Alt-Tab in the West
1. Steal underpants
2. Felch buffalo carcasses
3. Profit!!!
I confess I'm writing this in ignorance of whether or not this idea has already been posted. Beyond the obvious statement that it all starts with the kernel, I ask, "What do you NEED this kernel to do, all by itself?" Then write the kernel to do that only. Everything else should be plug-in, which of course means that one of the key "needs" of the kernel is a means of controlling how (or whether) other things should be plugged in. Open Standards, of course. Any plug-in should be able to connect to the features of any other plug-in that is actually plugged in (and naturally not offer a connection to any unplugged thing). The user decides whether to plug in a floppy I/O routine, or a ZIP-drive I/O routine (or both, or neither). The user can make these decisions by selecting a list of checkboxes during installation or later examination of the Operating System. Don't want TCP/IP? OK! Do want strong encryption? OK! Want to plug in something equivalent to Micosoft's new Palladium project? OK! Everything should be hot-pluggable and hot-unpluggable (if they can do it for hardware, certainly it can be done for software!) Any outfit who wants to create plug-ins are welcome to do so, and to compete. With respect to Operating System plug-ins and applications both, the user can decide to plug in an Open Source thingy, or a proprietary version. Reviewers can be expected to identify the best ones to choose, just like hardware reviewers. Et cetera. THIS IS MICROSOFT'S WORST NIGHTMARE. How soon can we make it real?
No. Liberals believe in equality, yet they don't enforce it by any means available as libertarians, who indeed believe that freedom is THE value. However, this leads to some pretty perverse results, e.g. freedom is theirs who have capital, so it means that while freedom of people who own something is increased those who own nothing get their freedom restricted (because they don't have any properties to dispose as they like to).
Liberal equality seems to be pretty plausible political philosophy. Libertarians on the other hand don't have much to offer after deeper peek into consequences...
gawd what a bullshit load that was....
"Liberal equality seems to be pretty plausible political philosophy"
guess what,WE ARE NOT ALL EQUAL...trying to make everyone equal just brings people down to the lowest common denominator
Time to get over it and face the real world
"Competition is bound to breed innovation"
score -1 troll....
Well,that about says it all slashdotters...
If there is ANY doubt whatsoever that this board is just a pile of Kommie bullshite...well,you just got your wakeup post...
Yes, been there, somewhere I even have my "researcher number" but not sure where ;)
...
;)) at the top, so if you could download a single CD, it would be the best *stuff* you could get on there ... something similar to the Slashdot rating system would seem appropriate, as would the ability to specify location, language and interests of the downloader ... custom almanac, bam!
And Yes, that's the sort of thing I'd like to see in hardware.
It really does bother me not that hard drives are sold blank, but that they tend (outside of operating systems, and very few of those) to only even be offered blank, when there are so many things they could be shipped with instead for a nominal cost
It would be interesting to constantly skim the cream off the top of H2G2.com (and / or similar sites) in 650MB chunks -- size of a CD -- so you could get one disk, two disks, or however many, but with the highest quality (by *someone's* measure, which I won't propose to outline for good reasons of impossibility!
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
This is not a political statement. This is not legal advice. It's a frick'n Slasdot post. However: I'm Running For
Microsoft has 30 billion in cash. They can buy and sell Intel and AMD..
Cool! Amazing Toys.