22K with an engineering degree? You gotta be kidding - either you are the absolute WORST engineer to get out of GA vo-Tech, or you are a complete moron. Move elsewhere - there are plenty of high paying entry level jobs for engineers. Sheesh, sit on you butt and expect the world to come to you and you'll get bupkis - you gotta get out there and do things for yourself.
1) CLEC still means leasing the lines from a local RBOC (ILEC). Still means dealing with a Public Utilities Commission. Still means being limited in DSL reach by the RBOC's own lack of CO equipment/capacity and piss-poor local plant (fiber extenders, muxes, etc to make up for poor capacity planning).
2) Where have you EVER seen a competitive network built? Cable companies opreate on exclusive franchises granted to them by local governments. Those local govts CREATED the meonopoly mess by allowing these companies to *exclude* competition in exchange for stability in the 70's and 80's. You can dream about non-monopoly franchises, but until I see more than 3 sets of wires in the ground at my house (Power, Telco, Cable), your dream is just wishful thinking. (BTW - I dont have cable anymore - my DSS from DirecTV is quite wonderful).
3) Investment into one of the giants still doesnt approach solving the problem of monopoly power over the last mile. You'd still have AT&T or whomever owning the bandwidth - and placing restriction on it in a monopolistic fashion - because there is STILL no competition for their wires. So Strike 3 bucko - unhook the buzzer and think it over again.
I've worked in broadband since the 80's - and the company I was working with started laying fiber in 1988 - because they planned to use micro-cells to become a phone company. Got regulated out of existence by the PUC in Florida at the behest of the baby-bells and GTE. So they simply said "if you cant beat em, join em", got their cable monopoly powers and started smashing customers for every penny they coudl get while blocking telco delivery of any video service by using their franchise monopoly powers to make the local govts disallow RBOC/ILEC from providing service.
Until they force open the last mile (like with the Telco/ISP stuff), the monopoly granted and created by the government will never be rectified.
You left out one thing - patents cannot be issued for things which are reasonable derived by any competent person in the filed (or some such language). So, give laptops with sound devices were around, so were walkmans, and I think the newton was already in existence, it doesnt take a genius to realize some sort of portable audio device that could pull music off a computer is probably. The problem is the people in the patent office are so unimaginative and ill informed about the fields they are issuing patents on that wer get travesties like these. SOudns like its time for the patent office to be flushed.
THe right to defend your life. This includes any reasonable means. And according to US Dept Of Justice statistics, and similar ones for the BoJ, one fo the most effective methods is the modern handgun. Your statements dont stand scrutiny - a fundamental right is not subject to a needs test. Handguns, escpecially concealed ones, have been shown to be quite effective at preventing a person from being a victim of violent crime, and for those that carry them legally (with the permit system) have been shown to have only a fraction of the crime rate of the normal citizen (Lott, Mustard 1998). And ilegal use of a concea;ed weapon by permit holders is almost nil. As an example, in florida where over 500,000 permits have been issued since 1997, only 12 deaths due to concealed handguns have been reports, and of those 12, only 2 (same incident) were found to be criminal - in other words, concealed handgunds deterred hundreds of thousands of attempted crimes, saved lives, and had very little cost in non-criminal lives. And since the handgun carry permits system was implemented allowing the average citizen to carry a concealed handgun, the violent crime rate in Florida has dropped rapidly and consistently - especially amongst older people and women, at 6-10% a year. Similare results are evident in Texas as well since their passage of CCW for handguns.
So, your statment doesnt hold any water - try thinking it through. Criminal prefer unarmed victims - and a handgun is the best form of personal defense: portable, easily carried, and it works - sometimes needing only to be shown, not fired (Kleck 1995).
Yours is the credo of slave. Think it over and come back when you ahve learned.
Sure, right - believe the lies your government tells you. But you are dead wrong on the results of the gun prohibiton laws, dead wrong.
Try this - since the prohibition laws were passed for guns, gun related violent crimes has INCREASED, the rate of violent crimes has INCREASED 40% or more in some catagories, then number of occupied forced-entry (i.e. smeon breaks into your home while you are there) crimes had INCREASED by more the 40%.
The citizens are disarmed, while the criminals remain armed. In other words, the criminals are having a field day, because they rest secure in knowing that the government has provided them a much larger and completey unarmed pool of victims they can prey on. This was predicted by the action in Jamaica when they enacted similar laws. Try readin ghte modern research by Dr. Lott and others in the USA. You Aussies are fools for letting the government grab that much power based on your irrational and fear based response to press crusades on the behalf of those who wish to control you.
Lesson here: dont give up your rights, ANY of them.
Try adding the following functions to the scratchpad and phone biik:
Expense tracking, checkbook balancing (syncs with Quicken), project planning and idea-brainstorming (look at Brainforest), sending and receiving my email, sending faxes, getting web contect for offline reading (like on short hop flights)receiving pages (have a module that makes my palm into an alphanumeric pager), teaching Kanji and Kana for a trip to Japan, and the usual corporate actions like keeping my appointments, syncing with the corporate calendar system, post-it notes that transer to/from my desktop. I alos use it for keeping my laptop (when needed)in sync with my desktop at work and my desktop at home as well (palm syncs the calendars, and notes, etc between the machines). All this without me having to shuffle the enormous amount of paper such things used to require, and to not need the dept secretary to do this stuff either. And even better it fits into my pocekt unlike the laptop and daytimer lugging that I see others stuck with. And this doenst even egin to mention the tech docs and such formatted for Aportis' Doc program, nor the large number of specialize calculators (got a good hex/octal/binary programmers one loaded in RPN) and other apps out there.
So, Id say its productive, and you need to learn what you speak of before you bray, AC.
Perhaps I could point out several comments that you made that display some bias and a bit of ignorance on your part -
"The Open Source Movement reminds me of communism. Richard Stallman's Marx rants about the evils of the profit motive and multinational corporations"
Firstly Stallman is considered a flake or an extremist by most in the open source movement, and many in the free software movement. Second, Stallman is the Free Software Foundation. Third, Eric Raymond is the Open Source movement. They are very distinct movements and quite different - as witnessed to the discord between Raymond and Stallman on fundamental philosophy (hardly a Trotsky and Lenin there as you portray it). So your argument is shown wrong straight out of the box.
"OK, communism is too harsh on Linux. Lenin too harsh on Torvalds"
Even you admit that this comparison to Communism is specious.
Engage your brain please: Central Control, a single authority, and change mandated from the top, all working for the good of the collective. Sounds like Microsoft and Bill Gates - ask almost any software engineer who has worked there, or anyone who has had to deal with bugs and the stream of unasked for "enhancements" from Redmond. Linux is much more along the lines of Adam Smith - people see a need in the marketplace (OS) and they fill it with product (code) for their own personal reasons with no need for mandated and forced decisions.
So you should admit that you were extremely in the wrong on this point as well.
"Stallman and Torvalds would have us return to the time when software was so new that one person working alone could change the world over the weekend."
It seems that you missed the facts here as well - most of Linux is done under a highly distributed but team oriented model. There are groups that provide for organizing and guiding the development efforts of things they have volunteered to take on. But it is a team environment - the lone-cowboy-hacker is a thing of myth, and is fairly far removed from Linux as it stands today. Aside from that, there are several HUNDRED people who have contributed to the kernel - hardly a single programmer approach, eh? Each one contributes in his area of specialty, and gets merged into the whole by the product manager (in this case Linus for the kernel). So you are wrong - and woefully ignorant.
Starting to see the pattern? Ignorance and misstatements (and innuendo) are looking like they are your stock-in-trade. Have you no integrity?
"If North America actually went back to the earth, close to 250 million people would die of starvation before you could say agribusiness. When they bring organic fruit to market, you pay extra for small apples with open sores -- the Open Sores Movement"
This attempted "ad hominem" scarcely deserves comment except for the obvious ignorance and sneering wrong-headed scorn that you display. But I will endeavor to show yet another flaw in your assumption: crops once planted can only be harvested once. Software, once written can be duplicated and reused essentially without cost. So the "farm" metaphor is brutally illustrative of your muddled and regrettably simplistic thinking on this matter.
"Stallman's EMACS was brilliant in the 1970s, but today we demand more, specifically Microsoft Word, which can't be written over a weekend, no matter how much Coke you drink."
Again you suffer from poor reasoning ability: comparing a programmers editor and a word processor is specious at best - and given the tone of your writing, its is deceitful. Compare apples and apples. EMACS is an editor, not a word processor, and as such its far superior to MS Word for writing and compiling code (its primary purpose when written). Likewise MS Word, bloated and inefficient as it is, is quite adequate for producing WYSIWYG documents, and for that specialized purpose is better then EMACS. But for you to make blanket statements like you did above shows that either you have no idea about the differences between a word processor and an editor, or that you deliberately chose to deceitfully post what you know to be a bogus comparison .
"Unix and the Internet turn 30 this summer. Both are senile, according to journalist Peter Salus, who like me is old enough, but not too old, to remember. The Open Sores Movement asks us to ignore three decades of innovation. It's just a notch above Luddism. At least they're not bombing Redmond. Not yet anyway."
Such innuendo and attempted smears (bombing indeed) that you tack onto this are despicable, intellectually dishonest, and devoid of any real content. If you have any intellectual integrity, you should be ashamed to put you name on such drivel. And to address your failed analogies, is Unix that old? Hmm, maybe we should throw out the automobile - after all the basic internal combustion engine is well over 100 years old. And lets toss out the Antilock Braking System while we are at it - it is as old as Unix. Age is irrelevant as long as new concepts are constantly incorporated - and Linux shows far more of this incorporation than Windows - which (Win98) is still based on a 16 bit kernel that was inadequate to begin with. And as for ignoring 3 decades of innovation, Linux has hardly ignored it - or did you not notice the addition of things such as threads (and theri APIs), multiple processor capability and scalability, machine clustering for distribute processing, cross platfrom compiling, open interfaces, drivers for audio and advanced graphics, and many other cutting edge technologies. So yet another part of your article is shown as hogwash coupled with deceitful attempts at smearing.
"W2K is software also from the distant past -- VAX/VMS for Windows. But it will overpower Linux. NT, now approaching 23x6 availability, is already overpowering Linux. NT and NetWare constitute 60 percent of server software shipments. All Unix's make up 17 percent, and Linux is a small fraction of that. When W2K gets here, goodbye Linux."
Here you perform a context switch and assume your conclusion - both terrible fallacies in argumentation. The assumption of W2K being quality and becoming the basis for systems is fallacious - many corporations are very reticent to move to NT5, simply because of the track record of Microsoft - poor stability in new releases, gaping security holes, and general unreliability until several patches have been released. Did you never have a freshman logic class to show you that fallacy of argumentation (assumed conclusion)? And as to the context switch, you claim that NT/Netware is 60% of all server shipments now. The original subject was NT - why did you all of a sunned have to drag in Netware - possibly because you knew that your comparison would look poor if you didn't change the context? And, in terms of context, you also omit the fact that as the internet pervades business, far more of those business are choosing Unix based servers (Sun, HP) as their prime connectivity component. Furthermore, you neglect the fact that the growth in Linux shipments and installations has far outstripped NT - and if the trend continues, that Linux will catch up to NT in a hurry. ON other thing in terms of missed context on your part: Most systems do not "ship" with Linux pre-loaded (but that is changing with Compaq coming into play now), but many of them end up that way. So shipments is not a reliable gauge.
Well, lets see - that just about demolishes your entire argument. So, when will we see a retraction printed? Or at least the intellectual integrity and honesty to admit your errors publicly?
"Multinational corporations are themselves technology invented to get big things done, things that sustain us in the complicated modern world"
Multinationals are playing catch up, their innovations coming from the smaller companies as they buy them up. Indeed, even Microsoft has acquired rather than created a good many of their products. And you overestimate the ability of any large monolithic corporation to survive - ask IBM - they had to change their culture or die. Your thinking smacks of 70's engineering, with central control and massive mater plans that produce things. Sorry fellow, it just doesn't work that way anymore. No matter how much spite and spleen you put into pasting lies, half truths and innuendo onto the internet with columns like this, the world will move on, and will not go back. Your brilliance in inventing Ethernet is appreciate, but now, please get out of our way - unlike you we have a world to build, and we'd rather like to see you as one of the forefathers than have to look back on you as roadkill.
Mr Metcalfe, the world has passed you by, sorry to see you go.
I wonder how this looks in light of those shootings in Columbine High School (Across town from where I live)? Can it exlplain the capacity to plan and cold bloodedly carry out mass executions? Can it explain not only why but how someone can be so intelligent yet so evil? Can it explain the immediate political response of "ban the guns" when all the things carried there were already illegal? Unlike the NRA, the gun-banners, the God squad, and the atheists, I dont have any pat answers.
How is the brain involved in moral decisions - is morality a fiction?
I've gone way off topic. Just rambling and still in shock from the carnage in my back yard.
Slashdot Mirror
22K with an engineering degree? You gotta be kidding - either you are the absolute WORST engineer to get out of GA vo-Tech, or you are a complete moron. Move elsewhere - there are plenty of high paying entry level jobs for engineers. Sheesh, sit on you butt and expect the world to come to you and you'll get bupkis - you gotta get out there and do things for yourself.
Unhook your buzzer Aaron - wrong on all 3.
1) CLEC still means leasing the lines from a local RBOC (ILEC). Still means dealing with a Public Utilities Commission. Still means being limited in DSL reach by the RBOC's own lack of CO equipment/capacity and piss-poor local plant (fiber extenders, muxes, etc to make up for poor capacity planning).
2) Where have you EVER seen a competitive network built? Cable companies opreate on exclusive franchises granted to them by local governments. Those local govts CREATED the meonopoly mess by allowing these companies to *exclude* competition in exchange for stability in the 70's and 80's. You can dream about non-monopoly franchises, but until I see more than 3 sets of wires in the ground at my house (Power, Telco, Cable), your dream is just wishful thinking. (BTW - I dont have cable anymore - my DSS from DirecTV is quite wonderful).
3) Investment into one of the giants still doesnt approach solving the problem of monopoly power over the last mile. You'd still have AT&T or whomever owning the bandwidth - and placing restriction on it in a monopolistic fashion - because there is STILL no competition for their wires. So Strike 3 bucko - unhook the buzzer and think it over again.
I've worked in broadband since the 80's - and the company I was working with started laying fiber in 1988 - because they planned to use micro-cells to become a phone company. Got regulated out of existence by the PUC in Florida at the behest of the baby-bells and GTE. So they simply said "if you cant beat em, join em", got their cable monopoly powers and started smashing customers for every penny they coudl get while blocking telco delivery of any video service by using their franchise monopoly powers to make the local govts disallow RBOC/ILEC from providing service.
Until they force open the last mile (like with the Telco/ISP stuff), the monopoly granted and created by the government will never be rectified.
You left out one thing - patents cannot be issued for things which are reasonable derived by any competent person in the filed (or some such language). So, give laptops with sound devices were around, so were walkmans, and I think the newton was already in existence, it doesnt take a genius to realize some sort of portable audio device that could pull music off a computer is probably. The problem is the people in the patent office are so unimaginative and ill informed about the fields they are issuing patents on that wer get travesties like these. SOudns like its time for the patent office to be flushed.
Typical ignorant liberal - thats not a republican statement, its an attempt at a libertarian one.
Checkk your facts arsehole, violent crimes are UP.
Quite wrong.
A fundamental right is involved here:
THe right to defend your life. This includes any reasonable means. And according to US Dept Of Justice statistics, and similar ones for the BoJ, one fo the most effective methods is the modern handgun. Your statements dont stand scrutiny - a fundamental right is not subject to a needs test. Handguns, escpecially concealed ones, have been shown to be quite effective at preventing a person from being a victim of violent crime, and for those that carry them legally (with the permit system) have been shown to have only a fraction of the crime rate of the normal citizen (Lott, Mustard 1998). And ilegal use of a concea;ed weapon by permit holders is almost nil. As an example, in florida where over 500,000 permits have been issued since 1997, only 12 deaths due to concealed handguns have been reports, and of those 12, only 2 (same incident) were found to be criminal - in other words, concealed handgunds deterred hundreds of thousands of attempted crimes, saved lives, and had very little cost in non-criminal lives. And since the handgun carry permits system was implemented allowing the average citizen to carry a concealed handgun, the violent crime rate in Florida has dropped rapidly and consistently - especially amongst older people and women, at 6-10% a year. Similare results are evident in Texas as well since their passage of CCW for handguns.
So, your statment doesnt hold any water - try thinking it through. Criminal prefer unarmed victims - and a handgun is the best form of personal defense: portable, easily carried, and it works - sometimes needing only to be shown, not fired (Kleck 1995).
Yours is the credo of slave. Think it over and come back when you ahve learned.
Sure, right - believe the lies your government tells you. But you are dead wrong on the results of the gun prohibiton laws, dead wrong.
Try this - since the prohibition laws were passed for guns, gun related violent crimes has INCREASED, the rate of violent crimes has INCREASED 40% or more in some catagories, then number of occupied forced-entry (i.e. smeon breaks into your home while you are there) crimes had INCREASED by more the 40%.
The citizens are disarmed, while the criminals remain armed. In other words, the criminals are having a field day, because they rest secure in knowing that the government has provided them a much larger and completey unarmed pool of victims they can prey on. This was predicted by the action in Jamaica when they enacted similar laws. Try readin ghte modern research by Dr. Lott and others in the USA. You Aussies are fools for letting the government grab that much power based on your irrational and fear based response to press crusades on the behalf of those who wish to control you.
Lesson here: dont give up your rights, ANY of them.
Try adding the following functions to the scratchpad and phone biik:
Expense tracking, checkbook balancing (syncs with Quicken), project planning and idea-brainstorming (look at Brainforest), sending and receiving my email, sending faxes, getting web contect for offline reading (like on short hop flights)receiving pages (have a module that makes my palm into an alphanumeric pager), teaching Kanji and Kana for a trip to Japan, and the usual corporate actions like keeping my appointments, syncing with the corporate calendar system, post-it notes that transer to/from my desktop. I alos use it for keeping my laptop (when needed)in sync with my desktop at work and my desktop at home as well (palm syncs the calendars, and notes, etc between the machines). All this without me having to shuffle the enormous amount of paper such things used to require, and to not need the dept secretary to do this stuff either. And even better it fits into my pocekt unlike the laptop and daytimer lugging that I see others stuck with. And this doenst even egin to mention the tech docs and such formatted for Aportis' Doc program, nor the large number of specialize calculators (got a good hex/octal/binary programmers one loaded in RPN) and other apps out there.
So, Id say its productive, and you need to learn what you speak of before you bray, AC.
Perhaps I could point out several comments that you made that display some bias and a bit of ignorance on your part -
"The Open Source Movement reminds me of communism. Richard Stallman's Marx rants about the evils of the profit motive and multinational corporations"
Firstly Stallman is considered a flake or an extremist by most in the open source movement, and many in the free software movement. Second, Stallman is the Free Software Foundation. Third, Eric Raymond is the Open Source movement. They are very distinct movements and quite different - as witnessed to the discord between Raymond and Stallman on fundamental philosophy (hardly a Trotsky and Lenin there as you portray it). So your argument is shown wrong straight out of the box.
"OK, communism is too harsh on Linux. Lenin too harsh on Torvalds"
Even you admit that this comparison to Communism is specious.
Engage your brain please: Central Control, a single authority, and change mandated from the top, all working for the good of the collective. Sounds like Microsoft and Bill Gates - ask almost any software engineer who has worked there, or anyone who has had to deal with bugs and the stream of unasked for "enhancements" from Redmond. Linux is much more along the lines of Adam Smith - people see a need in the marketplace (OS) and they fill it with product (code) for their own personal reasons with no need for mandated and forced decisions.
So you should admit that you were extremely in the wrong on this point as well.
"Stallman and Torvalds would have us return to the time when software was so new that one person working alone could change the world over the weekend."
It seems that you missed the facts here as well - most of Linux is done under a highly distributed but team oriented model. There are groups that provide for organizing and guiding the development efforts of things they have volunteered to take on. But it is a team environment - the lone-cowboy-hacker is a thing of myth, and is fairly far removed from Linux as it stands today. Aside from that, there are several HUNDRED people who have contributed to the kernel - hardly a single programmer approach, eh? Each one contributes in his area of specialty, and gets merged into the whole by the product manager (in this case Linus for the kernel). So you are wrong - and woefully ignorant.
Starting to see the pattern? Ignorance and misstatements (and innuendo) are looking like they are your stock-in-trade. Have you no integrity?
"If North America actually went back to the earth, close to 250 million people would die of starvation before you could say agribusiness. When they bring organic fruit to market, you pay extra for small apples with open sores -- the Open Sores Movement"
This attempted "ad hominem" scarcely deserves comment except for the obvious ignorance and sneering wrong-headed scorn that you display. But I will endeavor to show yet another flaw in your assumption: crops once planted can only be harvested once. Software, once written can be duplicated and reused essentially without cost. So the "farm" metaphor is brutally illustrative of your muddled and regrettably simplistic thinking on this matter.
"Stallman's EMACS was brilliant in the 1970s, but today we demand more, specifically Microsoft Word, which can't be written over a weekend, no matter how much Coke you drink."
Again you suffer from poor reasoning ability: comparing a programmers editor and a word processor is specious at best - and given the tone of your writing, its is deceitful. Compare apples and apples. EMACS is an editor, not a word processor, and as such its far superior to MS Word for writing and compiling code (its primary purpose when written). Likewise MS Word, bloated and inefficient as it is, is quite adequate for producing WYSIWYG documents, and for that specialized purpose is better then EMACS. But for you to make blanket statements like you did above shows that either you have no idea about the differences between a word processor and an editor, or that you deliberately chose to deceitfully post what you know to be a bogus comparison .
"Unix and the Internet turn 30 this summer. Both are senile, according to journalist Peter Salus, who like me is old enough, but not too old, to remember. The Open Sores Movement asks us to ignore three decades of innovation. It's just a notch above Luddism. At least they're not bombing Redmond. Not yet anyway."
Such innuendo and attempted smears (bombing indeed) that you tack onto this are despicable, intellectually dishonest, and devoid of any real content. If you have any intellectual integrity, you should be ashamed to put you name on such drivel. And to address your failed analogies, is Unix that old? Hmm, maybe we should throw out the automobile - after all the basic internal combustion engine is well over 100 years old. And lets toss out the Antilock Braking System while we are at it - it is as old as Unix. Age is irrelevant as long as new concepts are constantly incorporated - and Linux shows far more of this incorporation than Windows - which (Win98) is still based on a 16 bit kernel that was inadequate to begin with. And as for ignoring 3 decades of innovation, Linux has hardly ignored it - or did you not notice the addition of things such as threads (and theri APIs), multiple processor capability and scalability, machine clustering for distribute processing, cross platfrom compiling, open interfaces, drivers for audio and advanced graphics, and many other cutting edge technologies. So yet another part of your article is shown as hogwash coupled with deceitful attempts at smearing.
"W2K is software also from the distant past -- VAX/VMS for Windows. But it will overpower Linux. NT, now approaching 23x6 availability, is already overpowering Linux. NT and NetWare constitute 60 percent of server software shipments. All Unix's make up 17 percent, and Linux is a small fraction of that. When W2K gets here, goodbye Linux."
Here you perform a context switch and assume your conclusion - both terrible fallacies in argumentation. The assumption of W2K being quality and becoming the basis for systems is fallacious - many corporations are very reticent to move to NT5, simply because of the track record of Microsoft - poor stability in new releases, gaping security holes, and general unreliability until several patches have been released. Did you never have a freshman logic class to show you that fallacy of argumentation (assumed conclusion)? And as to the context switch, you claim that NT/Netware is 60% of all server shipments now. The original subject was NT - why did you all of a sunned have to drag in Netware - possibly because you knew that your comparison would look poor if you didn't change the context? And, in terms of context, you also omit the fact that as the internet pervades business, far more of those business are choosing Unix based servers (Sun, HP) as their prime connectivity component. Furthermore, you neglect the fact that the growth in Linux shipments and installations has far outstripped NT - and if the trend continues, that Linux will catch up to NT in a hurry. ON other thing in terms of missed context on your part: Most systems do not "ship" with Linux pre-loaded (but that is changing with Compaq coming into play now), but many of them end up that way. So shipments is not a reliable gauge.
Well, lets see - that just about demolishes your entire argument. So, when will we see a retraction printed? Or at least the intellectual integrity and honesty to admit your errors publicly?
"Multinational corporations are themselves technology invented to get big things done, things that sustain us in the complicated modern world"
Multinationals are playing catch up, their innovations coming from the smaller companies as they buy them up. Indeed, even Microsoft has acquired rather than created a good many of their products. And you overestimate the ability of any large monolithic corporation to survive - ask IBM - they had to change their culture or die. Your thinking smacks of 70's engineering, with central control and massive mater plans that produce things. Sorry fellow, it just doesn't work that way anymore. No matter how much spite and spleen you put into pasting lies, half truths and innuendo onto the internet with columns like this, the world will move on, and will not go back. Your brilliance in inventing Ethernet is appreciate, but now, please get out of our way - unlike you we have a world to build, and we'd rather like to see you as one of the forefathers than have to look back on you as roadkill.
Mr Metcalfe, the world has passed you by, sorry to see you go.
I wonder how this looks in light of those shootings in Columbine High School (Across town from where I live)? Can it exlplain the capacity to plan and cold bloodedly carry out mass executions? Can it explain not only why but how someone can be so intelligent yet so evil? Can it explain the immediate political response of "ban the guns" when all the things carried there were already illegal? Unlike the NRA, the gun-banners, the God squad, and the atheists, I dont have any pat answers.
How is the brain involved in moral decisions - is morality a fiction?
I've gone way off topic. Just rambling and still in shock from the carnage in my back yard.