RIAA is one of those entities that is created out of nothingness to fill a perceived void, but once instantiated fights to the bitter end to preserve its lifeless hulk. Witness stock brokers and internet trading. A few steps behind are record labels and internet media (MP3 et al). A few steps further behind are realty conglomerates and online auctions. All of the former entities came into being when we as a society or community needed a buffering entity to make it easier to deal with a specific type of service, media generation, or purchase.
The difference is how the entity reacts to its changing environment. I get my stock updates from an automated web-based system, and execute trades online. My realtor (I bought another house last year) sent me digital images of houses she thought I'd like via email, and her brokerage ditched the controlling operational rules and allows its clients to browse MLS listings directly. But RIAA? RIAA has dug in its heels so hard against the changing technological environment that it has virtually guaranteed its own demise.
RIAA wants to stop the unencumbered flow of digital media by killing MP3? They might as well try to quell a revolution by driving firearms manufacturers out of business. People will fight against ethically corrupt entities even if it means taking a pitchfork against a tank. RIAA keeps fighting these little battles because it doesn't realize that it has already lost the war. And even this argument gets a little tiring, because there's no need for anyone to ever buy into RIAA's fossilized rules again. It's an entity that has only as much power as we voluntarily give it.
Listen to what you want, pay artists as directly as you can, support organizations that treat their artists well, and *poof* RIAA diappears into the grave it has already dug for itself.
For about a year, I used my Palm3 with a real tcp/ip connection for performing remote admin. My employer graciously provided me with a Motorola PM100c CDPD modem and the PCMCIA adapter that allowed me to plug in a serial cable from the Palm3. While the whole mess was a little unweildy, it was still about the same size as a Palm+Minstrel. This was pretty handy, especially when I had to telnet into work and fix something, or use PalmVNC to reboot an NT machine.
However, I'd like to have a direct connection to the internet for network sync/downloading/etc. I haven't seen any direct serial-to-ethernet adapters other than some USB devices. Does anyone know of such a creature? Ideally I want a solution that does not require a host computer running as a proxy; just a small extra doodad similar to the Xircom PE3 to stuff in my bag-o-geekdom.
At the end of the first paragraph it ascribes to RIAA attitude of "...my way or the highway." Of course, I read this as "RIAA's way or the information highway."
Gee. Choose RIAA's way, or choose the way of the internet. Let me think about that...
Yeah, it seems like there's a lot of identification with this story, and I'm no different -- at least in terms of environmental stress. But how I react is, I think, a little different and a little more constructive.
I've been in the professional ranks for ~10 years, and just ended a four-year salaried stint at a big telecom monolith, back to consulting (hourly). The new place is the most politicised, disorganized, ugly environment I've seen since I left my short stint at MS, but I'm more positive and upbeat. Why? Because I'm in control of my situation.
I'm in control even when I should be powerless. I keep reminding myself that 10 years ago I was jobless and homeless, living in the back of my van in the woods near where my girlfriend was going to school. So, even if I'm fired, I quit, and every other support structure in my life falls to pieces, I have faith that I can get back on my feet.
With this bit of knowledge in my back pocket, I can walk into my place of work every day and say to myself "If they genuinely want the work done, I will do my best effort, consistently and creativly. If they want to fuck with me and use me, I'll roll with it and use it to my advantage -- consistently and creatively." Call it flexible ethics, but I will do unto others as they do unto me. At the previously mentioned telecom monolith, I put in three years of solid, dedicated, hard work. Then they started to jerk me around, promise promotions and then fail to deliver when the prerequisites were reached, yank my projects, and use me as a political pawn. I turned around and made a conscious effort to make my boss (and his boss) look *very* good. That made me valuable, which enabled me to request and receive training "to try harder for that promotion" (read: "to make me more valuable"). Every time they jerked me around, I smiled and used it to my advantage. When I walked out the door, they lost a significant resource, and I added another major digit to my yearly salary.
Why do I have no problem with this seemingly amoral behavior? Because I know that my soul belongs to me, not to any company. The adage is true -- what doesn't kill you makes you stronger as long as you are conscious of it. Noone can take knowledge, skills, dedication, achievement, or experience away from you. However, you can certainly surrender any of these, and you are often encouraged to do so. Some of the best companies try to instill a sense of teamwork or community without realizing that what they're really trying to do is convince individuals that they can only truly achieve in a company-sponsored group or community. Somehow you're supposed to believe that great things can be achieved by collective use of mediocre skills. (And of course, your skills are mediocre by definition, because they are not yet associated with the power of teamwork... feh.) It's bullshit, and most of them don't even know why.
The real power is in the strength, knowledge, and leadership of the individual. The structure of most IT and development organizations is designed to squash/coopt that. You have to resist it with all your might, or you will find yourself just as this article describes -- overworked, undercompensated, lonely, and stressed out. Maybe you can't change the reality of your job requirements, but you can change everything about yourself: Use every opportunity to educate yourself. Use every task as an opportunity to learn. Study and remember everything you can, even if it's just whatever is visible on the boss' rolodex today. Register for whatever classes your employer will pay for or you can afford (even if they have nothing to do with your job). Take a foreign language. Sign up for vocational tech classes (I am a decent cabinetmaker and blacksmith, among other things). Paint. Sing. Write kernel code. Help your coworkers; get them to think of you as a resource. Don't play paintball, hit a punching bag, let loose primal screams, drive fast on the way home, or take things out on your mate, even if it makes you feel better. These things are temporary at best, and you could use that time to develop something in yourself that is lasting.
Focus on the strength, and the worst you can do is make yourself happier and more self-confident.
Envoy Data PCD-30-USB Series PCD-CF30-USB (external USB-to-CFII adapter designed for general use) $199 http://www.envoydata.com/pccard.html#USB (These guys also make a bootable CFII--IDE port, which has some interesting possibilities for Linux on a CF card...)
Even the first review of this product states that the plugins allow you to bypass the various music encryption/encoding schemes. How long will it be before the plugins are reverse-engineered and you can load an open-source module that allows you to play any format you please? Not long, I'll bet.
And as for the cry of privacy invasion, this product bears no resemblance to the DIVX nightmare -- with DIVX, the device uses your phone to report your activities & preferences to a central controlling authority. It won't operate unless it's connected. With a Lyra-like device, you have to opt-in to a scheme like this (loading and using a decoding module that requires an online transaction with some authority), and there's less opportunity for any funny business (transaction recording that's unauthorized by you) because the device is physically disconnected (no built-in modem or network connection lying in wait).
Personally, I like the hardware, and I especially like the idea that I will soon be able to use it with open-source software modules that put my privacy fears to rest.
Here's the specific wish list: A portable cd player that runs on 2AA's, plays audio cds, and if you pop in a data cd it reads a playlist file in the root directory, or expands the directory tree on the cdrom and develops a playlist in memory.
Sure, it defeats some of the advantages of a purely solid-state device, but I'd rather use the in-system memory+processor for playlists & playlist mods (imagine running a whole dj show from a portable), decoding modules, audio processing, etc etc.
Compact Flash Type II cards are designed to work with PCMCIA Type II ports using an adapter. Just a half-step away from the mainstream, you can buy PCI cards that have one or two type II PCMCIA slots, enabling the dedicated (and flexible, since the ports are on the rear of your computer) geek to use these cards on a desktop pc. And if I recall correctly, this type of PCMCIA-docking station is available for USB from several vendors. (I'd be surprised if Belkin didn't make something of this sort.)
IBM states that external docking hardware is available for IBM's compactflash memory, which presumably means serial or USB. If not, IBM offers an adapter to put the CF type II cards into a PCMCIA type II slot, as well as Sandisk. Then you can use one of the more commonly-available PCMCIA docking ports. More info is here . jon (thoughts not in order because tie is too tight)
Yeah! "[A] transition course for Windows NT administrators" is just the sort of subtle mainstream accpetance that Linux needs to invade the PHB brainspace. Once the PHBs addicted to the notion of "continuous improvement" see the idea of transitioning away from NT to a new product, they will assume that the destination (in this case Linux) is an improvement over the current state of affairs.
The big difference is that in this case, they'll be right.
With that volume of hardware & wattage, it probably makes sense to invest in some good heat exchange systems in the facility and toss the traditional HVAC.
Why not locate the facilities in more extreme northern/southern/high altitude climes, and put all that heat to good use? The model waste treatment plant in Seattle uses its own methane to power the waste treatment systems, and even sells electricity back to the city. Apply the same idea to a computing facility -- If you know the average heat production of a system (over a large enough population the variances between systems wouldn't be that great even as you perpetually upgraded individual systems), it wouldn't be that hard to design it into a facility HVAC plan and make very efficient use it.
By the time you add a faster processor, good background processing to the Palm OS (so that it doesn't skip when you change apps), sound in/out jacks, volume contrrol, and a couple extra AAA batteries (or some Li-ion rechargables), you're gonna be paying more than $295. Not to say I wouldn't buy one... I'm just looking forward to the next step; simple improvements. What I really want (and will hopefully get by the time I'm 90) is fiber into my cortex with a couple of terabytes of holographic storage parked conveniently in my sinuses, and a 2ghz cdma-based local hotsync with the people around me. That way I won't have to complain about artifacts in the music D-A conversion; the MP3's will play directly in my brain.
Suggestion: Make the next "Special Edition" of the Rio (or any other player) fit into the Palm3 or Palm5 cradle, and have a hotsync module that identifies the "user" as needing to load.mp3 files just as the default user profile would load apps into the Palm.
The slowdown from using the serial port instead of the parallel port would probably be offset by the convenience of popping the player into the cradle and pushing the hotsync button (just before I go to bed). One of these years 3COM will come out with a USB cradle, and the speed problem will disappear. I predict that any mp3 player vendor who designs their product to piggyback off the Palm (the de-facto pda standard) will reap great reward. Collaborate, collaborate, collaborate!
Microsoft does a good enough job of bashing itself. While it's nice to help the great evil along on its trip towards the scrapheap, we should probably let it alone. Microsoft, personified by Gates and his vapid predictions for the past, is stuck in a hopeless battle to try and convince people that it isn't behind the technology curve. Meanwhile, the world moves on into new technology, culture, and benefits.
People who spend their time bashing or predicting Microsoft's demise (or that of any other stagnating company) should be aware that they are circling a target that is no longer moving -- and thus stop moving themselves. It is an inviting and juicy piece of bait, but it is bait in a trap nonetheless.
Instead, we as individuals should focus on the new technology and culture. Be positive. Contribute. Ignore Microsoft and Gates and the culture of control and stagnation. Look forward. As Andretti Sr. is rumored to have said "What issa behind you does no matter."
When AT&T (my employer until last week) bought the UK-based Olivetti Research Labs (www.orl.co.uk), they became the proud owners of several pieces of GPL software. Most notably VNC -- Virtual Network Computer software -- which is software that provides multiplatform x-like remote control of a system.
Development continues under the GPL at these new AT&T aquisitions, so the GPL already has its foot in the door in the form of very new, very modern software. This fits very nicely with AT&T's historical code-sharing, and imho their release of new software from other parts of the company under even a semi-GPL-like license bodes well for the future of AT&T's participation in GPL efforts.
(Check out VNC -- I find it quite ironic that the one essential piece of utility software that makes Windows NT somewhat acceptable to run in a datacenter is developed under the GPL.)
Any mirrors for this particular display? Some of us virgin-pure souls haven't seen the IIS analysis tools, so there's no context in which to understand the comments above.
Here's the details of the video documenting this (The title is misleading; 4 hours was the *previous* record). A book should be no problem.
Title Four hour house [videorecording] Call Number TH4812.F68 1992 Other Title 4 hour house. Publisher San Diego, Calif. : Image Dynamics, c1992. Description 1 videocassette (25 min.) : sd., col. ; 1/2 in. Credits Producer, Bertrand Wilbur. Two construction teams compete against each other for world record in building a house. Illustrates the value of teamwork, planning and communication, and includes the issue of quality control. Subject(s) House construction. House construction Quality control. Construction industry Quality control. Quality control. Wilbur, Bertrand. Building Industry Association of San Diego County. Image Dynamics.
Since the site went *poof*, some of us can only speculate on what kind of book it will be. With a thousand writers, editors, subject matter experts all looking at well-defined (and thus easily outline-able) technical topic, I have no doubt that the book could be done (and done well) in a day.
Any doubts? I'm sure there are links to the housebuilding competition (in Calif. I think) where homebuilders plan out the complete construction of a home from the ground up, including landscaping, appliances, etc. The current record is 2:10 or thereabouts. They used about 300 skilled craftspeople working in parallel (ex: roof constructed at same time as walls, then placed by crane), and did a quality job, i.e. there are people who purchased and live in these homes. (It's been a few months since I saw the documentary film on it, so I might be a little off on the time, or the record might have been broken by now.) It really is amazing what you can do with a good plan combined with good people.
If, on the other hand, we're talking about creating a novel, I'd subscribe to the previous poster's comment about expecting a baby in a month by having 9 women become pregnant. Ain't gonna happen. That would be more in the realm of direct mindshare than a shared task. And if by some chance it did happen, I'd be frightened that the Borg walked among us.
hmm. Perhaps you're investing a bit more humanity in the notion of a heuristic than I intended. A heuristic is a rule of thumb, or a way of doing something that _generally_ works _better_ than another way. The value embedded in the notion of "better" isn't so central, the way I see it. "Better" can be computed, more or less. And the concept of "generally better" is really an issue of statistics, which is derived from experience and not value. Perhaps that's a little cold, but I don't quite make the leap to "style."
So, I disagree. While it's true that a heuristic is not an algorythm or a truth, it is a fuzzy approximation of same: algorythm vs method, truth vs best choice. I don't think you can distinguish so cleanly between them.
A surgeon can safely ignore a patented method because a life might be at risk. That answers a question of "why", and at the same time preserves the idea that innovators deserve some recognition. (Cleverly sidestepping the issue of ownership.)
But in the case of software, there's the issue of obviousness and fundamental truths. US Patent law says that your patent should be for something that isn't obvious. But a piece of code is closely related to an algorythm (or even an heuristic), and those are closely related to mathematical proofs. A proof is a truth. How can I patent a truth? How can I patent a line of reasoning to a truth (a proof) that by its very nature is designed to make the truth obvious? How can I patent a mathematical method that implements a truth? What happens to software based on this method?
When you follow this line of reasoning back to software, it's obvious imho that there is some point at which there is a transition, and it becomes reasonable to identify a person or group of people with an idea. Whether that connotes ownership is debatable, of course, but as you travel the line between a mathematical truth and a software implementation, there is a point before which no person or group should have control of a basic idea, method, or truth.
Hum. This is almost weird enough to be a troll, but I'll run with it. Let's look at this.
One guy was able to reverse engineer your product and build a work-alike. One guy. Assuming that he didn't steal your code wholesale (which would be an entirely different issue), it is safe to assume that the code one person writes is less complex than code written by a passel of semi-coordinated coders. More consistent code, produced faster, at less cost (he was able to sell for 25% of your cost), with the same or better functionality. Nope, no innovation there. I would argue that this guy could counter your algorythm patent with a method patent.
You admitted "his user interface was like a zillion times better than ours was" Nope. No innovation there either. I would posit that an unusuable product (yours), no matter how much genius is embedded under the covers, is basically worthless. This opens the door for innovation in the human-computer interface arena.
Your argument about patents and time basically says that the state of the art for your field is based on your single set of patents. One of the most positive traits of sucessful systems is that there is always more than one way to get a task done. If you limit yourself to the view that your discovery is the only way to skin a cat, you end up with a lot of skinned cats, but not much progress in the cat-skinning technology. Your very declaration (patent) cuts you off from the greater community that could spur still greater discovery. Someone else always find a better way, and you end up one stuck behind the curve, with a patent for cold fusion, or some similar state of fuddy-duddy-ness.
Oh fer crissakes, get over yourself. There are no experts who are not end-users, otherwise there's a large chunk of required experience missing. Take your dishwasher, for example. Even if you have an EE degree and know every blooming detail of how the device is designed, constructed, and operated -- if you never pushed the start button yourself, you're not an expert. Knowledge without experience is nothing but faith, and faith doth not make an expert.
As this applies to GNOME, it's a good thing. Experts are borne of end-users, so the more end-users there are, the more experts we have in the making. And I doubt you would argue with the desirability of creating more experts.
Right-o. Your typical geek isn't going to use/need/want this. But for applications needing emulation, having the native processor present is of tremendous help. For example, the application I'm thinking of is an Alpha-primary system (boots to Linux for Alpha) with a K7-secondary processor used to support non-portable 32-bit x86 apps and WINE calls. Not TOO much work in patching WINE to look for the right processor, although other individual apps would be right bastards. There's also something to be said for optimizing ops for different processors when writing your own very-custom number-crunching code.
I wonder if anyone's done a patch to make WINE use the SunPC card (486) in SPARC Linux? Hum. Then again, noone else would put twin turbos in their Volvo either, but hey, that's just the way I am.
The K7 is supposed to (a) support SMP and (b) be electrically-compatble with the Alpha. Someone fill me in here -- what is the possibility that the K7 SMP design will be sufficiently compatible with the Alpha (maybe the same design?) that a heterogeneous multiprocessing system might be possible. Of course, this assumes the right basic hardware exists, like an SMP-compatible passive backplane system with daughterboards for the respective processors...
If you make a stereo-component style device that reads MP3's and playlists from a standard-format data cd (ISO 9660), I will buy it. You will earn revinue from me and many like-minded people.
If you base the design of your system on the assumption that I'm a thief, i.e. incorporating encryption and licensing tools that limit my ability to manage the data myself, you won't see a dime.
Here's a different perspective: I manage several people in a web/unix/network-intensive shop. A couple of people went to college for a year and dropped out. While their technical skills are excellent, they lack the broader base of knowledge that comes from a full college education. It may be trite, but the point of college isn't to teach you the specifics of the technology, it's primarily to teach you how to think on a variety of levels.
Some questions I face: Would I prefer to fill a lead sysadmin position (something that comes with a essentially unlimited access to other people's work) with a person who has 100% of the required skills but no college education, or someone with 90% of the skills and a couple of college philosophy classes in ethics? Would I rather hire someone with 100% of the technical skills for a programming position, or someone with 75% of the skills, but a good writing background from a minor in English Lit that would make our documentation effort easier? On a small staff, would I rather have an advanced software architect with a minor in business, or a non-degreed balls-to-the-wall code god?
In each of these cases, the person without the college education will get you farther for the first few steps. But you quickly realize that in order for the individual and the organization to advance, you _must_ have a broader base of skills. Sure, I can get more out of that code god in the short run, but what happens when I want to collaborate with another company? I run into a great big skill vacuum, and either the organization suffers, or I hire someone over the code god's head (which casts me as the bad guy).
IMHO, good, sucessful technical people focus on the convergence of fields. For example, a network security specialist is worth more than either a network admin or a business security person. A programmer-writer is worth more than a programmer or a tech writer. Web design people who have database design/coding skills are making loads of money in e-commerce right now; far more than the run-of-the-mill webgeek or database admin.
Finding this convergence requires having multiple perspectives that are built through a well-rounded education. This is why companies that pay no attention to education are doomed, and individuals who skip college, as a general rule, relegate themselves to a relatively low position in the organization. Those who skip college because it is truly beneath them are few and far between, but shine brightly enough to draw others into a dead-end or vastly handicapped career.
On the bright side, however, my organization (a top-50 corporate monolith) and many others like it provides generous resources for continuing education, and tuition reimbursement for degree completion. So, for those that skipped college to get a jump on a career, there are ways to eliminate the handicap. The point is, it isn't easy to do -- the years you saved by skipping college are eaten up by slow career growth and concurrent schooling later. It's not a position I would want to get into without giving it a lot of careful thought.
Slashdot Mirror
RIAA is one of those entities that is created out of nothingness to fill a perceived void, but once instantiated fights to the bitter end to preserve its lifeless hulk. Witness stock brokers and internet trading. A few steps behind are record labels and internet media (MP3 et al). A few steps further behind are realty conglomerates and online auctions. All of the former entities came into being when we as a society or community needed a buffering entity to make it easier to deal with a specific type of service, media generation, or purchase.
The difference is how the entity reacts to its changing environment. I get my stock updates from an automated web-based system, and execute trades online. My realtor (I bought another house last year) sent me digital images of houses she thought I'd like via email, and her brokerage ditched the controlling operational rules and allows its clients to browse MLS listings directly. But RIAA? RIAA has dug in its heels so hard against the changing technological environment that it has virtually guaranteed its own demise.
RIAA wants to stop the unencumbered flow of digital media by killing MP3? They might as well try to quell a revolution by driving firearms manufacturers out of business. People will fight against ethically corrupt entities even if it means taking a pitchfork against a tank. RIAA keeps fighting these little battles because it doesn't realize that it has already lost the war. And even this argument gets a little tiring, because there's no need for anyone to ever buy into RIAA's fossilized rules again. It's an entity that has only as much power as we voluntarily give it.
Listen to what you want, pay artists as directly as you can, support organizations that treat their artists well, and *poof* RIAA diappears into the grave it has already dug for itself.
For about a year, I used my Palm3 with a real tcp/ip connection for performing remote admin. My employer graciously provided me with a Motorola PM100c CDPD modem and the PCMCIA adapter that allowed me to plug in a serial cable from the Palm3. While the whole mess was a little unweildy, it was still about the same size as a Palm+Minstrel. This was pretty handy, especially when I had to telnet into work and fix something, or use PalmVNC to reboot an NT machine.
However, I'd like to have a direct connection to the internet for network sync/downloading/etc. I haven't seen any direct serial-to-ethernet adapters other than some USB devices. Does anyone know of such a creature? Ideally I want a solution that does not require a host computer running as a proxy; just a small extra doodad similar to the Xircom PE3 to stuff in my bag-o-geekdom.
At the end of the first paragraph it ascribes to RIAA attitude of "...my way or the highway." Of course, I read this as "RIAA's way or the information highway."
Gee. Choose RIAA's way, or choose the way of the internet. Let me think about that...
j
Yeah, it seems like there's a lot of identification with this story, and I'm no different -- at least in terms of environmental stress. But how I react is, I think, a little different and a little more constructive.
I've been in the professional ranks for ~10 years, and just ended a four-year salaried stint at a big telecom monolith, back to consulting (hourly). The new place is the most politicised, disorganized, ugly environment I've seen since I left my short stint at MS, but I'm more positive and upbeat. Why? Because I'm in control of my situation.
I'm in control even when I should be powerless. I keep reminding myself that 10 years ago I was jobless and homeless, living in the back of my van in the woods near where my girlfriend was going to school. So, even if I'm fired, I quit, and every other support structure in my life falls to pieces, I have faith that I can get back on my feet.
With this bit of knowledge in my back pocket, I can walk into my place of work every day and say to myself "If they genuinely want the work done, I will do my best effort, consistently and creativly. If they want to fuck with me and use me, I'll roll with it and use it to my advantage -- consistently and creatively." Call it flexible ethics, but I will do unto others as they do unto me. At the previously mentioned telecom monolith, I put in three years of solid, dedicated, hard work. Then they started to jerk me around, promise promotions and then fail to deliver when the prerequisites were reached, yank my projects, and use me as a political pawn. I turned around and made a conscious effort to make my boss (and his boss) look *very* good. That made me valuable, which enabled me to request and receive training "to try harder for that promotion" (read: "to make me more valuable"). Every time they jerked me around, I smiled and used it to my advantage. When I walked out the door, they lost a significant resource, and I added another major digit to my yearly salary.
Why do I have no problem with this seemingly amoral behavior? Because I know that my soul belongs to me, not to any company. The adage is true -- what doesn't kill you makes you stronger as long as you are conscious of it. Noone can take knowledge, skills, dedication, achievement, or experience away from you. However, you can certainly surrender any of these, and you are often encouraged to do so. Some of the best companies try to instill a sense of teamwork or community without realizing that what they're really trying to do is convince individuals that they can only truly achieve in a company-sponsored group or community. Somehow you're supposed to believe that great things can be achieved by collective use of mediocre skills. (And of course, your skills are mediocre by definition, because they are not yet associated with the power of teamwork... feh.) It's bullshit, and most of them don't even know why.
The real power is in the strength, knowledge, and leadership of the individual. The structure of most IT and development organizations is designed to squash/coopt that. You have to resist it with all your might, or you will find yourself just as this article describes -- overworked, undercompensated, lonely, and stressed out. Maybe you can't change the reality of your job requirements, but you can change everything about yourself: Use every opportunity to educate yourself. Use every task as an opportunity to learn. Study and remember everything you can, even if it's just whatever is visible on the boss' rolodex today. Register for whatever classes your employer will pay for or you can afford (even if they have nothing to do with your job). Take a foreign language. Sign up for vocational tech classes (I am a decent cabinetmaker and blacksmith, among other things). Paint. Sing. Write kernel code. Help your coworkers; get them to think of you as a resource. Don't play paintball, hit a punching bag, let loose primal screams, drive fast on the way home, or take things out on your mate, even if it makes you feel better. These things are temporary at best, and you could use that time to develop something in yourself that is lasting.
Focus on the strength, and the worst you can do is make yourself happier and more self-confident.
Jon xeno@wolfenet.com
Check out these possibilities:
Envoy Data PCD-30-USB Series PCD-CF30-USB (external USB-to-CFII adapter designed for general use) $199 http://www.envoydata.com/pccard.html#USB
(These guys also make a bootable CFII--IDE port, which has some interesting possibilities for Linux on a CF card...)
Compact Flash Photoreader USB CFPRUSB (CFII reader designed for cameras, USB) $107 http://www.alix.com/products.htm
I have no experience with the software on either of these, so your mileage will vary when it comes to writing thru these devices.
-jon
Even the first review of this product states that the plugins allow you to bypass the various music encryption/encoding schemes. How long will it be before the plugins are reverse-engineered and you can load an open-source module that allows you to play any format you please? Not long, I'll bet.
And as for the cry of privacy invasion, this product bears no resemblance to the DIVX nightmare -- with DIVX, the device uses your phone to report your activities & preferences to a central controlling authority. It won't operate unless it's connected. With a Lyra-like device, you have to opt-in to a scheme like this (loading and using a decoding module that requires an online transaction with some authority), and there's less opportunity for any funny business (transaction recording that's unauthorized by you) because the device is physically disconnected (no built-in modem or network connection lying in wait).
Personally, I like the hardware, and I especially like the idea that I will soon be able to use it with open-source software modules that put my privacy fears to rest.
Here's the specific wish list: A portable cd player that runs on 2AA's, plays audio cds, and if you pop in a data cd it reads a playlist file in the root directory, or expands the directory tree on the cdrom and develops a playlist in memory.
Sure, it defeats some of the advantages of a purely solid-state device, but I'd rather use the in-system memory+processor for playlists & playlist mods (imagine running a whole dj show from a portable), decoding modules, audio processing, etc etc.
-jon
Compact Flash Type II cards are designed to work with PCMCIA Type II ports using an adapter. Just a half-step away from the mainstream, you can buy PCI cards that have one or two type II PCMCIA slots, enabling the dedicated (and flexible, since the ports are on the rear of your computer) geek to use these cards on a desktop pc. And if I recall correctly, this type of PCMCIA-docking station is available for USB from several vendors. (I'd be surprised if Belkin didn't make something of this sort.)
IBM states that external docking hardware is available for IBM's compactflash memory, which presumably means serial or USB. If not, IBM offers an adapter to put the CF type II cards into a PCMCIA type II slot, as well as Sandisk. Then you can use one of the more commonly-available PCMCIA docking ports. More info is here . jon (thoughts not in order because tie is too tight)
Yeah! "[A] transition course for Windows NT administrators" is just the sort of subtle mainstream accpetance that Linux needs to invade the PHB brainspace. Once the PHBs addicted to the notion of "continuous improvement" see the idea of transitioning away from NT to a new product, they will assume that the destination (in this case Linux) is an improvement over the current state of affairs.
The big difference is that in this case, they'll be right.
With that volume of hardware & wattage, it probably makes sense to invest in some good heat exchange systems in the facility and toss the traditional HVAC.
Why not locate the facilities in more extreme northern/southern/high altitude climes, and put all that heat to good use? The model waste treatment plant in Seattle uses its own methane to power the waste treatment systems, and even sells electricity back to the city. Apply the same idea to a computing facility -- If you know the average heat production of a system (over a large enough population the variances between systems wouldn't be that great even as you perpetually upgraded individual systems), it wouldn't be that hard to design it into a facility HVAC plan and make very efficient use it.
By the time you add a faster processor, good background processing to the Palm OS (so that it doesn't skip when you change apps), sound in/out jacks, volume contrrol, and a couple extra AAA batteries (or some Li-ion rechargables), you're gonna be paying more than $295. Not to say I wouldn't buy one... I'm just looking forward to the next step; simple improvements. What I really want (and will hopefully get by the time I'm 90) is fiber into my cortex with a couple of terabytes of holographic storage parked conveniently in my sinuses, and a 2ghz cdma-based local hotsync with the people around me. That way I won't have to complain about artifacts in the music D-A conversion; the MP3's will play directly in my brain.
Suggestion: Make the next "Special Edition" of the Rio (or any other player) fit into the Palm3 or Palm5 cradle, and have a hotsync module that identifies the "user" as needing to load .mp3 files just as the default user profile would load apps into the Palm.
The slowdown from using the serial port instead of the parallel port would probably be offset by the convenience of popping the player into the cradle and pushing the hotsync button (just before I go to bed). One of these years 3COM will come out with a USB cradle, and the speed problem will disappear. I predict that any mp3 player vendor who designs their product to piggyback off the Palm (the de-facto pda standard) will reap great reward. Collaborate, collaborate, collaborate!
Microsoft does a good enough job of bashing itself. While it's nice to help the great evil along on its trip towards the scrapheap, we should probably let it alone. Microsoft, personified by Gates and his vapid predictions for the past, is stuck in a hopeless battle to try and convince people that it isn't behind the technology curve. Meanwhile, the world moves on into new technology, culture, and benefits.
People who spend their time bashing or predicting Microsoft's demise (or that of any other stagnating company) should be aware that they are circling a target that is no longer moving -- and thus stop moving themselves. It is an inviting and juicy piece of bait, but it is bait in a trap nonetheless.
Instead, we as individuals should focus on the new technology and culture. Be positive. Contribute. Ignore Microsoft and Gates and the culture of control and stagnation. Look forward. As Andretti Sr. is rumored to have said "What issa behind you does no matter."
When AT&T (my employer until last week) bought the UK-based Olivetti Research Labs (www.orl.co.uk), they became the proud owners of several pieces of GPL software. Most notably VNC -- Virtual Network Computer software -- which is software that provides multiplatform x-like remote control of a system.
Development continues under the GPL at these new AT&T aquisitions, so the GPL already has its foot in the door in the form of very new, very modern software. This fits very nicely with AT&T's historical code-sharing, and imho their release of new software from other parts of the company under even a semi-GPL-like license bodes well for the future of AT&T's participation in GPL efforts.
(Check out VNC -- I find it quite ironic that the one essential piece of utility software that makes Windows NT somewhat acceptable to run in a datacenter is developed under the GPL.)
Jon
Any mirrors for this particular display? Some of us virgin-pure souls haven't seen the IIS analysis tools, so there's no context in which to understand the comments above.
Here's the details of the video documenting this (The title is misleading; 4 hours was the *previous* record). A book should be no problem.
.F68 1992
Title Four hour house [videorecording]
Call Number TH4812
Other Title 4 hour house.
Publisher San Diego, Calif. : Image Dynamics, c1992.
Description 1 videocassette (25 min.) : sd., col. ; 1/2 in.
Credits Producer, Bertrand Wilbur.
Two construction teams compete against each other for world
record in building a house. Illustrates the value of
teamwork, planning and communication, and includes the issue
of quality control.
Subject(s) House construction.
House construction Quality control.
Construction industry Quality control.
Quality control.
Wilbur, Bertrand.
Building Industry Association of San Diego County.
Image Dynamics.
order info: BIA, 1-800-746-0440
Since the site went *poof*, some of us can only speculate on what kind of book it will be. With a thousand writers, editors, subject matter experts all looking at well-defined (and thus easily outline-able) technical topic, I have no doubt that the book could be done (and done well) in a day.
Any doubts? I'm sure there are links to the housebuilding competition (in Calif. I think) where homebuilders plan out the complete construction of a home from the ground up, including landscaping, appliances, etc. The current record is 2:10 or thereabouts. They used about 300 skilled craftspeople working in parallel (ex: roof constructed at same time as walls, then placed by crane), and did a quality job, i.e. there are people who purchased and live in these homes. (It's been a few months since I saw the documentary film on it, so I might be a little off on the time, or the record might have been broken by now.) It really is amazing what you can do with a good plan combined with good people.
If, on the other hand, we're talking about creating a novel, I'd subscribe to the previous poster's comment about expecting a baby in a month by having 9 women become pregnant. Ain't gonna happen. That would be more in the realm of direct mindshare than a shared task. And if by some chance it did happen, I'd be frightened that the Borg walked among us.
hmm. Perhaps you're investing a bit more humanity in the notion of a heuristic than I intended. A heuristic is a rule of thumb, or a way of doing something that _generally_ works _better_ than another way. The value embedded in the notion of "better" isn't so central, the way I see it. "Better" can be computed, more or less. And the concept of "generally better" is really an issue of statistics, which is derived from experience and not value. Perhaps that's a little cold, but I don't quite make the leap to "style."
So, I disagree. While it's true that a heuristic is not an algorythm or a truth, it is a fuzzy approximation of same: algorythm vs method, truth vs best choice. I don't think you can distinguish so cleanly between them.
Where's the line?
A surgeon can safely ignore a patented method because a life might be at risk. That answers a question of "why", and at the same time preserves the idea that innovators deserve some recognition. (Cleverly sidestepping the issue of ownership.)
But in the case of software, there's the issue of obviousness and fundamental truths. US Patent law says that your patent should be for something that isn't obvious. But a piece of code is closely related to an algorythm (or even an heuristic), and those are closely related to mathematical proofs. A proof is a truth. How can I patent a truth? How can I patent a line of reasoning to a truth (a proof) that by its very nature is designed to make the truth obvious? How can I patent a mathematical method that implements a truth? What happens to software based on this method?
When you follow this line of reasoning back to software, it's obvious imho that there is some point at which there is a transition, and it becomes reasonable to identify a person or group of people with an idea. Whether that connotes ownership is debatable, of course, but as you travel the line between a mathematical truth and a software implementation, there is a point before which no person or group should have control of a basic idea, method, or truth.
Where do you think it is?
Hum. This is almost weird enough to be a troll, but I'll run with it. Let's look at this.
One guy was able to reverse engineer your product and build a work-alike. One guy. Assuming that he didn't steal your code wholesale (which would be an entirely different issue), it is safe to assume that the code one person writes is less complex than code written by a passel of semi-coordinated coders. More consistent code, produced faster, at less cost (he was able to sell for 25% of your cost), with the same or better functionality. Nope, no innovation there. I would argue that this guy could counter your algorythm patent with a method patent.
You admitted "his user interface was like a zillion times better than ours was" Nope. No innovation there either. I would posit that an unusuable product (yours), no matter how much genius is embedded under the covers, is basically worthless. This opens the door for innovation in the human-computer interface arena.
Your argument about patents and time basically says that the state of the art for your field is based on your single set of patents. One of the most positive traits of sucessful systems is that there is always more than one way to get a task done. If you limit yourself to the view that your discovery is the only way to skin a cat, you end up with a lot of skinned cats, but not much progress in the cat-skinning technology. Your very declaration (patent) cuts you off from the greater community that could spur still greater discovery. Someone else always find a better way, and you end up one stuck behind the curve, with a patent for cold fusion, or some similar state of fuddy-duddy-ness.
Oh fer crissakes, get over yourself. There are no experts who are not end-users, otherwise there's a large chunk of required experience missing. Take your dishwasher, for example. Even if you have an EE degree and know every blooming detail of how the device is designed, constructed, and operated -- if you never pushed the start button yourself, you're not an expert. Knowledge without experience is nothing but faith, and faith doth not make an expert.
As this applies to GNOME, it's a good thing. Experts are borne of end-users, so the more end-users there are, the more experts we have in the making. And I doubt you would argue with the desirability of creating more experts.
Right-o. Your typical geek isn't going to use/need/want this. But for applications needing emulation, having the native processor present is of tremendous help. For example, the application I'm thinking of is an Alpha-primary system (boots to Linux for Alpha) with a K7-secondary processor used to support non-portable 32-bit x86 apps and WINE calls. Not TOO much work in patching WINE to look for the right processor, although other individual apps would be right bastards. There's also something to be said for optimizing ops for different processors when writing your own very-custom number-crunching code.
I wonder if anyone's done a patch to make WINE use the SunPC card (486) in SPARC Linux? Hum. Then again, noone else would put twin turbos in their Volvo either, but hey, that's just the way I am.
The K7 is supposed to (a) support SMP and (b) be electrically-compatble with the Alpha. Someone fill me in here -- what is the possibility that the K7 SMP design will be sufficiently compatible with the Alpha (maybe the same design?) that a heterogeneous multiprocessing system might be possible. Of course, this assumes the right basic hardware exists, like an SMP-compatible passive backplane system with daughterboards for the respective processors...
For hardware manufacturers:
If you make a stereo-component style device that reads MP3's and playlists from a standard-format data cd (ISO 9660), I will buy it. You will earn revinue from me and many like-minded people.
If you base the design of your system on the assumption that I'm a thief, i.e. incorporating encryption and licensing tools that limit my ability to manage the data myself, you won't see a dime.
Jon
Here's a different perspective: I manage several people in a web/unix/network-intensive shop. A couple of people went to college for a year and dropped out. While their technical skills are excellent, they lack the broader base of knowledge that comes from a full college education. It may be trite, but the point of college isn't to teach you the specifics of the technology, it's primarily to teach you how to think on a variety of levels.
Some questions I face:
Would I prefer to fill a lead sysadmin position (something that comes with a essentially unlimited access to other people's work) with a person who has 100% of the required skills but no college education, or someone with 90% of the skills and a couple of college philosophy classes in ethics? Would I rather hire someone with 100% of the technical skills for a programming position, or someone with 75% of the skills, but a good writing background from a minor in English Lit that would make our documentation effort easier? On a small staff, would I rather have an advanced software architect with a minor in business, or a non-degreed balls-to-the-wall code god?
In each of these cases, the person without the college education will get you farther for the first few steps. But you quickly realize that in order for the individual and the organization to advance, you _must_ have a broader base of skills. Sure, I can get more out of that code god in the short run, but what happens when I want to collaborate with another company? I run into a great big skill vacuum, and either the organization suffers, or I hire someone over the code god's head (which casts me as the bad guy).
IMHO, good, sucessful technical people focus on the convergence of fields. For example, a network security specialist is worth more than either a network admin or a business security person. A programmer-writer is worth more than a programmer or a tech writer. Web design people who have database design/coding skills are making loads of money in e-commerce right now; far more than the run-of-the-mill webgeek or database admin.
Finding this convergence requires having multiple perspectives that are built through a well-rounded education. This is why companies that pay no attention to education are doomed, and individuals who skip college, as a general rule, relegate themselves to a relatively low position in the organization. Those who skip college because it is truly beneath them are few and far between, but shine brightly enough to draw others into a dead-end or vastly handicapped career.
On the bright side, however, my organization (a top-50 corporate monolith) and many others like it provides generous resources for continuing education, and tuition reimbursement for degree completion. So, for those that skipped college to get a jump on a career, there are ways to eliminate the handicap. The point is, it isn't easy to do -- the years you saved by skipping college are eaten up by slow career growth and concurrent schooling later. It's not a position I would want to get into without giving it a lot of careful thought.