That's true. However, the 1.5m distance is already as optimised as they can get after several years of hard work using wopping great antennas. If you really can get that distance up to 2-3m (let alone 8-10), then I suggest you'd be better off selling your solution to Philips than snooping into your neighbours underwear drawer.
Oh, and most of the RFID tag units are already directional - so just walking past the reader with the tag antenna at rightangles to the reader antenna is probably enough to defeat it.
I'm bemused. This is slashdot talking about a new piece of technology - and yet I've not found a single post talking about installing Linux on it, seting up the first 'underwear web server', or connecting up a 120GB hard disk to it.
And of course, the very real possibility of having your own personal beowolf cluster of clothes...
The whole reason they're doing this is to track the clothes through their inventory system. However, they'll probably want to be able to identify refunds too: if it's simple for them to track which batches of clothes have a higher return rate (due to defects), then it'll help their quality control.
The flip side of this is that it'll probably annoy the hell out of them when the clothes you're wearing while trying to buy a new item start registering at the checkout:)
Because the tags are powerless, they have to be powered via the field induced by the reader. This drops off as the inverse square of the distance. The tag then has to transmit back to the reader - again power is the inverse square of the distance. Therefore, the range is related to the inverse fourth power of the power output of the reader. I.e. to ramp up the range to 15m you'd have to increase the power output by a factor of 10000! You might start melting things at that point.
The 1.5m range is already with big heavily optimised antennas (like the big theft detection antennas by shop entrances) which are operating at the maximum legal power output.
So in summary - you're going to have more luck taking a pair of binoculars and war-driving looking out for barcodes
I'm sure there must be loads of intelligent, internet-savvy people working in AOL, but are any of them in managment?
Company insiders are putting together targeted pitches to capitalize on the demographics of the AOL instant messaging community.
Do you:
a) Provide as good an IM tool as you can, which allows you to talk to anyone else on the internet, or
b) 'Capitalize on your community' by providing an inward looking tool which is only any good when talking to other AOL users?
An easy one to answer that. Now a test. Look through that article, and count the number of times that interoperability with MS/Yahoo is mentioned. Count the number of mentions for open standards for interoperability. Count the number of potential exciting innovations there (IM to mobiles? News headlines over IM? IM as pushed alerts for updated webpages?).
Does anyone want to predict how badly AOL will muck this up?
SVG Support & Mozilla
on
SVG On the Rise
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It also suffers from a licensing problem: it uses libart, which is licensed under the LGPL, which (for some reason) means it can't be included as standard in mozilla builds.
There is also an Adobe plugin, which does claim to work with mozilla, but it crashes more often than not...
The idea of Ricochet is that it can cover a whole city when fully deployed. The article was focusing on it killing 3G before it's born - which is possible.
However, if you're competing with 2.5/3G then you're competing on ubiquity not bandwidth. There's a lot you can do with low bandwidth which really is 'always on' wherever you are - but it will fail if people can't rely on it. For example, internet radio would be a great mobile app, but as soon as the signal starts pausing and hitting blackspots you'll turn it off.
It can't compete with WiFi on bandwidth. The question is can it compete with 2.5/3G on coverage?
One of the neat things I haven't seen comments on was the fact they were using GPRS to transmit the GPS data in real-time - so the GPS data really was uploaded as it was generated. This is the sort of thing that GPRS is really good for - it's low bandwidth (so doesn't cost an arm and a leg) and constantly updated.
Kirin: A mythological beast from China and Japan similar to a Dragon (sort of a cross between a unicorn and a dragon). This is the only decent reference I could find. Fits in with the theme (grand mythical beasts with supernatural powers) of Mozilla and Phoenix. One legend has it that a Kirin was the father of Confucious...
(It's also a beer from Japan - but presumably they can't claim copyright since it's a common word and there isn't too much link between software and beer...)
That's a good question. But the media reports the news, they don't make it:)
I do honestly think the media should bear a large part of the blame - they're in love with the 'personalities' of the industry, and as a result do too much parroting of press releases, and not enough investigative journalism. (A bit of a tangent, but you can trace some blame for Enron/Worldcom to the fact that noone was asking the hard questions earlier)
He didn't sneak in and try to leave a personal blank check...this goes back to my contention that these things are normally quiet affairs, and this one was far from quiet. India one week and Comdex the next. I'd love to feel different, and I'm inclined to let you sway me, but how else can this be characterized?
OK, I'll try - i'll admit it's not easy:) He had 2 reasons to visit: 1 was as head of Microsoft which was doing it's drug-pusher charity act of donating $$$s worth of MS software to schools. Helps India's IT industry, but helps MS more; fair business practise, but a long way from altruistic charity.
The 2nd reason was to donate to the AIDS foundation. This was done as himself.
Now obviously, whatever's good for Bill is good for MS, and I don't doubt MS benfited from the donation. However consider the other side of the coin; here we have the richest man in the world visiting one of the poorest countries in the world - should he confine himself 100% to business or should he take the chance to do some good as well?
As a businessman he's a ruthless bastard, but as a person he (IMHO) has as much compassion as anyone, and more ability to do something about it. He knows he's in a unique position (probably in world history) to do something which will really help a huge number of people - without having to give up a single one of his Lear jets.
So my rule of thumb is: anything he does personally (for his foundation) he's innocent (more than innocent, a genuinely good guy) until proven guilty. Anything he does for MS he's guilty (as hell) until proven innocent.
Incidentally, I heard him speak in Comdex, and he didn't mention once (or make a reference to) his charity or trip to India. I think he really does make an effort to separate his two activities... and so I try to extend him the same courtesy.
P.S. All this defending of Bill Gates has made me feel dirty - I need a shower:)
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (which is what gave the money to the AIDS institute in India) is the largest charitable body in the US with an endowment of $24bn. I would claim that this foundation (which is basically setup with his - not Microsoft's money) is worthy of some respect.
I don't personally care whether this money is given so he can get his name remembered, because he's got so much money he doesn't know what to do with it, or because he's a genuine good guy. (In fact, as with most human motives, I guess the answer to 'why?' is 'all of the above'.)
As to charity direct from Microsoft - I would share you suspicion that the main reason for it is to benefit Microsoft (any benefit to the recipient is incidental).
In this case, I feel you're right to show some scepticism as to how altruistic this donation is - and agree with you that the amount of publicity he got for Microsoft as a result was disproportionate. But doesn't that mean we should be criticising the media rather than him?
Be fair. The guy is giving money to charity, so more sick people are going to be treated. He isn't delaying necessary funding for people, he's giving extra funding.
You can be cynical about the amount of publicity Microsoft gets from it, but I don't think it's fair to be cynical about the fact he gives to charity. He doesn't have to give a single cent of his ill-gotten gains. Compare his donations to (for example) Larry Ellison, Steve Ballmer, Jeff Bezos and Scott McNealy (and me, although I'm not quite as rich as them) and I suspect you'll find he's the good guy in this case.
IMHO he does very few things worthy of praise, but this is one of them (or at least, not worthy of scorn).
Because Gates is trying to buy MS favor with India using the sick and dead as a pole to tie his promotional flag to. It stinks, and no one but the most stubborn is buying it for a minute.
It's true that he was very aware that he was getting free advertising by donating this money - but which would you rather have: MS spending those millions running TV ads and on billboards, or using the money on a good cause?
He may not have 100% selfless motives in this, but that doesn't change the fact that his money is doing good. Think of it as 'ethical advertising'!
Anyway, of all the dodgy business practises that MS gets up to, do you really think giving to charity rates a mention?
As far as I can make out (are there any native Malayalam speakers out there?) it's a kind of spiritual freedom; Instead of being controlled by external forces, you are able to control yourself. (Or is that because you are in control of yourself, you are not controlled by others?).
If i've understood correctly, it's actually a much nicer description than the beer/speech freedom... the point of free software is that *you* can control what it does, how it works, and how you use it, rather than leaving that control to a large software company. It also implies that free software is the 'enlightened' choice which sits quite well:-)
PS I'm now quite worried - the only time I've considered my spiritual side recently is while discussing Linux. This can't be healthy...
7.4 We wish to clarify that by the term 'Free Software' used above, we are referring to 'freedom', as in 'swatantryam' - not 'soujanyam'.
Damn... I'm tempted to use that in my sig... "Linux: because it's free as in swatantryam". OK - maybe only people from one state in India will understand it, but it still sounds better than 'free as in beer/speech':-)
Linus' tone might seem a bit aggressive and abrupt, but consider that this is message is a deep, deep down a very long thread that starts here.
From the very beginning, Linus was saying he thought this patch was something that should be driven by vendors - i.e. put it in their trees *first*, and then it may find a way into Linus' tree later.
Hence the constant references to 'this is my tree, this is how I do things'.
The whole thread is actually quite interesting. If you're thinking of suggesting a patch, I suggest you read the whole lot to get an idea about how best to approach it.
Couldn't they provide a version of their 'terms & conditions' which includes a little video with airhostesses miming actions to clarify it...
"Our trademarks and logos are protected *here* and *here*... When you reach paragraph 17 masks will automatically drop from the compartment above. Please ensure that your rights have been securely passed to us before helping those sitting next to you... etc"
That way everyone could click on the "I accept" after ignoring the whole thing with a clear conscience!
Our mission is to pursue the perfect partnership, providing security in our customers' transformation to collaborative business models.
Which roughly translates to: 'we want to use the internet securely'. They then put some confidential information on their public website, and sue the first people to read it... Doh!
Looking at the license, it is treated as confidential material. To quote bits:
3.1 Permitted use. This Specification Version contains information that is highly confidential to the TV Linux Alliance and/or its Founders. Adopter agrees to protect this Specification Version... This Specification Version may not be disclosed to a third party...
3.2 Time Period. Adopter's obligations regarding the confidentiality of this Specification Version will expire 5 years after the Effective Date (except for any source code not licensed under the GNU General Public License or other open source license, if any, which will be protected in perpetuity).
Now, I guess it's fine to put these restrictions on a specification of a GPL-d system, but once they start releasing products, they'll have to release source code - so i'm a bit confused as to what the license implies. They're protecting the standard, but are going to release the source of implementations? Why?
The most common, 5-day route up the hill is called the "Coca Cola" route since it's gotten so trashed out.
Is this recent? Having just posted a reply saying there is no garbage, i'm a bit surprised:-) When I went up (6 years ago), it was very well organised and run. We were given the eco-friendly lecture before going up, and eveyone seemed fairly concious of trash. The only really horrible bits were the toilets (long-drop... big-smell). Very commercialised, but pretty well run was my impression.
The other bad thing about tourists on Kilimanjaro is all the trash they leave behind.
Total bollocks. Kilimanjaro is one of the most well protected national parks in Africa. The Tanzanian government controls the number of passes that it gives out each year to avoid too many people going up, and when I climbed it I can't remember seeing a single piece of litter. As the article you reference mentioned, wood is carried up the mountain to be used in fires - in other words, not a single branch on the whole mountain is ever used as firewood.
The fact that the Tanzanian economy is heavily dependent on tourism, and that the tips the porters get for 5 days work are equivalent to a months wages there are all good things.
Now, if you want to complain about litter and garbage on Everest, go ahead, I'd support you - but Kilimanjaro (along with all the main Tanzanian tourist spots) is an example of eco-tourism at it's best.
Umm... what aren't you buying? There was no 'we're all going to die!!!' angle in the article - it was simply reporting a change in a single ecosystem.
Remember that the glaciers on Kilimanjaro are pretty unique - it's slap on the equator (so there's no winter/summer to allow the glaciers to grow and shrink), it's peak is 6km above sea level, where the atmospheric pressure is ~50% of sea level (how does that effect the melting point?), and the glaciers are a side effect of what happened about 10000 years ago.
Because it's a single (well, ok, actually a triple) peak, not in a mountain range, there aren't going to be any particular wierd weather patterns around it, so it's probably quite a good gauge of what's happening 6000m above us. How changes in the atmosphere up there effect us down here is, of course, the subject of heated (sorry) debate.
I actually climbed up in 1996 and was quite surprised that i didn't come across any snow at all - but you could walk right up to the base of bits of the glaciers. Still bloody cold though - especially as everyone climbs up the last bit in the night (to see dawn break from the top).
Slashdot Mirror
That's true. However, the 1.5m distance is already as optimised as they can get after several years of hard work using wopping great antennas. If you really can get that distance up to 2-3m (let alone 8-10), then I suggest you'd be better off selling your solution to Philips than snooping into your neighbours underwear drawer.
Oh, and most of the RFID tag units are already directional - so just walking past the reader with the tag antenna at rightangles to the reader antenna is probably enough to defeat it.
I'm bemused. This is slashdot talking about a new piece of technology - and yet I've not found a single post talking about installing Linux on it, seting up the first 'underwear web server', or connecting up a 120GB hard disk to it.
And of course, the very real possibility of having your own personal beowolf cluster of clothes...
The whole reason they're doing this is to track the clothes through their inventory system. However, they'll probably want to be able to identify refunds too: if it's simple for them to track which batches of clothes have a higher return rate (due to defects), then it'll help their quality control.
:)
The flip side of this is that it'll probably annoy the hell out of them when the clothes you're wearing while trying to buy a new item start registering at the checkout
Because the tags are powerless, they have to be powered via the field induced by the reader. This drops off as the inverse square of the distance. The tag then has to transmit back to the reader - again power is the inverse square of the distance. Therefore, the range is related to the inverse fourth power of the power output of the reader. I.e. to ramp up the range to 15m you'd have to increase the power output by a factor of 10000! You might start melting things at that point.
The 1.5m range is already with big heavily optimised antennas (like the big theft detection antennas by shop entrances) which are operating at the maximum legal power output.
So in summary - you're going to have more luck taking a pair of binoculars and war-driving looking out for barcodes
Do you:
a) Provide as good an IM tool as you can, which allows you to talk to anyone else on the internet, or
b) 'Capitalize on your community' by providing an inward looking tool which is only any good when talking to other AOL users?
An easy one to answer that. Now a test. Look through that article, and count the number of times that interoperability with MS/Yahoo is mentioned. Count the number of mentions for open standards for interoperability. Count the number of potential exciting innovations there (IM to mobiles? News headlines over IM? IM as pushed alerts for updated webpages?).
Does anyone want to predict how badly AOL will muck this up?
There is a Mozilla project working on SVG support, but it's not yet seriously usable.
...
It also suffers from a licensing problem: it uses libart, which is licensed under the LGPL, which (for some reason) means it can't be included as standard in mozilla builds.
There is also an Adobe plugin, which does claim to work with mozilla, but it crashes more often than not
Why not just wait for Prince Charles to become king, and it'll happen anyway?
Anyway, I'm guessing the next person to be put on a NZ banknote is going to be Frodo Baggins
However, if you're competing with 2.5/3G then you're competing on ubiquity not bandwidth. There's a lot you can do with low bandwidth which really is 'always on' wherever you are - but it will fail if people can't rely on it. For example, internet radio would be a great mobile app, but as soon as the signal starts pausing and hitting blackspots you'll turn it off.
It can't compete with WiFi on bandwidth. The question is can it compete with 2.5/3G on coverage?
... what the ping-rate was?
Sounds like someone is bragging
One of the neat things I haven't seen comments on was the fact they were using GPRS to transmit the GPS data in real-time - so the GPS data really was uploaded as it was generated. This is the sort of thing that GPRS is really good for - it's low bandwidth (so doesn't cost an arm and a leg) and constantly updated.
Kirin: A mythological beast from China and Japan similar to a Dragon (sort of a cross between a unicorn and a dragon). This is the only decent reference I could find. Fits in with the theme (grand mythical beasts with supernatural powers) of Mozilla and Phoenix. One legend has it that a Kirin was the father of Confucious ...
...)
(It's also a beer from Japan - but presumably they can't claim copyright since it's a common word and there isn't too much link between software and beer
That's a good question. But the media reports the news, they don't make it :)
:)
... and so I try to extend him the same courtesy.
:)
I do honestly think the media should bear a large part of the blame - they're in love with the 'personalities' of the industry, and as a result do too much parroting of press releases, and not enough investigative journalism. (A bit of a tangent, but you can trace some blame for Enron/Worldcom to the fact that noone was asking the hard questions earlier)
He didn't sneak in and try to leave a personal blank check...this goes back to my contention that these things are normally quiet affairs, and this one was far from quiet. India one week and Comdex the next. I'd love to feel different, and I'm inclined to let you sway me, but how else can this be characterized?
OK, I'll try - i'll admit it's not easy
He had 2 reasons to visit: 1 was as head of Microsoft which was doing it's drug-pusher charity act of donating $$$s worth of MS software to schools. Helps India's IT industry, but helps MS more; fair business practise, but a long way from altruistic charity.
The 2nd reason was to donate to the AIDS foundation. This was done as himself.
Now obviously, whatever's good for Bill is good for MS, and I don't doubt MS benfited from the donation. However consider the other side of the coin; here we have the richest man in the world visiting one of the poorest countries in the world - should he confine himself 100% to business or should he take the chance to do some good as well?
As a businessman he's a ruthless bastard, but as a person he (IMHO) has as much compassion as anyone, and more ability to do something about it. He knows he's in a unique position (probably in world history) to do something which will really help a huge number of people - without having to give up a single one of his Lear jets.
So my rule of thumb is: anything he does personally (for his foundation) he's innocent (more than innocent, a genuinely good guy) until proven guilty. Anything he does for MS he's guilty (as hell) until proven innocent.
Incidentally, I heard him speak in Comdex, and he didn't mention once (or make a reference to) his charity or trip to India. I think he really does make an effort to separate his two activities
P.S. All this defending of Bill Gates has made me feel dirty - I need a shower
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (which is what gave the money to the AIDS institute in India) is the largest charitable body in the US with an endowment of $24bn. I would claim that this foundation (which is basically setup with his - not Microsoft's money) is worthy of some respect.
I don't personally care whether this money is given so he can get his name remembered, because he's got so much money he doesn't know what to do with it, or because he's a genuine good guy. (In fact, as with most human motives, I guess the answer to 'why?' is 'all of the above'.)
As to charity direct from Microsoft - I would share you suspicion that the main reason for it is to benefit Microsoft (any benefit to the recipient is incidental).
In this case, I feel you're right to show some scepticism as to how altruistic this donation is - and agree with you that the amount of publicity he got for Microsoft as a result was disproportionate. But doesn't that mean we should be criticising the media rather than him?
Be fair. The guy is giving money to charity, so more sick people are going to be treated. He isn't delaying necessary funding for people, he's giving extra funding.
You can be cynical about the amount of publicity Microsoft gets from it, but I don't think it's fair to be cynical about the fact he gives to charity. He doesn't have to give a single cent of his ill-gotten gains. Compare his donations to (for example) Larry Ellison, Steve Ballmer, Jeff Bezos and Scott McNealy (and me, although I'm not quite as rich as them) and I suspect you'll find he's the good guy in this case.
IMHO he does very few things worthy of praise, but this is one of them (or at least, not worthy of scorn).
It's true that he was very aware that he was getting free advertising by donating this money - but which would you rather have: MS spending those millions running TV ads and on billboards, or using the money on a good cause?
He may not have 100% selfless motives in this, but that doesn't change the fact that his money is doing good. Think of it as 'ethical advertising'!
Anyway, of all the dodgy business practises that MS gets up to, do you really think giving to charity rates a mention?
[swatantryam] Does that mean beer?
... the point of free software is that *you* can control what it does, how it works, and how you use it, rather than leaving that control to a large software company. It also implies that free software is the 'enlightened' choice which sits quite well :-)
...
As far as I can make out (are there any native Malayalam speakers out there?) it's a kind of spiritual freedom; Instead of being controlled by external forces, you are able to control yourself. (Or is that because you are in control of yourself, you are not controlled by others?).
If i've understood correctly, it's actually a much nicer description than the beer/speech freedom
PS I'm now quite worried - the only time I've considered my spiritual side recently is while discussing Linux. This can't be healthy
Damn
OK - maybe only people from one state in India will understand it, but it still sounds better than 'free as in beer/speech'
Linus' tone might seem a bit aggressive and abrupt, but consider that this is message is a deep, deep down a very long thread that starts here.
From the very beginning, Linus was saying he thought this patch was something that should be driven by vendors - i.e. put it in their trees *first*, and then it may find a way into Linus' tree later.
Hence the constant references to 'this is my tree, this is how I do things'.
The whole thread is actually quite interesting. If you're thinking of suggesting a patch, I suggest you read the whole lot to get an idea about how best to approach it.
Couldn't they provide a version of their 'terms & conditions' which includes a little video with airhostesses miming actions to clarify it...
... When you reach paragraph 17 masks will automatically drop from the compartment above. Please ensure that your rights have been securely passed to us before helping those sitting next to you ... etc"
"Our trademarks and logos are protected *here* and *here*
That way everyone could click on the "I accept" after ignoring the whole thing with a clear conscience!
Which roughly translates to: 'we want to use the internet securely'.
They then put some confidential information on their public website, and sue the first people to read it
Now, I guess it's fine to put these restrictions on a specification of a GPL-d system, but once they start releasing products, they'll have to release source code - so i'm a bit confused as to what the license implies. They're protecting the standard, but are going to release the source of implementations? Why?
The most common, 5-day route up the hill is called the "Coca Cola" route since it's gotten so trashed out.
:-) When I went up (6 years ago), it was very well organised and run. We were given the eco-friendly lecture before going up, and eveyone seemed fairly concious of trash. The only really horrible bits were the toilets (long-drop ... big-smell). Very commercialised, but pretty well run was my impression.
Is this recent? Having just posted a reply saying there is no garbage, i'm a bit surprised
The other bad thing about tourists on Kilimanjaro is all the trash they leave behind.
Total bollocks. Kilimanjaro is one of the most well protected national parks in Africa. The Tanzanian government controls the number of passes that it gives out each year to avoid too many people going up, and when I climbed it I can't remember seeing a single piece of litter. As the article you reference mentioned, wood is carried up the mountain to be used in fires - in other words, not a single branch on the whole mountain is ever used as firewood.
The fact that the Tanzanian economy is heavily dependent on tourism, and that the tips the porters get for 5 days work are equivalent to a months wages there are all good things.
Now, if you want to complain about litter and garbage on Everest, go ahead, I'd support you - but Kilimanjaro (along with all the main Tanzanian tourist spots) is an example of eco-tourism at it's best.
Sorry... too skeptical to buy this one.
... what aren't you buying? There was no 'we're all going to die!!!' angle in the article - it was simply reporting a change in a single ecosystem.
Umm
Remember that the glaciers on Kilimanjaro are pretty unique - it's slap on the equator (so there's no winter/summer to allow the glaciers to grow and shrink), it's peak is 6km above sea level, where the atmospheric pressure is ~50% of sea level (how does that effect the melting point?), and the glaciers are a side effect of what happened about 10000 years ago.
Because it's a single (well, ok, actually a triple) peak, not in a mountain range, there aren't going to be any particular wierd weather patterns around it, so it's probably quite a good gauge of what's happening 6000m above us. How changes in the atmosphere up there effect us down here is, of course, the subject of heated (sorry) debate.
I actually climbed up in 1996 and was quite surprised that i didn't come across any snow at all - but you could walk right up to the base of bits of the glaciers. Still bloody cold though - especially as everyone climbs up the last bit in the night (to see dawn break from the top).