Dan (K2VOL) and I originally decided we wanted to launch a balloon in the Spring of 2003. We had seen a few articles about hams launching balloons, visited a few websites about their adventures, and thought it sounded like something we'd like to get into. We made plans, did some research, and then life intervened. A year went by without any further real action. In the Fall of 2003, I acquired several Dakota Digital cameras with the idea that they might be useful for the balloon. In the Summer of 2004, we decided it was time to get our acts in gear. I assembled a Hi-Value Radio PocketTracker, and Dan bought two latex balloons from Kaymont and a parachute from Public Missiles. We also found a closeout on DigiTraveler GPSes at RadioShack, and bought all that they had (for $20 apiece). Then, once again, we got busy, and another year went by. It wasn't until March 2005 that the topic came up again in a UTARC meeting. We decided that it was imperative to set a date for the launch, or it would never happen. Half randomly, we chose May 14, 2005, with a rain date the following day. Little did we realize what we were getting ourselves into...
One day, a few weeks before the scheduled launch, it dawned on us that there was still much to do -- too much, it seemed. Although we had all major flight systems more-or-less together, overall assembly had not even begun, and we really had only the vaguest notions of what we needed to do to get everything ready. Dan put out requests for assistance on the UTARC email list, and we both began doing research about the next steps. Dan decided the best way to proceed would be to have separate launch and recovery crews. The task of the launch crew would be to get the balloon safely into the air; after that, the recovery team would take over and chase it, with the eventual goal of recovering the payload. Fortunately, several people piped up and volunteered to be part of the recovery team, and Jeff Napier (AF3X) volunteered to find a launch site for us. That meant it was up to Dan and me to get the balloon itself ready. We found a small styrofoam cooler that we thought would be a good container for the payload, as it was lightweight and would keep everything insulated. Dan built a circuit board to contain the various control systems for the balloon, and I built a half-wave dipole antenna for our tracking system. We requisitioned a canister of helium from Holston Gases, which turned out to be a bit of a bureaucratic ordeal, and then went to pick it up a few days before launch with the assistance of Don Riley (N4CZL). Physically, we now had all the parts of the balloon, but the fun was just beginning.
As anyone who works with modern electronics knows, hardware is only half the equation, and so it was with the balloon. Dan spent a great deal of time in the runup to launch programming the software for the Basic Stamp microcontroller that would govern the balloon's overall operation. Basically, this device is a small computer that controls the GPS, radio, siren and strobe. If the microcontroller does not function properly, there is an excellent chance that the balloon and payload will be lost. At the same time, I was working to apply software patches and hacks to the digital camera so that it could take more photos on our flight. By this time, it was the Friday night before the scheduled launch, and I went home, thinking Dan would also be wrapping up in a few hours. What I didn't realize was that he would actually never go to bed that night.
Dan spent the entire night working on final assembly of the payload and programming the microcontroller. At 4:30 AM, he discovered that the expensive, lightweight lithium batteries we had bought from surplus were completely dead. Without the lithium batteries, we could either postpone for a week, or fly with regular heavy alkaline batteries, which would put us outside of our known weight calculations. With only 20 minutes remaining bef
If these guys are going for 100.000 feet, they will need a very big accesible area to recover their instrument package. given that winds up high may be a stong as 100 km/h, that leaves a pretty big oval your package could drop in.
Given some of the hostility to the larger community within OpenOffice.org, as well as Stallman's determination, deciding on the solutions and implementing them could still create problems. For now, though, at least the two sides are talking and trying to cooperate -- and free software advocates will get a version of OpenOffice.org they can install without pangs of conscience.
Nice article, until he makes it sound like having priciples is a bad thing. The issue with FSF is not one of "conscience" but of licenses that can/will be an impedient of free use of the software. This goes beyond conscience and ventures into the realm of property rights that typically can deny others of free use. That is why Stallman in the past warned of the issue of using Sun Java.
I think OOo need to look at FSF as representing customers that have a particular demand and accomodate that demand. All too often critics misuse the word "conscience" to disparage FSF community (customers) demands.
This is simple "marketing 101" -- listen to the demands of your customers
Yes it sure looks that there is no substance at all to the blogentry apart from some whatif's.
It appears they used the olde MS vs linux formula: combine MS and linux in one headline and you are guaranteed to have slashdot come over and look at your ads.
Let's see what else I can come up with: MS hates Linux: for hash words on some conference MS denies Linux: same event, please tear me down version(but still give the attention) MS fights Linux: MS will make better product (in the future) then linux (as it is now). MS defeats Linux: newsgrab pointless statistics. MS buys Linux: Pie in the sky line this one. MS Improves linux: MS trying to drive a wedge in Linux by releasing a binary-only kernel module. MS embraces Linux: will make extensions later. MS Loves Linux: but only for that strict niche. MS acknowledges Linux: so what but will make MS seem realistic. MS sells Linux: to the highers bidder after gutting it from customers? MS verb Linux: the central theme that gets you good catchy headlines.
This will be a huge acknowledgment that linux is vialble. There are still hordes of clueless IT managers out there that think buyinh MS will not get them fired. MS buying a linux company will make many conservatives, that formed an opinion on linux long ago, have to revise there opinion. They will no longer have a black and white division between MS and Linux. It does not matter what MS would do with RedHat, sales people from other linux vendors will have a much easier time selling linux, because the will not have to battle the MS==good inertia.
Seen from MS's point of view, it is highly unlikely. Any edge they'd gain over IBM would be quickly lost to a competitor that has no MS ties.
If you don't like it, don't use it. Nobody will force you to sign a NDA or sue you for looking at the code. The only reason your code should become GPL-ed is when you actively use GPLed code in a product you distibute. Calling that viral would be on equal terms with calling water poisonous: only if you inject very large amounts directly into the bloodstream.
The 'viral' term was a stroke of genius of those opposing Free Software. That meme relies on hotheads like you for its propagation. Wouldn't that be more viral?
The GPL is not viral in that everything that comes into contact with it gets ill/becomes gpl. There is absolutely no problem for a non-free program to run an a free OS, so dish can use a linux kernel for their os, and run their own non-free software on top of it. That is at least, if you regard the box a a 'regular' computer that users can run their own programs on.
However if you regard it as an appliance, where the only program the user can run is non-free, maybe then you can regard the whole appliance as a derivative of linux => GPL. Also if their proprietary code uses specific linux calls that are not offered by any other OS, one can still argue that the complete product is a derivative work. Let's hope they are not using any netfilter code in there, otherwise Harald Welte (of gplviolations and author of said code) might give them some 'free publicity'.;-)
When you see a case where the defense has no case... then, what is the tactic
that the lawyers try?
- If you can't attack the message.
- Then, attack the messenger!
This is what the other side is doing now. It is even to the point where the
parent corporation of the publication(s) in question seems to be anti-FOSS. You
can not run or hide from the truth. Actions speak louder than words. The
publication of this article was an action. I don't believe that even a
retraction will undo the damage.
The next question is this... how deep does the conspiracy against Linux go if
supposedly pro-Linux publications are allowing themselves to be a tool to attack
PJ?
This is a low, low, low day in the history of all corporate entities that are
somehow related to this article. Who in management would approve of this tact?
2 motives exist that result in corporate actions like this. Business or
personal. At this point, if it was a business related action. Then, someone
made the wrong choice and the only choice is to resign with what little dignity
you have left. If this writting was personal, then the parties involved need to
step back and do the right thing (resign)!...a total absence of class!
How much lower can they go?
And I think I speak for everyone with an IQ above 90 (that leaves out Terri Schavo and maybe you) that that tone is not the way to do it right. You are evil as wel if you stoop to their low level. I can understand that you are upset, but that should be no reason to celebrate agression.
Wasn't it about a year ago that IBM top honcho declared that all of IBM would switch to using linux? Now that would be a impressive feat if they pulled that off. 10% of IBM employees pales in comparison to that. But the PR spinmeisters hoped you would have forgotten that already, i guess.
it is all fine and dany that it uses a PN junction to gather the beta radiation, but how it this converted into usable energy?
As far as I know, the electrons that are emited by this decay are very energetic in the oreder ov 100's of KeV(Kilo electron Volt). Since the current == the decay, you have a fixed amount of total charge that can flow, and that are very few AmpHours. That current must be very low for a halflive of 12 years(=105120hours) but it is potentially at a very high voltage.
But how do they convert this extremly higvoltage/exttremely low current into a usable current/voltage? Is that where this silicon pn junction has some tricks up it's sleeve?
After reading the ultra mysterious unknown exploit in hyperthreading to be announced at that bsd conference + BSD is usually security paranoid == they have tickets to sell for that conference and are brewing up some hype...
I could be wrong, TFA is very sparse on details...
So he has gathered a few advisories (without details) and promises to release a whopping 12 page report after this ueber important conference?
I am presenting details of how to exploit this security flaw at BSDCan 2005 in Ottawa on May 13th, 2005. Following my talk, I will be releasing a 12-page paper on this website discussing this flaw and related problems, both realized and theoretical.
granted there is nothing wrong with this guys ability in marketing. As as techie this creates two reactions in me:
the guy starts of with an Q&A even before he explains how it can be done, or what caused the flaw.
question 4 in his list:
Where do you work?
I'm unemployed. For the past three months, I've spent almost all of my time working on this security flaw -- investigating how serious it was, contacting all of the affected vendors, explaining how this should be fixed, et cetera. I simply haven't had time to go out and get a job -- and I decided that making sure that this issue was properly reported and fixed was far more important than earning some money.
I get a slight hunch that is not as serious as it sounds. the cliche use of that tilte is an indication too.
This move is perfect for any linux distro over there. Please get them to corrupt some officials to make piracy even more criminal. Unlike popular belief, people in developing countries are not unable to think for themselves. Shops selling computers will think again before they put pirated windows on their products. Linux fits the bill much better (free install on all systems you sell) than windows (way to expensive) or cripple-windows(it's crippled).
The more MS wants to rake in the money and uses their evil way to do so, the more people will consider Linux as a very good alternative. So please go right ahead Bill!
Like it or not software is patentable around here, so we are stuck with the consequences.
Like it or not, buy your 'here' does not extend to here. Ever realised there is such a thing as 'the rest of the world', where sofware patents are not allowed?
sure you can claim that it is a phone that swallowed an iPod, but Apple will claim that is was an iPod that got the ability to dial phonenumbers too. That iPod dial look quite like the old pulse dial.
As a result of recent actions, the criminal activity appears to have stopped.
I read that as: "As a result, the criminals have realised they were being watched and have cleaned up their act, and have made sure they are not noticed by 'them' anymore.
the next version of the Windows operating system, will make malicious software (malware) that gets onto computers without the users' knowledge 'a thing of the past'.
In the windows monopoly, the software comes preinstalled on the computer and the user is not allowed to take it off.
Most people in european gouvernments do not want cannabis to be illegal. The health risks compared to alcohol are minimal and it is costing a lot of money enforcing. What keeps the dutch gouvernment from decriminalizing it alltogether are the conservative forces that point to countries with a very harsh stance to cannabis, saying that legalising it will isolate us from these countries.
In reality, this is costing us a lot of money: money we have to spend in enforcement, and money that could be make in taxing the stuff. Right now 1 kilo of maihuana costs ~1000 Euro (in bulk), plus a similar amount it costs in enforcement paid by the taxpayer. That money is made illegally, because it is still illegal (and prosecuted) to grow weed commercially), so no taxes are paid over its production. The price can be expected to drop sharply once production is legal. This low price makes room for taxing the stuff, just like it's done with alcohol.
As for exporting to other countries: That is not a nonexistent problem right now either: a lot of shops selling the stuff are right next to the border, many counties are making it a policy to put them there to decrease the trouble their customers would cause if the shops were located in the city center. Legalising the production side of it, will not increase those kind of problems.
Meanwhile some politicians put up a stance 'against cannabis,' probably for electoral gains from an electorate that has no experience with it (apart from seeing some scary people smoking the stuff). If only they knew how much their ignorance was costing them...
(And for myself: I think it stinks, literally, and the hangover from it lasts way too long for me)
Slashdot Mirror
it appeared on mirrordot:
The UX-1 Story
by Mike Coffey (KJ4Z) and Dan Bowen (K2VOL)
Dan (K2VOL) and I originally decided we wanted to launch a balloon in the Spring of 2003. We had seen a few articles about hams launching balloons, visited a few websites about their adventures, and thought it sounded like something we'd like to get into. We made plans, did some research, and then life intervened. A year went by without any further real action. In the Fall of 2003, I acquired several Dakota Digital cameras with the idea that they might be useful for the balloon. In the Summer of 2004, we decided it was time to get our acts in gear. I assembled a Hi-Value Radio PocketTracker, and Dan bought two latex balloons from Kaymont and a parachute from Public Missiles. We also found a closeout on DigiTraveler GPSes at RadioShack, and bought all that they had (for $20 apiece). Then, once again, we got busy, and another year went by. It wasn't until March 2005 that the topic came up again in a UTARC meeting. We decided that it was imperative to set a date for the launch, or it would never happen. Half randomly, we chose May 14, 2005, with a rain date the following day. Little did we realize what we were getting ourselves into...
One day, a few weeks before the scheduled launch, it dawned on us that there was still much to do -- too much, it seemed. Although we had all major flight systems more-or-less together, overall assembly had not even begun, and we really had only the vaguest notions of what we needed to do to get everything ready. Dan put out requests for assistance on the UTARC email list, and we both began doing research about the next steps. Dan decided the best way to proceed would be to have separate launch and recovery crews. The task of the launch crew would be to get the balloon safely into the air; after that, the recovery team would take over and chase it, with the eventual goal of recovering the payload. Fortunately, several people piped up and volunteered to be part of the recovery team, and Jeff Napier (AF3X) volunteered to find a launch site for us. That meant it was up to Dan and me to get the balloon itself ready. We found a small styrofoam cooler that we thought would be a good container for the payload, as it was lightweight and would keep everything insulated. Dan built a circuit board to contain the various control systems for the balloon, and I built a half-wave dipole antenna for our tracking system. We requisitioned a canister of helium from Holston Gases, which turned out to be a bit of a bureaucratic ordeal, and then went to pick it up a few days before launch with the assistance of Don Riley (N4CZL). Physically, we now had all the parts of the balloon, but the fun was just beginning.
As anyone who works with modern electronics knows, hardware is only half the equation, and so it was with the balloon. Dan spent a great deal of time in the runup to launch programming the software for the Basic Stamp microcontroller that would govern the balloon's overall operation. Basically, this device is a small computer that controls the GPS, radio, siren and strobe. If the microcontroller does not function properly, there is an excellent chance that the balloon and payload will be lost. At the same time, I was working to apply software patches and hacks to the digital camera so that it could take more photos on our flight. By this time, it was the Friday night before the scheduled launch, and I went home, thinking Dan would also be wrapping up in a few hours. What I didn't realize was that he would actually never go to bed that night.
Dan spent the entire night working on final assembly of the payload and programming the microcontroller. At 4:30 AM, he discovered that the expensive, lightweight lithium batteries we had bought from surplus were completely dead. Without the lithium batteries, we could either postpone for a week, or fly with regular heavy alkaline batteries, which would put us outside of our known weight calculations. With only 20 minutes remaining bef
Since I can not RTFA, ican only speculate it will be much more fun that these guys, that lofted a package on a weathe balloon too, but let it return to the launchsite by using a glider. They got a few flifghts out of it until it presumably crashed into a mountainside.
If these guys are going for 100.000 feet, they will need a very big accesible area to recover their instrument package. given that winds up high may be a stong as 100 km/h, that leaves a pretty big oval your package could drop in.
Nice article, until he makes it sound like having priciples is a bad thing. The issue with FSF is not one of "conscience" but of licenses that can/will be an impedient of free use of the software. This goes beyond conscience and ventures into the realm of property rights that typically can deny others of free use. That is why Stallman in the past warned of the issue of using Sun Java.
I think OOo need to look at FSF as representing customers that have a particular demand and accomodate that demand. All too often critics misuse the word "conscience" to disparage FSF community (customers) demands.
This is simple "marketing 101" -- listen to the demands of your customers
Yes it sure looks that there is no substance at all to the blogentry apart from some whatif's.
It appears they used the olde MS vs linux formula:
combine MS and linux in one headline and you are guaranteed to have slashdot come over and look at your ads.
Let's see what else I can come up with:
MS hates Linux: for hash words on some conference
MS denies Linux: same event, please tear me down version(but still give the attention)
MS fights Linux: MS will make better product (in the future) then linux (as it is now).
MS defeats Linux: newsgrab pointless statistics.
MS buys Linux: Pie in the sky line this one.
MS Improves linux: MS trying to drive a wedge in Linux by releasing a binary-only kernel module.
MS embraces Linux: will make extensions later.
MS Loves Linux: but only for that strict niche.
MS acknowledges Linux: so what but will make MS seem realistic.
MS sells Linux: to the highers bidder after gutting it from customers?
MS verb Linux: the central theme that gets you good catchy headlines.
This will be a huge acknowledgment that linux is vialble. There are still hordes of clueless IT managers out there that think buyinh MS will not get them fired. MS buying a linux company will make many conservatives, that formed an opinion on linux long ago, have to revise there opinion. They will no longer have a black and white division between MS and Linux.
It does not matter what MS would do with RedHat, sales people from other linux vendors will have a much easier time selling linux, because the will not have to battle the MS==good inertia.
Seen from MS's point of view, it is highly unlikely. Any edge they'd gain over IBM would be quickly lost to a competitor that has no MS ties.
Most likely they figured out it is really not a nice game. Tried it, could not figure out what to do, dumped it.
I would not be boasting about 73% not liking your game, but that is just me...
That is just downright name-calling.
If you don't like it, don't use it. Nobody will force you to sign a NDA or sue you for looking at the code. The only reason your code should become GPL-ed is when you actively use GPLed code in a product you distibute. Calling that viral would be on equal terms with calling water poisonous: only if you inject very large amounts directly into the bloodstream.
The 'viral' term was a stroke of genius of those opposing Free Software. That meme relies on hotheads like you for its propagation. Wouldn't that be more viral?
Even then, it is still more ?
So it is more like ~95Mb of source. That crud has reached nirvana even!
The GPL is not viral in that everything that comes into contact with it gets ill/becomes gpl. There is absolutely no problem for a non-free program to run an a free OS, so dish can use a linux kernel for their os, and run their own non-free software on top of it. That is at least, if you regard the box a a 'regular' computer that users can run their own programs on.
;-)
However if you regard it as an appliance, where the only program the user can run is non-free, maybe then you can regard the whole appliance as a derivative of linux => GPL. Also if their proprietary code uses specific linux calls that are not offered by any other OS, one can still argue that the complete product is a derivative work.
Let's hope they are not using any netfilter code in there, otherwise Harald Welte (of gplviolations and author of said code) might give them some 'free publicity'.
When you see a case where the defense has no case... then, what is the tactic
...a total absence of class!
that the lawyers try?
- If you can't attack the message.
- Then, attack the messenger!
This is what the other side is doing now. It is even to the point where the
parent corporation of the publication(s) in question seems to be anti-FOSS. You
can not run or hide from the truth. Actions speak louder than words. The
publication of this article was an action. I don't believe that even a
retraction will undo the damage.
The next question is this... how deep does the conspiracy against Linux go if
supposedly pro-Linux publications are allowing themselves to be a tool to attack
PJ?
This is a low, low, low day in the history of all corporate entities that are
somehow related to this article. Who in management would approve of this tact?
2 motives exist that result in corporate actions like this. Business or
personal. At this point, if it was a business related action. Then, someone
made the wrong choice and the only choice is to resign with what little dignity
you have left. If this writting was personal, then the parties involved need to
step back and do the right thing (resign)!
How much lower can they go?
And I think I speak for everyone with an IQ above 90 (that leaves out Terri Schavo and maybe you) that that tone is not the way to do it right.
You are evil as wel if you stoop to their low level.
I can understand that you are upset, but that should be no reason to celebrate agression.
Zicklein == kid
see dict.cc
found it here:u m.html
http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/earth/waton/triti
Wasn't it about a year ago that IBM top honcho declared that all of IBM would switch to using linux? Now that would be a impressive feat if they pulled that off.
10% of IBM employees pales in comparison to that. But the PR spinmeisters hoped you would have forgotten that already, i guess.
it is all fine and dany that it uses a PN junction to gather the beta radiation, but how it this converted into usable energy?
As far as I know, the electrons that are emited by this decay are very energetic in the oreder ov 100's of KeV(Kilo electron Volt).
Since the current == the decay, you have a fixed amount of total charge that can flow, and that are very few AmpHours. That current must be very low for a halflive of 12 years(=105120hours) but it is potentially at a very high voltage.
But how do they convert this extremly higvoltage/exttremely low current into a usable current/voltage? Is that where this silicon pn junction has some tricks up it's sleeve?
PLease explain.
After reading the ultra mysterious unknown exploit in hyperthreading to be announced at that bsd conference + BSD is usually security paranoid == they have tickets to sell for that conference and are brewing up some hype...
I could be wrong, TFA is very sparse on details...
question 4 in his list:
I get a slight hunch that is not as serious as it sounds. the cliche use of that tilte is an indication too.
Now lets read the reast of the article...
This move is perfect for any linux distro over there. Please get them to corrupt some officials to make piracy even more criminal. Unlike popular belief, people in developing countries are not unable to think for themselves. Shops selling computers will think again before they put pirated windows on their products. Linux fits the bill much better (free install on all systems you sell) than windows (way to expensive) or cripple-windows(it's crippled).
The more MS wants to rake in the money and uses their evil way to do so, the more people will consider Linux as a very good alternative. So please go right ahead Bill!
sure you can claim that it is a phone that swallowed an iPod, but Apple will claim that is was an iPod that got the ability to dial phonenumbers too. That iPod dial look quite like the old pulse dial.
I read that as: "As a result, the criminals have realised they were being watched and have cleaned up their act, and have made sure they are not noticed by 'them' anymore.
Now on to the FA.
In the windows monopoly, the software comes preinstalled on the computer and the user is not allowed to take it off.
Most people in european gouvernments do not want cannabis to be illegal. The health risks compared to alcohol are minimal and it is costing a lot of money enforcing. What keeps the dutch gouvernment from decriminalizing it alltogether are the conservative forces that point to countries with a very harsh stance to cannabis, saying that legalising it will isolate us from these countries.
In reality, this is costing us a lot of money: money we have to spend in enforcement, and money that could be make in taxing the stuff.
Right now 1 kilo of maihuana costs ~1000 Euro (in bulk), plus a similar amount it costs in enforcement paid by the taxpayer. That money is made illegally, because it is still illegal (and prosecuted) to grow weed commercially), so no taxes are paid over its production. The price can be expected to drop sharply once production is legal. This low price makes room for taxing the stuff, just like it's done with alcohol.
As for exporting to other countries: That is not a nonexistent problem right now either: a lot of shops selling the stuff are right next to the border, many counties are making it a policy to put them there to decrease the trouble their customers would cause if the shops were located in the city center. Legalising the production side of it, will not increase those kind of problems.
Meanwhile some politicians put up a stance 'against cannabis,' probably for electoral gains from an electorate that has no experience with it (apart from seeing some scary people smoking the stuff). If only they knew how much their ignorance was costing them...
(And for myself: I think it stinks, literally, and the hangover from it lasts way too long for me)