Regarding Babbage - first off, the concepts underlying the Difference Engine came to Babbage in 1812 (and, since Babbage was born in 1792 - that would make him 19 or 20 years old at the time!), as he was thinking on logarithms and the inacuracies that could occur during their calculation. He didn't follow up on his ideas until 1819, at which point he began building a small Difference Engine, finishing it in 1822. In 1823 he applied for and got a grant to build a larger engine (which was not completed). The Difference Engine, however, was more a calculator, and not a computer. The later Analytical Engine (began in 1833 - also not completed) was a true programmable device. More information can be found here and here...
Ada Lovelace, however - didn't invent the loom you refer to - that goes to Joseph Marie Jacquard, who invented the Jacquard Loom in 1802 - which utilised a series of punched cards to control warp threads on each pass of the weft thread. Ada obviously knew quite a bit about these looms (as did Babbage, who conceived of using punch cards for the control of Analytical Engine, presumably after seeing such a loom in action - indeed, the names he settled upon for what we today call the CPU (Mill) and memory (the Store), happen to be derived from terms used in the weaving industry at the time!), and so wrote in her Sketch of the Analytical Engine in 1842:
The distinctive characteristic of the Analytical Engine, and that which has rendered it possible to endow mechanism with such extensive faculties as bid fair to make this engine the executive right-hand of abstract algebra, is the introduction into it of the principle which Jacquard devised for regulating, by means of punched cards, the most complicated patterns in the fabrication of brocaded stuffs. It is in this that the distinction between the two engines lies. Nothing of the sort exists in the Difference Engine. We may say most aptly, that the Analytical Engine weaves algebraical patterns just as the Jacquard-loom weaves flowers and leaves.
Indeed - even she understood the value of the Analytical Engine over that of the Difference Engine - its programmability (weavability?)!
I could indeed go on - you neglect to mention Konrad Zuse, as well as the contribution of Atanasoff and Berry (the ABC) for the first electronic stored program computer.
This has to be the lamest robot "story" on the planet. Similar "security" robots have been built by companies and individuals for years. I remember several companies in the 80's doing this, when robots were the "thing" of the "future".
GPS? Why GPS? A white or black line (or even one done in a flourescent "invisible" paint or something) would be much cheaper for navigation. In a new building, a buried wire under the floor or carpet could be used. Coded tags at doors could further aid navigation (UPC or IR "active" tags).
Nomadic Technologies used to sell research robots with this kind of use in mind (sadly, I just found that they stopped production).
IRobot has a research robot that seems ideal for this as well.
Of course, nothing would beat Odetic's Odex-1 for the "scare" factor in security - too bad this 80's robot never went into production...
Now, homebrew bots - that is where the action is:
Karl Williams seems to have many projects of the type that would make interesting security platforms - or at least something to build off of (mount the vortex cannon or coil gun onto the home drone - yikes!).
This machine might even be better for security - simply because it could be smaller and faster for such a job.
The truth is that there are a lot of homebrew and commercial robots that can easily do what this robot does - probably at a fraction of the cost (actually, some of the commercial bots are quite expensive). There were many robots built in the 80's that were capable as well.
That is the article I want to see. Somehow I was hoping for a two legged chicken walker (not ED-209 sized, but something) patrolling the halls, maybe packing low powered pea shooters for "defense" (actually, one homebrewer managed to build such a robot with a "pea-shooter"-style, multi barrel "gun" - it couldn't hurt you, but it could knock over empty pop cans - I wish I had a link to it - probably do, but it is buried in my link list somewhere deep).
And one I might be modded down for, if only for being "buzzword compliant":
Use a config file, of course - but use XML as the format for that config file.
The main reason is for human readability, as long as you make your node names, etc - sufficiently readable. Furthermore, you could include nodes that would allow for user defined settings (if that is the reason that environment variables were being used) - these nodes could specify where to look for the user's XML config file (say, in $HOME/appname/userconfig.xml) - which the user could edit easily - if the config file is absent (or the path doesn't exist, etc) - the parser could supply default values (perhaps picked out from the main config file - which the user couldn't edit).
Using XML might make things more difficult (especially if you have to write your own parser) - but if you are writing from the ground up anyhow, you might as well set up to use XML, because your app will probably need it (intercommunication between different app sections - especially if you are black boxing everything to make parts very reusable. Also if you are using an XML format that is well defined, you can easily create back ends for any data sharing for third party apps that might be needed).
Perhaps - a lot of my news does come from/. - a bit from k5 (which I didn't read anything about this on, either). Sometimes I read "norm" sites (cnn, msnbc, etc), though not that often. Sometimes I even get the paper.
I wonder why we are only really hearing about it now - instead of back since 1999? Why didn't they send out these privacy statements every month for a year? Why wasn't there a big cry about it? Why are people so damn apathetic.
I should have read at least one of the statements - true. I kept them all - thinking maybe I had at least a few months - and not just two weeks - to act. I have a busy life - and mailing letters just isn't a big part, unless I am really fired up about things.
After I made this post, I called the various institutions, and talked to them about it, and opted out at all of them. I had opted out at equifax about a week ago.
Finally, I object to your name calling: I am not ignorant (though I plead the 5th on the lazy portion - let's just say I take my time) - I recognized that when I got the statement, I needed to do it, which is why I kept all of them. I guess the laziness portion got the better of me - but in the end, as I noted, I did it - under the deadline as well.
And for the record, I do write my congressman (ok, maybe I email them) when I see fit to do so (and before you moan about a letter being better than an email, which I concede at this point most likely is true - it is only because our congresscritters are so ass-backward when it comes to tech that it is like this - information, ideas, and opinions are worthy regardless of the medium of expression - I wish they could get that through their skulls - some have, most haven't)...
Is this the deadline for them to contact you (I later called all the financial institutions about opting out soon after I posted, and some iterated the same thing), or is it the deadline by which they have to contact you and for you to opt out of old and new information from being shared - that is, if you opt out after the first, old info is fair game...?
I don't blame you for not doing or posting anything - most likely there wasn't a forum, or if you did write an article, it probably wouldn't be posted.
What I do wonder is given the number of people at where you work that opted out, and that a likely amount did the same at other similar employers - why didn't this message get out in a huge way to everyone and thier mother - it is frustrating to see, feel, and wonder about the apathy in American society today...
Whip out your wallet or purse, pull out any credit cards, bank cards, credit union cards, etc - and look on the back - most (if not all) will have a phone number for customer service - call it!
I just did this - it took a little time, but most of the time I didn't wait more than 5 minutes. I also called the institutions I worked with for auto loans, even the one I had paid off a couple of years back.
Suprising thing I learned while on the phone? Most of the customer service people didn't even know what I was talking about until I explained it - then they understood what I wanted - many reffered to it as another thing, or had a message stating their policy "to not share information" but that "policy could change at any time" - with these, I explicitly got a representative on the line and told them I wanted it noted in my account that I was "opting out" - and waited on the line until they did it. Out of all the institutions I called, only one knew what I wanted instantly (Retailers National Bank - Target and Mervyns cards). Even my bank was coy about it!
Many kept telling me "oh, we never share private info, blah, blah" - but I told them I wanted it noted in my account.
I also asked them, as consumers, if they had opted out as well (education, you see) - most didn't, wondering why it was a bad thing...
For the auto loans, I looked up the numbers on the web to call. I am not sure if they take these calls seriously, but it would be impossible to get letters out to all of these companies in under the deadline of July 1st (short of FedEx'ing overnight the letters, and even then, I think it is too late) - I might still send out the Nader letter - I like it!
Anyhow, that is what I did - I had or could get the phone numbers easily, and it took only a little time. I think it is near-criminal that we have to opt-out, when it should be an opt-in only, instead.
Today's computers are already silent! I remember my first job, they didn't have a place to put me, so I got stuck in the computer room. Taught me how to deal with real noise:
Two Genicom printers - a 4440 line printer and a 3820 open carriage (those were fun when others were running reports) A large RS6000 box An old Prime Minicomputer with open reel 9-track vacuum tape-drive, and power supply with large loud fans
Later, they gave me an office, but stuck the 4440 in there with me...
Everything else was silent - we used Wyse terminals for everything...
Today's machines can't be compared - in fact, I miss the drone of that power supply...
You knew about this several months ago. And I presume, opted out with the rest of your collegues.
Most people have learned about it today (surprise, surprise), when they can do little about it.
I started getting those "privacy opt-out" letters a couple of weeks ago - figuring I would get around to them when I had to the time to really do it. At the time I was getting them, I wondered "Why now?" - wondering what law got passed that was making them send them out, and why I didn't hear anything about it on Slashdot...?
The thing that disturbs me is that this law actually got passed years ago, and only now - when it is really too late to do anything (and today was the first I heard about that you had to opt-out before July 1st! I would gladly call everywhere I could - I have notified Equifax, though - if I had the stuff in front of me!). Why didn't we know about this long ago?
Why didn't you write up an article about what your company was doing, and the effects - and get the word out?
Why has it taken this long?
I don't mean to rant at you - this is just VERY frustrating...
All they should have to do is mount the panel, laid back at a 30-45 degree angle (may be more or less depending on lattitude of the landing site), onto a servo motor of some sort, so that the panel can rotate around a vertical axis (like a turntable). Then instead of a light sensor, use the panel itself! The voltage will vary according to the amount of light falling on the panel. Rotate the servo until the panel registers the highest voltage - run it from stop-to-stop, 270-360 degrees (ie, you need a servo with built-in stops, so that the wiring harness doesn't get tangled/twisted - and I wouldn't use some kind of commutator system on such a critical item for an interplanetary mission). Heck, if you wanted to be real cheap, just mount the panel, and drive the robot until it is angled properly (one less moving part to break). At any rate, you would rotate it until you found the maximum light value, set it at that, determine your heading, then you would know which direction to rotate the servo as the voltage drops.
Also, even if it is a reflection or artificial light (and if it is the latter on the surface of Mars, you may have bigger problems!), as long as it is giving enough voltage - it don't matter...!
Here is his book (unfortunately, it is out of print. I found my copy only a couple of years ago in the discount section of a local Bookstar, so you might check), which is available in PDF format (for the price of 9 euros, which is reasonable):
This is talked about in the book, IIRC. I don't remember off hand what the reasoning was, but I do remember it being sound and well thought out. I will have to find the book tonight, post the details, and let you know what the reasoning behind the found quarries are...
One thing the story about the kites got right is that all attempts to build pyramids and other structures based on the currently accepted theories have tended to fail. Plus, these theories don't explain how it was possible for other societies to build extreme megalithic structures (start looking into it - you will find one account of a solid stone "foundation" stone - of several hundred tons, sitting up on the side of a mountain!)...
Here is a link - look into geopolymers and "agglomerated stone"...
OH! OH!
Here is the book - available in electronic format, out of print now (I found mine only a couple of years ago in the discount section of a local Bookstar, so you might check), but cheap: The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved - plus, the first chapter is online, as well...
Want some more fun? Look into the history and stories behind the Coral Castle - a fascinating site in Florida, that is stranger than fiction, if only because it involves megalithic proportion construction on a massive scale, built by a single man, who not only was in poor health and only weighed 100 pounds, but who also had only a fourth-grade education!!! The site was started in 1920, and completed in 1940. Yet no one knows how he did it...
This is a site I plan to visit later this year (along with Gibtown)...
What you are facing is probably not only ignorance, but a common reaction against a new form/medium that all new "art forms" have experienced in their times. It is akin to the mocking photography received in its early days before it too became "fine art".
Tragically, you will probably end up dead before such recognition takes place, but perhaps you won't, given the rate at which computers (and the graphics they can show) are pervading society at an ever increasing rate.
Computers provide something not many other "fine arts" can - interactivity. Especially in the graphics arena. Simply creating a graphic, sending it to a printer, or photo print system, or projecting it as a still, or similar - is fine, but it doesn't truely allow for what the computer excels at. If you use the machine as a tool, find out how to interact with it differently, so that the creation of the final art, while computer generated, also has that "touch" of the artist (here is an idea - create a system by which you control a CNC milling machine on a block of steel with a computer, through which you interact and guide the system via a funky Theremin-like interface - even the act of creation could be viewed as performance art). Or, allow the audience "viewing" the "work" to cause the work to change over time, given guidelines by you, the artist (hmm - how about this, think of an audience surrounding a large, deep box, which has sand, or some other material in it, a grid of tubes, and a computer controlled pneumatic system, that would cause the sand to "bubble" and such based on audience "sound" and "motion" input - perhaps taken via video feeds).
Artists have done this kind of art before with computers - I don't think you will get very far though with straight graphic designs, but I wouldn't consider it impossible. Perhaps you could back project the images onto a dome, or somehow immerse the audience in the work (the presentation of the art can be as important as the art itself - sometimes the presentation is the art!)...
Maybe I should have become an artist...
Then again, maybe I don't know jack about art, and you should ignore me?
I should've said "in addition to the physical hardware based button".
Truth be told, I would probably never use these software solutions - rarely do I used a software disk eject feature, instead leaning over to hit the "eject" button (floppy, CD-ROM, Zip drive - of course, these last two are software controlled in some way, as you alude to).
However, I can see some people wanting a software disk ejection mechanism, and for those, what I outlined is more intuitive in that regard.
This sounds OK, but still isn't as intuitive. If you have an icon that represents a floppy (or some other removable media) drive, I can think of a few ways to intuitively eject the disk:
1. A "button" on the icon that looks like an eject button - click on it to eject the disk. 2. Drag the icon off the screen (preferably the bottom) to eject. 3. Maybe an "Open Door" type icon, showing "exitability"?
These are just my three suggestions - I am sure there are other ideas...
Admittedly, it is only a theory, but it seems to have more weight to it than using kites...
I have a book (unfortunately, not nearby, so I can't quote the title and such - maybe I will follow up later with a reply) detailing how the blocks used in the construction of Egyptian monuments could have been cast, in situ.
The author of the book is an inventor who developed a type of concrete that looks and "works" like natural stone - in fact, comparing it with the blocks used in the pyramids, he found the compositions nearly identical. He then goes on to find local (to Egypt) sources of the chemicals and materials needed for this special "concrete", then uses those materials to perform experiments to cast blocks from the resulting mix (mixing the material and casting blocks).
To me, this idea seems to have the most weight, especially given the evidence the author presented. This doesn't mean that this had to be the way, but it makes a lot of sense...
In any case, unless this employer is forcing me into slavery, yes, my freedom is perfectly intact -- because I choose whether to participate or not.
No - once you are bound by the leash or by chains, you would become my "bitch" - you would have lost your freedom of choice, because at that point you would be under my control.
Or maybe you didn't understand my "proposal" - when I said leash - I meant a physical leash, made of steel, with a chain anchored to it - perhaps locked to the desk, while I sat nearby, watching your every move. Whoops! You made a mistake - "bitch slap"! Bad sl... I mean... worker!
Do you still maintain that you are free - I hold the key to the lock, after all...
We are not typical consumers - even people who buy boards to do their own upgrades may not know about it if they aren't reading the fine print, or staying up on the issues. Most just want to upgrade to play the latest game or whatnot...
The answer is because competition drives prices down, with a floor at the cost of production. If you have more revenues coming in, then that reduces the overall cost of production, and thus there is more room to reduce prices to undercut your competitors.
This assumes something though - that the consumers are aware of the monitoring aspect and are willing to have it monitor them. If the consumer goes along with all of this, and likes it, and others do as well, then I could see this happening - but I doubt the box is going to say on the side "Spies on all of your habits in exchange for a lower price!". It will do it secretly - and the extra stuff will appear to be "magic" to the oridinary consumer (they tend to be sheep). If they came right out and said what it does, I tend to doubt people would really want it...
Second, yes, there are people who would be willing to have details of their lives reported in exchange for money.
Why not just "sell" themselves into slavery? What you say is true, and is disturbing to think about - that money should be above privacy to some people. Doesn't that disturb you? If it doesn't, it should.
The supermarkets pay you for the ability to track your purchases. Don't want to participate? Fine, then don't. But I have absolutely no problem with being paid for this.
I take it when you mean "paid", you mean "getting lower prices" - the truth of the matter is in how these cards really work. The savings aren't really there if the prices are raised a bit beforehand. Or, if the products you buy aren't the "typical" ones, the ones that are already high-priced to begin with. Furthermore, some stores give you the savings even if you don't use the card, so what is the card really for?
And what's so ironic is that you people like you who talk on and on about freedom are the first people who say that I should NOT have the freedom to decide whether I want to be tracked or not.
Why would you want to be tracked? For a small monetary gain (if any)? I can think of advantages of tracking, but the risks far outweigh the gains, especially since the system would never be open enough for the plebes to watch Big Brother. Who watches the watchers, huh? Sure the hell won't be you or me...
Right -- as long as you are the one controlling what freedoms people have.
Gah! I can't understand why you don't understand that being monitored isn't freedom! Think of it this way:
Let us suppose I am your employer. I give you a choice (to freely make) to place a leash around your neck, so that I may track what you do during the day, while you are in my employ. I tell you in exchange for this, I will give you double your salary. You are saying you would take this deal, freely - yet I control the leash. Are you now more free?
That's simply absurd. While I don't think it was a particularly good idea, there is nothing "unethical" about this at all. If the consumer doesn't want it, then the consumer won't buy it. This is not about some secret society spying on people.
The fact is that the idea is being foisted on a group of people who may be unaware that the system is capable of doing such a thing. If the consumer doesn't know about it, then they are unable to make a choice not to buy it. Your friend had to know this, yet went ahead and pitched the idea to be created anyhow - probably thinking "Yeah, more money for me!", rather than taking the high road (and not disclosing his idea to his employer).
The fact of the matter is that alternate revenue streams would serve to drive down the costs of PCs. If someone wanted the lower end PC that was subsidized by this, then it would be their choice.
We both know this is a lie. Such schemes won't drive the cost of PCs down, but rather keep them the same, and increase profits - it is all about money, and "Damn the citizen!"...
In fact, who are you to decide what people should or shouldn't have?
I am a person who knows that the nature of man is to be free, yet corporations and government continue to build chains to enslave and control. Do you honestly think people want their computers reporting details contained on their hard drives back to some "anonymous authority"? You may say it is only relevant details, but the individual doesn't know this - they can't see source code, and I doubt many know how to use packet sniffer/logging programs to analyze data coming out the backend. Do you honestly think people want another entity looking over their shoulders? If society honestly wants this, then we are far, far down the slope - and we might as well strip to the skin and be bonded in chains, because that is what the situation would be.
Something tells me you don't have too many friends.
The friends I do have are those who oppose corporate and government tyranny and control such as this. The friends I have know about freedom and rights.
Something tells me your friends would backstab you and society for a buck, grinning all the way to the bank...
I would have stood up, told him that he could stick his idea where the sun didn't shine, that you were personally never going to buy a machine with the Award BIOS in it, and would recommend the same to friends, and why, and that as of that moment, your friendship was dissolved, and if he couldn't understand why, then that was reason enough.
Your "friend" has created an idea that essentially allows remote monitoring and control of other citizens' property and habits. This is morally repugnant, and unethical, to say the least. People who dream up such stuff should be stuffed back into the holes from whence they came...
I want to use GNUCash to replace Checkfree's old Windows software - that software is the only thing keeping me using a Windows box - in fact, this is very nearly the _only_ thing I boot my Windows box for (maybe the rarely occasional game).
I have the old Checkfree software (the have since switched to MSMoney as being the default application) for bill payment for several years now. It has everything I need - simple reports, a check register, and bill payment. I have tried to think of a different system to use, but all such systems come down to a double entry style affair (since most involve some web-based bill payment system), which can be fraught with errors during data entry.
I want a system where I can enter all my transactions, electronic bill payments, checks, deposits - and then at the end of the month reconcile my bank statement/balance - like I do with the Checkfree software. GNUCash comes close (it does most everything, except the electronic bill payment)...
My cable modem service is just fine, D/L wise. What I want is the ability to run servers (legally). I want to publish, damnit (on my own machines - sure, Hurricane Electric is a nice hosting company, but I would rather have the DNS pointing to my server, rather than someone else's - and I don't want to pay an arm and a leg for the "privilege")...
The arbitrariness (is that a word?) of it all is most frustrating - the fact is I have had several "Ask/.'s" posted before. The one about Thumbscript I decided to post about immediately after seeing it in the new copy of Nuts and Volts (June 2001) - I had received it the day I posted it. I found it most interesting because of the "terms" the inventor held out regarding licensing for hobbiest use. Very fair, IMO, and unusual. I decided to post it as an article - maybe I picked the wrong topic/area (and if I did, why couldn't they just change it to something more appropriate? Are they editors, or monkeys?)...
I am rather suprised that a story wasn't posted sooner than it was - I just can't figure it out...
To at least attempt to keep this comment somewhat on topic:
Regarding Thumbscript - while it is patented, the developer has been kind enough to allow for hobbiest type licensing, which you have to sign up for, allowing you to develop thumbscript applications that will have no immediate commercial bearing. The license is currently free. Since there is no proprietary hardware involved, and no proprietary software involved, what you are basically licensing is the input method, not anything else. I consider this a fair thing of the inventor to have done.
And now, the rant:
I knew a Thumbscript link would show up sooner or later! I posted a story on it not too long ago, yet it was rejected:
Why? Not too long after (the next fscking day!), I posted a comment on the wearables story about Thumbscript!
This is crazy! While I understand that the posters pick and choose stories based on their daily whims, I tend to wonder what those whims are? I tend to wonder why certain stories are rejected, while others (especially in the Ask Slashdot section) are accepted? Why is it that an Ask/. story that can easily be answered by a query on Google gets accepted (time after time), while a more relevant link to something else gets rejected? Worst of all, the submitter never gets to know why it was rejected, so he can never alter his writing style, or know what to do differently, the next time he posts...
Not to mention exchanging all sorts of other data about the cars - think about it, black boxes, etc could be incorporated to tell who did what when, and how each driver reacted, giving more evidence for the insurance companies and cops to hash over, in addition to any witnesses who (oh so rarely) happened to stop (as a witness for several accidents, I have seen people blatently lie about what happened, especially if they are the ones in the wrong. It pisses me off)...
First off, thank you for posting this - access to such information is a rarity, to say the least. I enjoy reading such old texts, and this is one that is going to keep me coming back, for certain. I oftentimes find humor in such texts - such as:
Notice how in the beginning, it notes that basically the manual isn't an "encyclopedic reference"?
Then you turn to page 13 "Introduction to Computer Operations" - and are given a lesson over the next 40 odd pages on what basically amounts to how to build a damn computer, starting with basic digital circuits and going from there! In fact, the rest of the manual reads the exact same way!
It would be like opening the glovebox in your new car, pulling out the manual, it reading simply, then the rest of the 100 odd pages being a Chilton's or Hayne's!!! Hahahahah!
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, so this is out of context...
correct me if I'm wrong
Gladly...
Regarding Babbage - first off, the concepts underlying the Difference Engine came to Babbage in 1812 (and, since Babbage was born in 1792 - that would make him 19 or 20 years old at the time!), as he was thinking on logarithms and the inacuracies that could occur during their calculation. He didn't follow up on his ideas until 1819, at which point he began building a small Difference Engine, finishing it in 1822. In 1823 he applied for and got a grant to build a larger engine (which was not completed). The Difference Engine, however, was more a calculator, and not a computer. The later Analytical Engine (began in 1833 - also not completed) was a true programmable device. More information can be found here and here...
Ada Lovelace, however - didn't invent the loom you refer to - that goes to Joseph Marie Jacquard, who invented the Jacquard Loom in 1802 - which utilised a series of punched cards to control warp threads on each pass of the weft thread. Ada obviously knew quite a bit about these looms (as did Babbage, who conceived of using punch cards for the control of Analytical Engine, presumably after seeing such a loom in action - indeed, the names he settled upon for what we today call the CPU (Mill) and memory (the Store), happen to be derived from terms used in the weaving industry at the time!), and so wrote in her Sketch of the Analytical Engine in 1842:
The distinctive characteristic of the Analytical Engine, and that which has rendered it possible to endow mechanism with such extensive faculties as bid fair to make this engine the executive right-hand of abstract algebra, is the introduction into it of the principle which Jacquard devised for regulating, by means of punched cards, the most complicated patterns in the fabrication of brocaded stuffs. It is in this that the distinction between the two engines lies. Nothing of the sort exists in the Difference Engine. We may say most aptly, that the Analytical Engine weaves algebraical patterns just as the Jacquard-loom weaves flowers and leaves.
Indeed - even she understood the value of the Analytical Engine over that of the Difference Engine - its programmability (weavability?)!
I could indeed go on - you neglect to mention Konrad Zuse, as well as the contribution of Atanasoff and Berry (the ABC) for the first electronic stored program computer.
But I will stop here...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
In this "robot".
/. for posting this story.
In
Why?
This has to be the lamest robot "story" on the planet. Similar "security" robots have been built by companies and individuals for years. I remember several companies in the 80's doing this, when robots were the "thing" of the "future".
GPS? Why GPS? A white or black line (or even one done in a flourescent "invisible" paint or something) would be much cheaper for navigation. In a new building, a buried wire under the floor or carpet could be used. Coded tags at doors could further aid navigation (UPC or IR "active" tags).
Nomadic Technologies used to sell research robots with this kind of use in mind (sadly, I just found that they stopped production).
IRobot has a research robot that seems ideal for this as well.
Of course, nothing would beat Odetic's Odex-1 for the "scare" factor in security - too bad this 80's robot never went into production...
Now, homebrew bots - that is where the action is:
Karl Williams seems to have many projects of the type that would make interesting security platforms - or at least something to build off of (mount the vortex cannon or coil gun onto the home drone - yikes!).
This machine might even be better for security - simply because it could be smaller and faster for such a job.
The truth is that there are a lot of homebrew and commercial robots that can easily do what this robot does - probably at a fraction of the cost (actually, some of the commercial bots are quite expensive). There were many robots built in the 80's that were capable as well.
That is the article I want to see. Somehow I was hoping for a two legged chicken walker (not ED-209 sized, but something) patrolling the halls, maybe packing low powered pea shooters for "defense" (actually, one homebrewer managed to build such a robot with a "pea-shooter"-style, multi barrel "gun" - it couldn't hurt you, but it could knock over empty pop cans - I wish I had a link to it - probably do, but it is buried in my link list somewhere deep).
Oh well...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
And one I might be modded down for, if only for being "buzzword compliant":
Use a config file, of course - but use XML as the format for that config file.
The main reason is for human readability, as long as you make your node names, etc - sufficiently readable. Furthermore, you could include nodes that would allow for user defined settings (if that is the reason that environment variables were being used) - these nodes could specify where to look for the user's XML config file (say, in $HOME/appname/userconfig.xml) - which the user could edit easily - if the config file is absent (or the path doesn't exist, etc) - the parser could supply default values (perhaps picked out from the main config file - which the user couldn't edit).
Using XML might make things more difficult (especially if you have to write your own parser) - but if you are writing from the ground up anyhow, you might as well set up to use XML, because your app will probably need it (intercommunication between different app sections - especially if you are black boxing everything to make parts very reusable. Also if you are using an XML format that is well defined, you can easily create back ends for any data sharing for third party apps that might be needed).
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Perhaps - a lot of my news does come from /. - a bit from k5 (which I didn't read anything about this on, either). Sometimes I read "norm" sites (cnn, msnbc, etc), though not that often. Sometimes I even get the paper.
I wonder why we are only really hearing about it now - instead of back since 1999? Why didn't they send out these privacy statements every month for a year? Why wasn't there a big cry about it? Why are people so damn apathetic.
I should have read at least one of the statements - true. I kept them all - thinking maybe I had at least a few months - and not just two weeks - to act. I have a busy life - and mailing letters just isn't a big part, unless I am really fired up about things.
After I made this post, I called the various institutions, and talked to them about it, and opted out at all of them. I had opted out at equifax about a week ago.
Finally, I object to your name calling: I am not ignorant (though I plead the 5th on the lazy portion - let's just say I take my time) - I recognized that when I got the statement, I needed to do it, which is why I kept all of them. I guess the laziness portion got the better of me - but in the end, as I noted, I did it - under the deadline as well.
And for the record, I do write my congressman (ok, maybe I email them) when I see fit to do so (and before you moan about a letter being better than an email, which I concede at this point most likely is true - it is only because our congresscritters are so ass-backward when it comes to tech that it is like this - information, ideas, and opinions are worthy regardless of the medium of expression - I wish they could get that through their skulls - some have, most haven't)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Re: The July Deadline
Is this the deadline for them to contact you (I later called all the financial institutions about opting out soon after I posted, and some iterated the same thing), or is it the deadline by which they have to contact you and for you to opt out of old and new information from being shared - that is, if you opt out after the first, old info is fair game...?
I don't blame you for not doing or posting anything - most likely there wasn't a forum, or if you did write an article, it probably wouldn't be posted.
What I do wonder is given the number of people at where you work that opted out, and that a likely amount did the same at other similar employers - why didn't this message get out in a huge way to everyone and thier mother - it is frustrating to see, feel, and wonder about the apathy in American society today...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Whip out your wallet or purse, pull out any credit cards, bank cards, credit union cards, etc - and look on the back - most (if not all) will have a phone number for customer service - call it!
I just did this - it took a little time, but most of the time I didn't wait more than 5 minutes. I also called the institutions I worked with for auto loans, even the one I had paid off a couple of years back.
Suprising thing I learned while on the phone? Most of the customer service people didn't even know what I was talking about until I explained it - then they understood what I wanted - many reffered to it as another thing, or had a message stating their policy "to not share information" but that "policy could change at any time" - with these, I explicitly got a representative on the line and told them I wanted it noted in my account that I was "opting out" - and waited on the line until they did it. Out of all the institutions I called, only one knew what I wanted instantly (Retailers National Bank - Target and Mervyns cards). Even my bank was coy about it!
Many kept telling me "oh, we never share private info, blah, blah" - but I told them I wanted it noted in my account.
I also asked them, as consumers, if they had opted out as well (education, you see) - most didn't, wondering why it was a bad thing...
For the auto loans, I looked up the numbers on the web to call. I am not sure if they take these calls seriously, but it would be impossible to get letters out to all of these companies in under the deadline of July 1st (short of FedEx'ing overnight the letters, and even then, I think it is too late) - I might still send out the Nader letter - I like it!
Anyhow, that is what I did - I had or could get the phone numbers easily, and it took only a little time. I think it is near-criminal that we have to opt-out, when it should be an opt-in only, instead.
I hate what America has become - I HATE IT!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Today's computers are already silent! I remember my first job, they didn't have a place to put me, so I got stuck in the computer room. Taught me how to deal with real noise:
Two Genicom printers - a 4440 line printer and a 3820 open carriage (those were fun when others were running reports)
A large RS6000 box
An old Prime Minicomputer with open reel 9-track vacuum tape-drive, and power supply with large loud fans
Later, they gave me an office, but stuck the 4440 in there with me...
Everything else was silent - we used Wyse terminals for everything...
Today's machines can't be compared - in fact, I miss the drone of that power supply...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I am curious about something...
You knew about this several months ago. And I presume, opted out with the rest of your collegues.
Most people have learned about it today (surprise, surprise), when they can do little about it.
I started getting those "privacy opt-out" letters a couple of weeks ago - figuring I would get around to them when I had to the time to really do it. At the time I was getting them, I wondered "Why now?" - wondering what law got passed that was making them send them out, and why I didn't hear anything about it on Slashdot...?
The thing that disturbs me is that this law actually got passed years ago, and only now - when it is really too late to do anything (and today was the first I heard about that you had to opt-out before July 1st! I would gladly call everywhere I could - I have notified Equifax, though - if I had the stuff in front of me!). Why didn't we know about this long ago?
Why didn't you write up an article about what your company was doing, and the effects - and get the word out?
Why has it taken this long?
I don't mean to rant at you - this is just VERY frustrating...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
You know...
All they should have to do is mount the panel, laid back at a 30-45 degree angle (may be more or less depending on lattitude of the landing site), onto a servo motor of some sort, so that the panel can rotate around a vertical axis (like a turntable). Then instead of a light sensor, use the panel itself! The voltage will vary according to the amount of light falling on the panel. Rotate the servo until the panel registers the highest voltage - run it from stop-to-stop, 270-360 degrees (ie, you need a servo with built-in stops, so that the wiring harness doesn't get tangled/twisted - and I wouldn't use some kind of commutator system on such a critical item for an interplanetary mission). Heck, if you wanted to be real cheap, just mount the panel, and drive the robot until it is angled properly (one less moving part to break). At any rate, you would rotate it until you found the maximum light value, set it at that, determine your heading, then you would know which direction to rotate the servo as the voltage drops.
Also, even if it is a reflection or artificial light (and if it is the latter on the surface of Mars, you may have bigger problems!), as long as it is giving enough voltage - it don't matter...!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
First off, a link:
Geopolymers
Also, look into "agglomerated stone"...
The man who (re?)discovered this technique, was one Prof. Joseph Davidovits.
Here is his book (unfortunately, it is out of print. I found my copy only a couple of years ago in the discount section of a local Bookstar, so you might check), which is available in PDF format (for the price of 9 euros, which is reasonable):
The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved
The first chapter is available for free online as well - so check that out...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
This is talked about in the book, IIRC. I don't remember off hand what the reasoning was, but I do remember it being sound and well thought out. I will have to find the book tonight, post the details, and let you know what the reasoning behind the found quarries are...
One thing the story about the kites got right is that all attempts to build pyramids and other structures based on the currently accepted theories have tended to fail. Plus, these theories don't explain how it was possible for other societies to build extreme megalithic structures (start looking into it - you will find one account of a solid stone "foundation" stone - of several hundred tons, sitting up on the side of a mountain!)...
Here is a link - look into geopolymers and "agglomerated stone"...
OH! OH!
Here is the book - available in electronic format, out of print now (I found mine only a couple of years ago in the discount section of a local Bookstar, so you might check), but cheap: The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved - plus, the first chapter is online, as well...
Want some more fun? Look into the history and stories behind the Coral Castle - a fascinating site in Florida, that is stranger than fiction, if only because it involves megalithic proportion construction on a massive scale, built by a single man, who not only was in poor health and only weighed 100 pounds, but who also had only a fourth-grade education!!! The site was started in 1920, and completed in 1940. Yet no one knows how he did it...
This is a site I plan to visit later this year (along with Gibtown)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
What you are facing is probably not only ignorance, but a common reaction against a new form/medium that all new "art forms" have experienced in their times. It is akin to the mocking photography received in its early days before it too became "fine art".
Tragically, you will probably end up dead before such recognition takes place, but perhaps you won't, given the rate at which computers (and the graphics they can show) are pervading society at an ever increasing rate.
Computers provide something not many other "fine arts" can - interactivity. Especially in the graphics arena. Simply creating a graphic, sending it to a printer, or photo print system, or projecting it as a still, or similar - is fine, but it doesn't truely allow for what the computer excels at. If you use the machine as a tool, find out how to interact with it differently, so that the creation of the final art, while computer generated, also has that "touch" of the artist (here is an idea - create a system by which you control a CNC milling machine on a block of steel with a computer, through which you interact and guide the system via a funky Theremin-like interface - even the act of creation could be viewed as performance art). Or, allow the audience "viewing" the "work" to cause the work to change over time, given guidelines by you, the artist (hmm - how about this, think of an audience surrounding a large, deep box, which has sand, or some other material in it, a grid of tubes, and a computer controlled pneumatic system, that would cause the sand to "bubble" and such based on audience "sound" and "motion" input - perhaps taken via video feeds).
Artists have done this kind of art before with computers - I don't think you will get very far though with straight graphic designs, but I wouldn't consider it impossible. Perhaps you could back project the images onto a dome, or somehow immerse the audience in the work (the presentation of the art can be as important as the art itself - sometimes the presentation is the art!)...
Maybe I should have become an artist...
Then again, maybe I don't know jack about art, and you should ignore me?
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I should've said "in addition to the physical hardware based button".
Truth be told, I would probably never use these software solutions - rarely do I used a software disk eject feature, instead leaning over to hit the "eject" button (floppy, CD-ROM, Zip drive - of course, these last two are software controlled in some way, as you alude to).
However, I can see some people wanting a software disk ejection mechanism, and for those, what I outlined is more intuitive in that regard.
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
This sounds OK, but still isn't as intuitive. If you have an icon that represents a floppy (or some other removable media) drive, I can think of a few ways to intuitively eject the disk:
1. A "button" on the icon that looks like an eject button - click on it to eject the disk.
2. Drag the icon off the screen (preferably the bottom) to eject.
3. Maybe an "Open Door" type icon, showing "exitability"?
These are just my three suggestions - I am sure there are other ideas...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Admittedly, it is only a theory, but it seems to have more weight to it than using kites...
I have a book (unfortunately, not nearby, so I can't quote the title and such - maybe I will follow up later with a reply) detailing how the blocks used in the construction of Egyptian monuments could have been cast, in situ.
The author of the book is an inventor who developed a type of concrete that looks and "works" like natural stone - in fact, comparing it with the blocks used in the pyramids, he found the compositions nearly identical. He then goes on to find local (to Egypt) sources of the chemicals and materials needed for this special "concrete", then uses those materials to perform experiments to cast blocks from the resulting mix (mixing the material and casting blocks).
To me, this idea seems to have the most weight, especially given the evidence the author presented. This doesn't mean that this had to be the way, but it makes a lot of sense...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
So you are for indentured servitude?
In any case, unless this employer is forcing me into slavery, yes, my freedom is perfectly intact -- because I choose whether to participate or not.
No - once you are bound by the leash or by chains, you would become my "bitch" - you would have lost your freedom of choice, because at that point you would be under my control.
Or maybe you didn't understand my "proposal" - when I said leash - I meant a physical leash, made of steel, with a chain anchored to it - perhaps locked to the desk, while I sat nearby, watching your every move. Whoops! You made a mistake - "bitch slap"! Bad sl... I mean... worker!
Do you still maintain that you are free - I hold the key to the lock, after all...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Funny how we all know about it.
We are not typical consumers - even people who buy boards to do their own upgrades may not know about it if they aren't reading the fine print, or staying up on the issues. Most just want to upgrade to play the latest game or whatnot...
The answer is because competition drives prices down, with a floor at the cost of production. If you have more revenues coming in, then that reduces the overall cost of production, and thus there is more room to reduce prices to undercut your competitors.
This assumes something though - that the consumers are aware of the monitoring aspect and are willing to have it monitor them. If the consumer goes along with all of this, and likes it, and others do as well, then I could see this happening - but I doubt the box is going to say on the side "Spies on all of your habits in exchange for a lower price!". It will do it secretly - and the extra stuff will appear to be "magic" to the oridinary consumer (they tend to be sheep). If they came right out and said what it does, I tend to doubt people would really want it...
Second, yes, there are people who would be willing to have details of their lives reported in exchange for money.
Why not just "sell" themselves into slavery? What you say is true, and is disturbing to think about - that money should be above privacy to some people. Doesn't that disturb you? If it doesn't, it should.
The supermarkets pay you for the ability to track your purchases. Don't want to participate? Fine, then don't. But I have absolutely no problem with being paid for this.
I take it when you mean "paid", you mean "getting lower prices" - the truth of the matter is in how these cards really work. The savings aren't really there if the prices are raised a bit beforehand. Or, if the products you buy aren't the "typical" ones, the ones that are already high-priced to begin with. Furthermore, some stores give you the savings even if you don't use the card, so what is the card really for?
And what's so ironic is that you people like you who talk on and on about freedom are the first people who say that I should NOT have the freedom to decide whether I want to be tracked or not.
Why would you want to be tracked? For a small monetary gain (if any)? I can think of advantages of tracking, but the risks far outweigh the gains, especially since the system would never be open enough for the plebes to watch Big Brother. Who watches the watchers, huh? Sure the hell won't be you or me...
Right -- as long as you are the one controlling what freedoms people have.
Gah! I can't understand why you don't understand that being monitored isn't freedom! Think of it this way:
Let us suppose I am your employer. I give you a choice (to freely make) to place a leash around your neck, so that I may track what you do during the day, while you are in my employ. I tell you in exchange for this, I will give you double your salary. You are saying you would take this deal, freely - yet I control the leash. Are you now more free?
Somehow, you argue that you are...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
That's simply absurd. While I don't think it was a particularly good idea, there is nothing "unethical" about this at all. If the consumer doesn't want it, then the consumer won't buy it. This is not about some secret society spying on people.
The fact is that the idea is being foisted on a group of people who may be unaware that the system is capable of doing such a thing. If the consumer doesn't know about it, then they are unable to make a choice not to buy it. Your friend had to know this, yet went ahead and pitched the idea to be created anyhow - probably thinking "Yeah, more money for me!", rather than taking the high road (and not disclosing his idea to his employer).
The fact of the matter is that alternate revenue streams would serve to drive down the costs of PCs. If someone wanted the lower end PC that was subsidized by this, then it would be their choice.
We both know this is a lie. Such schemes won't drive the cost of PCs down, but rather keep them the same, and increase profits - it is all about money, and "Damn the citizen!"...
In fact, who are you to decide what people should or shouldn't have?
I am a person who knows that the nature of man is to be free, yet corporations and government continue to build chains to enslave and control. Do you honestly think people want their computers reporting details contained on their hard drives back to some "anonymous authority"? You may say it is only relevant details, but the individual doesn't know this - they can't see source code, and I doubt many know how to use packet sniffer/logging programs to analyze data coming out the backend. Do you honestly think people want another entity looking over their shoulders? If society honestly wants this, then we are far, far down the slope - and we might as well strip to the skin and be bonded in chains, because that is what the situation would be.
Something tells me you don't have too many friends.
The friends I do have are those who oppose corporate and government tyranny and control such as this. The friends I have know about freedom and rights.
Something tells me your friends would backstab you and society for a buck, grinning all the way to the bank...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Instead of grinning...
I would have stood up, told him that he could stick his idea where the sun didn't shine, that you were personally never going to buy a machine with the Award BIOS in it, and would recommend the same to friends, and why, and that as of that moment, your friendship was dissolved, and if he couldn't understand why, then that was reason enough.
Your "friend" has created an idea that essentially allows remote monitoring and control of other citizens' property and habits. This is morally repugnant, and unethical, to say the least. People who dream up such stuff should be stuffed back into the holes from whence they came...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I want to use GNUCash to replace Checkfree's old Windows software - that software is the only thing keeping me using a Windows box - in fact, this is very nearly the _only_ thing I boot my Windows box for (maybe the rarely occasional game).
I have the old Checkfree software (the have since switched to MSMoney as being the default application) for bill payment for several years now. It has everything I need - simple reports, a check register, and bill payment. I have tried to think of a different system to use, but all such systems come down to a double entry style affair (since most involve some web-based bill payment system), which can be fraught with errors during data entry.
I want a system where I can enter all my transactions, electronic bill payments, checks, deposits - and then at the end of the month reconcile my bank statement/balance - like I do with the Checkfree software. GNUCash comes close (it does most everything, except the electronic bill payment)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
My cable modem service is just fine, D/L wise. What I want is the ability to run servers (legally). I want to publish, damnit (on my own machines - sure, Hurricane Electric is a nice hosting company, but I would rather have the DNS pointing to my server, rather than someone else's - and I don't want to pay an arm and a leg for the "privilege")...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
The arbitrariness (is that a word?) of it all is most frustrating - the fact is I have had several "Ask /.'s" posted before. The one about Thumbscript I decided to post about immediately after seeing it in the new copy of Nuts and Volts (June 2001) - I had received it the day I posted it. I found it most interesting because of the "terms" the inventor held out regarding licensing for hobbiest use. Very fair, IMO, and unusual. I decided to post it as an article - maybe I picked the wrong topic/area (and if I did, why couldn't they just change it to something more appropriate? Are they editors, or monkeys?)...
I am rather suprised that a story wasn't posted sooner than it was - I just can't figure it out...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
To at least attempt to keep this comment somewhat on topic:
/. story that can easily be answered by a query on Google gets accepted (time after time), while a more relevant link to something else gets rejected? Worst of all, the submitter never gets to know why it was rejected, so he can never alter his writing style, or know what to do differently, the next time he posts...
Regarding Thumbscript - while it is patented, the developer has been kind enough to allow for hobbiest type licensing, which you have to sign up for, allowing you to develop thumbscript applications that will have no immediate commercial bearing. The license is currently free. Since there is no proprietary hardware involved, and no proprietary software involved, what you are basically licensing is the input method, not anything else. I consider this a fair thing of the inventor to have done.
And now, the rant:
I knew a Thumbscript link would show up sooner or later! I posted a story on it not too long ago, yet it was rejected:
2001-06-10 06:14:09 Graffiti Alternative? (developers,pilot) (rejected)
Why? Not too long after (the next fscking day!), I posted a comment on the wearables story about Thumbscript!
This is crazy! While I understand that the posters pick and choose stories based on their daily whims, I tend to wonder what those whims are? I tend to wonder why certain stories are rejected, while others (especially in the Ask Slashdot section) are accepted? Why is it that an Ask
It is frustrating to say the least...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Not to mention exchanging all sorts of other data about the cars - think about it, black boxes, etc could be incorporated to tell who did what when, and how each driver reacted, giving more evidence for the insurance companies and cops to hash over, in addition to any witnesses who (oh so rarely) happened to stop (as a witness for several accidents, I have seen people blatently lie about what happened, especially if they are the ones in the wrong. It pisses me off)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
First off, thank you for posting this - access to such information is a rarity, to say the least. I enjoy reading such old texts, and this is one that is going to keep me coming back, for certain. I oftentimes find humor in such texts - such as:
Notice how in the beginning, it notes that basically the manual isn't an "encyclopedic reference"?
Then you turn to page 13 "Introduction to Computer Operations" - and are given a lesson over the next 40 odd pages on what basically amounts to how to build a damn computer, starting with basic digital circuits and going from there! In fact, the rest of the manual reads the exact same way!
It would be like opening the glovebox in your new car, pulling out the manual, it reading simply, then the rest of the 100 odd pages being a Chilton's or Hayne's!!! Hahahahah!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!