The image this story creates is amusing, to say the least. I find myself wanting to get about a gross of Superballs caught in this contraption, and see where they all end up...
Ok... Fair warning, fellow slashdot readers. This is a rant. I make no bones about it. If that's not the kind of thing you want to read, then it's probably best just to move on.
I know exactly why they called it the 'Dreamliner.' Because it's probably just the kind of aircraft that the current crop of Boeing execs dream about in terms of continuing to outsource design and subassembly manufacturing, thus worsening the unemployment rate in the Puget Sound region even further.
The 7E7 will be a Great Thing, yes... Assuming that you want to live in Russia, China, Japan, Chile, or one of the other locations where Boeing has "Global Partners" (spit!)
Don't believe me? I was with Boeing for six years before being laid off. In that time, I saw several "Buy/Build" charts for the current crop of aircraft, like the 737, 757, and others. It was outright scary to see how many parts of those planes were designed or built overseas, and shipped in for final assembly here (at least 30% by my estimate).
Don't even get me started on the horror stories I was hearing from friends on the assembly line, shortly before I left, about out-of-tolerance parts causing more assembly delays and problems than had been seen in the last five years.
I think, given the current corporate mindset of short-term gain over long-term survival, that it's only going to get worse. Yes, I could be way wrong, and I will be the first to admit that I'm more than a little biased, thanks to seeing loads of my would-be colleagues in all levels of engineering get the boot (myself as well).
However, I might be less bitter if the company hadn't (a), moved their corporate HQ to Chicago for no good reason that I (or a lot of other folk) could see; (b), Sent most of the engineering services to Russia; (c), Hung out the final-assembly location of the 7E7 like a carrot on a stick, and invited various states to bid on it like some third-rate auction prize.
Boeing has, IMO, long since forgotten or destroyed the values that made it the great company it once was. They've been in a tailspin ever since that disaster of a merger with McDonnel-Douglas, and I would be very much surprised if there were anything other than the defense & space side left in business ten years from now (if that long).
Vent completed. I feel a bit better now.
Everything You Know Is Wrong!!!
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
All the current statements about why 42V was chosen are blatantly blah. Why? It should be obvious to the galaxy's various hitch-hikers.
'42' is still the Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. That includes vehicular electrical systems. I'm just surprised nobody realized it earlier.
In my six years at Boeing (and I'm told that, given the layoffs, I did well to last that long), I was fortunate enough to be able to 'fly' the full-motion 747 sim, as well as the fixed-base 737 NextGen.
Although the full-motion is definitely what I'd class as a "wild ride" in terms of convincing one's senses (ever try to land a 747 on only two engines?), I found that (much to my surprise) the fixed-base sims can produce many of the same sensations, simply by the projected movement on the window displays.
In other words: When I went into a climb in the fixed-base unit, it still felt like I was tilting up despite the fact that there were no motion components to move the cab around. Same thing when I went into a turn. I caught myself leaning into it, and feeling like it was really happening, just as I did during my private pilot training.
While fixed-base may not provide the full experience, it most definitely provides enough to effectively fool the senses if it's done right. And it sounds like this fellow did it right.
Remind the kids that they need to look at what device, system, or application they'll be writing code for before they even think of sitting down at the code editor. Make sure they know that PCs and Windows are NOT the Answer to Everything, and work accordingly.
One of the things I hated most about the (required for my A.A.S. degree) programming course I took at the local community college was its focus on games. I have ZERO use for game coding in an electronics environment.
Said course would have been far more valuable to me if they had chosen a specific application pertinent to the Electronics Technology major I was carrying (perhaps an introduction to programming the PIC microcontrollers, or 68xxx assembler), and coded for that.
To delve a little further into that line of thought: You don't need Visual Basic or Visual C++ to code a PIC to be, say, an electronic lock or programmable frequency divider. What you do need is a stable development platform, a good feel for simple BASIC, and some idea of how the software you're writing is going to interact with the hardware involved.
On the other wing, you don't usually (that I know of) need to delve into the details of assembly language if you're going to be writing (here we go) a game, or a spreadsheet app, or some similar program that is intended mainly to interact with the user as opposed to running a dedicated function in an embedded device.
No one can be an expert in all programming forms and languages. There's just too much Out There. Help new students to make intelligent choices about what, exactly, they're trying to code for, teach them good ground rules about coding in general, and the rest should follow on its own.
So... What countermeasures...?
on
Walmart to Push RFID
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Ok. Here's my $0.02 worth. I have no issue whatsoever with these things being used in the store where the merchandise is purchased. In that respect, they're no different from electronic anti-theft tags.
I have a BIG problem with leaving the tags active and able to respond outside of said store environment. So, with that in mind (and maybe this should be turned into an 'Ask Slashdot' question):
What countermeasures are available to kill the tags, but not harm the item they're attached to, once you leave the store environment? Some ideas that come immediately to my mind are:
(1) Stuff your purchase into a microwave oven for a few seconds. That should effectively fry the tag. Unfortunately, this may not be practical for clothing containing metal buttons, zippers, or snaps.
(2) Build or buy a small EMP device designed expressly to destroy the tag's functionality. Could have varying degrees of difficulty, depending on one's skill with electronics, or the availability of such devices at the commercial level.
The quality of ANY 'online' education is directly related to how well the subject material can be adapted to said online environment.
If the course involves nothing but writing/reading, or writing computer code, then yes; it should be able to adapt fairly well to being taught online.
It would, on the other wing, be extremely difficult (if not impractical) to teach, say, courses in electronics over the 'net. This is simply because really -learning- electronics, chemistry, or any of the other physical sciences requires a hands-on lab environment with specialized equipment.
Until we develop 'holodeck' technology, I don't see how it would be possible to effectively teach such courses online. However, if someone knows of a system that can teach good hands-on electronic assembly skills, or techniques of component-level troubleshooting, I would love to hear about it.;-)
So, in summary; it sounds to me like the course you're taking, although adaptable to an online environment, is indeed suffering from incompetence or laziness at the teaching level. I would not only complain to the school involved, I would also get in touch with your local state board of education, and tell them what's going on. At the very least, they may be able to start some sort of investigation.
Good luck.
Re:Mod parent down... (-1, absolutely ridiculous)
on
The Exim SMTP Mail Server
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Ralsky, is that you?
Come to think of it, I don't much care which spammer you are. You're a bottom-feeding thief, without even the courage to post as anything other than an AC, and your crap will never be welcome at any servers I'm in charge of. The sooner you're exposed for what you are, and thrown off the Internet permanently, the better.
Please accept my most cordial invitation to take your parasitical, thieving, spam operation and implode at your earliest convenience.
"The day the Internet died. Sure, it will be more "efficient" then. No spam. But it won't be free..."
Actually, to my mind, the original Internet "died" when the NSF's controlling influence went away in the mid-90's, taking their prohibition against commercial traffic with it.
I think if they, or the IETF, had simply thought ahead about the likely consequences of opening 'net access to the "consumer" arena, to people who probably didn't even know what the term 'Internet' meant, they would have thought twice about simply throwing the barn doors wide open.
I've always believed that there should have been some sort of multi-tier licensing system -- one level for end users, another for those who run servers, perhaps another for ISPs -- for ANYone who wanted 'net access.
If that kind of basic screening had been implemented from the word 'Go,' if for no other reason than to provide a path of accountability for one's own online actions, I don't think spam would be anywhere near the nightmare it is today.
User 'falsification' continued:
"Don't cry about it. It happens to all technology. Those who need anonymous communications will just move to something else. Maybe web-based discussion, for example. Just no more truly private, truly anonymous, or truly free e-mail..."
If spam keeps up at its current rate, E-mail will be rendered useless in any case. It's damn near that point now.
As for anonymizing, it's easy enough to encrypt your E-mail. PGP and GNU-PG still work, no matter who's using them. The only thing that shows up in the clear under such a system is your E-addy, that of the recipient, the datestamp, and maybe the subject line. That info has, to the best of my knowledge, never been anonymous.
As for the 'net being "free," in the sense of freedom, remember that along with freedom comes responsibility; to yourself, to others around you, and to your environment. One who is truly responsible will measure, in their own mind, how their actions affect those around them, and will act accordingly.
Those who send spam, no matter if it's some college student floating a get-rich-quick chain letter or a (supposedly) reputable company like Microsoft or Network Associates (yes, both of them do spam), have clearly demonstrated that they are not responsible because they do not care. They don't care how their abusive behavior affects the rest of the 'net, and they don't care about the private property (servers, routers, bandwidth pipes) of others.
They care only about one thing; making as many $$ as they can in the shortest time possible, often by ANY means.
I still believe that spam is more a social problem than a technological one. If it were purely technological, it would have shown up prior to the Internet's barn doors being thrown wide open to anyone with a credit card and a cheap computer.
Because of this belief, I question whether the IETF's proposed changes, as strong as they have the potential to be, are really going to help. Personally, I'm not holding my breath.
I will, however, do what it takes to keep my servers connected and running. If that means going along with changes that I don't think, in the long run, are going to make much difference, then so be it.
Put another way: I would far rather see spam blown out of existence by the proposed authentication mechanisms, even if it means the loss of anonymity or "freedom," than see E-mail itself go down in flames because a bunch of greedy and irresponsible people (and I use the term loosely in referring to spammers) couldn't keep themselves under control.
Keep the peace(es).
Re:Dang it, there goes my stomach lining...
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Opt-out is a cop-out. Why should ANYone ever be required to opt-out of any E-mail list that they never opted into in the first place?
You, like many others (thieving parasites like Scelson included), are still overlooking one critical fact:
The Internet is not now, nor has it ever been, a truly "public" resource. Nobody in the government pays me any subsidy to operate my servers, and I don't know of any ISPs in the U.S. that are receiving any similar subsidies.
I pay, out of my own pocket, for the electricity and bandwidth that my servers require to work as they do, just as anyone from a mom-n'-pop ISP to a giant like Earthlink pays for the electricity and bandwidth to run theirs.
In each case, whether you're a single individual or a multinational conglomerate, or anywhere in between, your servers are YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY, along with the mailboxes on them. You might rent them to others, as ISPs do, but the only guarantee that ANYone has in terms of sending and receiving mail is whatever guarantees are in the contract that gets signed between an Internet provider and their customers.
When spammers spam, they're violating private property rights. Period. When someone spams me, or one of my other users, they're STEALING from me. When someone spams AOL, they're stealing from AOL and its users. When someone spams ANYone with a 'net-connected system, it is theft of resources. Period.
I will do whatever it takes to protect my systems from such intrusions. If that means risking the loss or delay of some legitimate E-mail, so be it.
Apparently, AOL is taking a similar path. That's fine. They have absolute and final authority over their own equipment. Scelson can scream "censorship!" all he wants, but he still has no right to mail to someone else's network if they don't want to receive his (or any other spammer's) crap.
You must not have been paying attention back in May of 2000, when GPS's 'Selective Availability' was permanently turned off. As of midnight on May 1, 2000, all GPS units, civilian or military, became accurate to within 15 meters.
On the subject of GPS accuracy, the development to be watching at the moment is the FAA's WAAS project. Typical GPS accuracy using WAAS correction data will be less than 3 meters. The kicker is that your receiver must be WAAS-enabled in order to use the system. WAAS will eventually replace the Coast Guard's current system of DGPS beacon stations.
FWIW: The WAAS network must already be at least partly functional, at least in the Puget Sound region. I just upgraded our mobile receiver to a WAAS-enabled engine (the Garmin GPS-15), and I noticed an immediate improvement.
Ralsky has no one to blame but himself. If he didn't make a career out of abusing other people's private property, none of the crap that's happening to him would ever have happened.
No matter if it's 'right' or 'wrong' to take someone's personal info and feed it to catalog houses, it still comes back to one simple idea; You Reap What You Sow, or 'Do Unto Others,' etc. Ralsky has been heaping abuse on other people's in-boxes, servers, etc. for years, and now he's reaping the fruits of his labors. If they're inedible, it's his own fault.
...that an ex-cop, who should certainly know the difference between 'Right' and 'Wrong,' would not see spamming for the ongoing theft of bandwidth and resources that it truly is. He got out of it because of all the hate mail and such that he was getting, not because it was just plain unethical.
I still think the best possible defense against spam is to be self-hosted, server-wise. I would also be interested to know how often this guy had to change ISPs thanks to being (rightfully) shut down for abuse of resources.
Then again, if he were hosted on AT&T/Comcast, that might never have happened. AT&T likes spammer money too much.
Remember, folks; There's always the used/surplus market.
Computers are plentiful, and dirt cheap, especially if you don't need the latest/fastest/flavor-of-the-week machine (and there are darn few applications that really do -- video editing comes immediately to mind).
...to something that's been going on since there have been "tinkerers" and "the public."
There have always been, and always will be, Those who Know (how to tinker) and Those who Do Not Know (and, in many cases, don't seem to want to know) how to work with computer innards, or solder, or build electronic kits, or even design their own stuff. It's all different levels of the same bar.
An example; Joe and Jane Consumer are thrilled to death about being able to send E-mail with pictures of the kids to granny, but they don't have Clue One about the processes involved, nor do they want one. They're under the belief that any such details are far too messy or complex for their comprehension, even though Joe may have a Ph.d in Astrophysics and Jane in Mathematics.
Belief is a very powerful thing. Far more so than people realize. If you truly believe, in mind and spirit, that something is too tough or too complex for you to learn or do, you will not be able to learn or do it, no matter how hard you try, until you completely shed the belief that is holding you back. That's not easy to do either, because a belief that takes root is just as hard to get rid of as a bad infestation of weeds.
As another example, there are those who have at least a basic understanding of computers and networks (I'm talking the SysAdmins and network techs of the world), but that don't have Clue One about the most basic electrical or electronic principles, or how the very hardware they maintain is put together. Mention Ohm's Law to such people, and you would likely get as blank a stare as if you'd said "The Internet uses TCP/IP protocols" to Joe and Jane. These same admins and techs are just as likely to burn themselves with a soldering iron as they would be to use it right.
There's another tier. Those who take electronics seriously enough to really learn how to work with it, or that know enough about construction practices to be able to design and build a useful circuit, or modify something else to suit their purposes. And there are tiers above that, for those that are (or were, in times past) pioneers in the sciences (Tesla, Marconi, Bell, etc.)
My point is simple; It all boils down to how much you choose to teach yourself about the world we share, and the tools we use in it. The more you choose to learn, the easier a time you'll have working with those same tools. A high IQ, a dexterous touch, or other physical and mental gifts can help, but you never know what you're truly capable of until you push your OWN limits -- hard!
If you want to be led around by the nose, and don't mind paying for the privilege, then anything Microsoft puts out, hardware or software, will be a good match.
If you would rather be doing the leading, of yourself or others, then you need to learn enough about the hardware and/or software you're working with to do something more sophisticated than click a mouse. Period. Learning may not be easy, or fun (most of the time), but the rewards are usually well worth the effort.
It's all the same dance, folks. It's just a question of whether you want to be a dancer or a musician (or somewhere in between).
Not until Drizzle's network guru calls me up and tells me "Hey, we're switching over to IPv6, you'll need to update your DNS boxen."
I've tried -- hard -- to understand the IPv6 FAQ, the structure of IPv6 setups, and how those setups relate to DNS. Maybe I'm dense, maybe I just don't work well with the FAQ the way it's written, but so far I've not had much luck.
I will say that the FAQs seem to put out nothing but pure theory, and they expect the reader to make the intuitive leap as to how to set up v6 for their own network.
I definitely don't work like that. I usually need to be shown, explicitly, HOW to do something first (as in comparing what my v4 and v6 DNS setups would look like side-by-side), and my gray matter will then pick up the theory along the way.
In other words: If someone can show me, in a PRACTICAL manner instead of bombarding me with the theoreticals first, how to make the switch and how my current addresses relate to IPv6, then I will create the appropriate setup for my domains and keep it mothballed until the time comes to use it.
Until then, well... my current setup is definitely not broken. I don't see any reason to "fix" it.
If you can't be bothered to get up from your computer long enough to take a potty break, you've got a much bigger problem than just 'holding it.'
All of a sudden, Microsoft's closing line from the old W95 shutdown process comes to mind.
"It is now safe to turn off your computer."
Think about it.
Re:Ham radio swap meets are so over
on
Hamvention
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I could not disagree more!
Every year, I make it a point to attend a minimum of four ham swap meets; the big Mike & Key event in Puyallup, the two in the Bay Area (Livermore and Foothill), and the Radio Club of Tacoma event. I try to do more if I can.
The quality and quantity of gear at each one fluctuates wildly, year-to-year, as do the prices. That's part of the fun! While Ebay has the greater variety, in many cases, it can never substitute for the fun and satisfaction of making a face-to-face deal. Besides getting the gear on-the-spot, you can get a far better "feel" for whether you want to deal with someone when you're staring them in the face.
You say "The new stuff is better and cheaper than the old stuff." While there is some truth to that, in terms of 'cheaper,' there is also a lot of "WRONG!" in terms of 'better.'
A perfect example is test equipment, especially oscilloscopes. Tektronix completely discontinued their analog 'scope line beginning in 2000. However, their 7000-series (yes, analog) hardware can still beat the crap out of most modern stuff in terms of durability, flexibility, and value for the $$. Earlier this year, I bought a 7904A mainframe, with a basic bandwidth of 500MHz, from a local surplus place for $400. Plug-ins for it would have run around another $200 if I didn't have them already.
Would you like to tell me where I could have gotten a new O-scope, good to at least 500MHz and at least as durable, versatile, and well-made as the Tek unit for $600?
No? I didn't think so.;-)
My point is that ham swap meets and electronic surplus stores still have a firm place in this world. Don't you dare judge them all by what you're seeing in the Bay Area! I've visited some places in Florida (Orlando & Melbourne) that still have Good Stuff at Good Prices, and I had outstanding luck at the 2002 Mike & Key and RCT swap meets.
In fact (shameless plug alert!), I have part of my web site dedicated to listings of Washington state and California (at least the Bay Area) surplus places and ham swap meets. I happen to agree with you on HSC, but there are other spots you should check out.
I guess the best way to say it is that both Ebay and ham swaps still have a firm place in this world. One will never take the place of the other, so you should use them both. Between the two of them, you will likely never lack in whatever you search for.
Re:Oh, simpler times...
on
Hamvention
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I think the biggest change I've seen is that the "tinkerers" (those who modify commercial gear for ham purposes, or design their own stuff) are no longer so great a force in the hobby. The hams who take the hobby seriously enough to have a labful of RF test gear, and who know how to use it, seem to be getting increasingly rare. I know, because I'm one of them!;-)
It used to be that I could turn on any of the local 2m (VHF) or 70cm (UHF) repeater channels, and hear a discussion going on that at least included something technical. It used to be that I could pop onto those same channels with a technical question, and chances were good that someone would know how to answer it.
Not any more. It seems that I can have a conversation with a dozen different hams, and out of them there will be 1-2 that know anything more about their radio than how to turn it on and use it. "Appliance Operators," once a rarity in the ham field, have become largely the norm.
I have mixed feelings about it. On the one wing, it's sad, I think, to see so many people take their exams just for the sake of taking them, and then forget everything they learned and have no further interest in expanding their electronics knowledge.
On the other wing, a big piece of my side business is dependent on those who choose not to do the technical side for themselves. I try to give my customers a bit of free education as they walk out the door with their newly-programmed radio, but I never know where they're going to go with it.
Also, don't forget that tinkerers need stuff to tinker with. The quality and quantity of stuff showing up at many ham swap meets all over the country seems to be going down. I think it's due largely to the depredations of Ebay. Why comb the swaps when you can search for goodies from your easy chair?
I have an answer for that. Social skills! Ham swaps are more than swaps; they're social gatherings, just like the rest of any ham convention. As I've said on my Ebay 'About Me' page, where can you get a clearer impression of who you're buying stuff from? By looking at someone's feedback record, or looking them in the eye and watching how they interact in real time?
Anyway, I've drifted off-topic enough. I plan to make the 'pilgrimage' to Dayton, possibly in 2004. Until then, those of you that are going, good luck and good journey.
73 de KC7GR
Re:available bandwidth?
on
Hamvention
·
· Score: 4, Informative
No longer required to be skilled in CW? Perhaps not in the UK. In the States, however, one still needs to be proficient to 5 WPM CW to go any higher than a Technician-class license.
The dividing point is HF privileges (1-30MHz). If you want to work HF (with the possible exception of the 10-meter band), and you live in the U.S., you still have to pass a minimal CW test.
The ongoing scorning of practicality and usability, in favor of fluff and glitter, never ceases to amaze me where the cellphone manufacturers are concerned. It seems to go hand-in-hand with their delusion that "Smaller is Always Better!"
Consider: An awful lot (heck, most) of the portable phones made today have keypads that Tinkerbell would have trouble working with, and they just seem to be getting smaller. Anyone with large hands (like me!) is going to have trouble with pressing only a single key. I question whether voice-recognition technology is far enough along to make up for it.
I dread to think what the keypad on these wristphones is going to be like. I doubt that anyone with hands bigger than a midget's will be able to use the thing effectively.
And what about people who are visually impaired, like my wife? We've been looking for a decent cellphone for her for three years now. Nothing that's in the 'consumer' arena will work because she needs an all-black background with bright-white legends on the keys to even be able to see the thing, and said legends need to be bold print to boot.
It would be dead easy for the cellphone makers to turn something like that out, but no... They seem much more concerned with making their products into fashion statements instead of the useful tools they can be.
And how about mobile safety? There are far too many people on the road right now who seem to never have heard the phrase "hands-free kit," let alone installed one. How safe is some driver going to be who suddenly sticks their wrist up to their face to answer a call?
This whole idea seems to me to be another of those points where I have to ask 'Just because we CAN do this with our technology, SHOULD it be done?'
To put it another way, I'd really like to see the makers of this expensive toy devote their resources to something that can actually be USED instead.
Slashdot Mirror
The image this story creates is amusing, to say the least. I find myself wanting to get about a gross of Superballs caught in this contraption, and see where they all end up...
Ok... Fair warning, fellow slashdot readers. This is a rant. I make no bones about it. If that's not the kind of thing you want to read, then it's probably best just to move on.
I know exactly why they called it the 'Dreamliner.' Because it's probably just the kind of aircraft that the current crop of Boeing execs dream about in terms of continuing to outsource design and subassembly manufacturing, thus worsening the unemployment rate in the Puget Sound region even further.
The 7E7 will be a Great Thing, yes... Assuming that you want to live in Russia, China, Japan, Chile, or one of the other locations where Boeing has "Global Partners" (spit!)
Don't believe me? I was with Boeing for six years before being laid off. In that time, I saw several "Buy/Build" charts for the current crop of aircraft, like the 737, 757, and others. It was outright scary to see how many parts of those planes were designed or built overseas, and shipped in for final assembly here (at least 30% by my estimate).
Don't even get me started on the horror stories I was hearing from friends on the assembly line, shortly before I left, about out-of-tolerance parts causing more assembly delays and problems than had been seen in the last five years.
I think, given the current corporate mindset of short-term gain over long-term survival, that it's only going to get worse. Yes, I could be way wrong, and I will be the first to admit that I'm more than a little biased, thanks to seeing loads of my would-be colleagues in all levels of engineering get the boot (myself as well).
However, I might be less bitter if the company hadn't (a), moved their corporate HQ to Chicago for no good reason that I (or a lot of other folk) could see; (b), Sent most of the engineering services to Russia; (c), Hung out the final-assembly location of the 7E7 like a carrot on a stick, and invited various states to bid on it like some third-rate auction prize.
Boeing has, IMO, long since forgotten or destroyed the values that made it the great company it once was. They've been in a tailspin ever since that disaster of a merger with McDonnel-Douglas, and I would be very much surprised if there were anything other than the defense & space side left in business ten years from now (if that long).
Vent completed. I feel a bit better now.
All the current statements about why 42V was chosen are blatantly blah. Why? It should be obvious to the galaxy's various hitch-hikers.
'42' is still the Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. That includes vehicular electrical systems. I'm just surprised nobody realized it earlier.
In my six years at Boeing (and I'm told that, given the layoffs, I did well to last that long), I was fortunate enough to be able to 'fly' the full-motion 747 sim, as well as the fixed-base 737 NextGen.
Although the full-motion is definitely what I'd class as a "wild ride" in terms of convincing one's senses (ever try to land a 747 on only two engines?), I found that (much to my surprise) the fixed-base sims can produce many of the same sensations, simply by the projected movement on the window displays.
In other words: When I went into a climb in the fixed-base unit, it still felt like I was tilting up despite the fact that there were no motion components to move the cab around. Same thing when I went into a turn. I caught myself leaning into it, and feeling like it was really happening, just as I did during my private pilot training.
While fixed-base may not provide the full experience, it most definitely provides enough to effectively fool the senses if it's done right. And it sounds like this fellow did it right.
Remind the kids that they need to look at what device, system, or application they'll be writing code for before they even think of sitting down at the code editor. Make sure they know that PCs and Windows are NOT the Answer to Everything, and work accordingly.
One of the things I hated most about the (required for my A.A.S. degree) programming course I took at the local community college was its focus on games. I have ZERO use for game coding in an electronics environment.
Said course would have been far more valuable to me if they had chosen a specific application pertinent to the Electronics Technology major I was carrying (perhaps an introduction to programming the PIC microcontrollers, or 68xxx assembler), and coded for that.
To delve a little further into that line of thought: You don't need Visual Basic or Visual C++ to code a PIC to be, say, an electronic lock or programmable frequency divider. What you do need is a stable development platform, a good feel for simple BASIC, and some idea of how the software you're writing is going to interact with the hardware involved.
On the other wing, you don't usually (that I know of) need to delve into the details of assembly language if you're going to be writing (here we go) a game, or a spreadsheet app, or some similar program that is intended mainly to interact with the user as opposed to running a dedicated function in an embedded device.
No one can be an expert in all programming forms and languages. There's just too much Out There. Help new students to make intelligent choices about what, exactly, they're trying to code for, teach them good ground rules about coding in general, and the rest should follow on its own.
Ok. Here's my $0.02 worth. I have no issue whatsoever with these things being used in the store where the merchandise is purchased. In that respect, they're no different from electronic anti-theft tags.
I have a BIG problem with leaving the tags active and able to respond outside of said store environment. So, with that in mind (and maybe this should be turned into an 'Ask Slashdot' question):
What countermeasures are available to kill the tags, but not harm the item they're attached to, once you leave the store environment? Some ideas that come immediately to my mind are:
(1) Stuff your purchase into a microwave oven for a few seconds. That should effectively fry the tag. Unfortunately, this may not be practical for clothing containing metal buttons, zippers, or snaps.
(2) Build or buy a small EMP device designed expressly to destroy the tag's functionality. Could have varying degrees of difficulty, depending on one's skill with electronics, or the availability of such devices at the commercial level.
(3) Other ideas...?
The quality of ANY 'online' education is directly related to how well the subject material can be adapted to said online environment.
;-)
If the course involves nothing but writing/reading, or writing computer code, then yes; it should be able to adapt fairly well to being taught online.
It would, on the other wing, be extremely difficult (if not impractical) to teach, say, courses in electronics over the 'net. This is simply because really -learning- electronics, chemistry, or any of the other physical sciences requires a hands-on lab environment with specialized equipment.
Until we develop 'holodeck' technology, I don't see how it would be possible to effectively teach such courses online. However, if someone knows of a system that can teach good hands-on electronic assembly skills, or techniques of component-level troubleshooting, I would love to hear about it.
So, in summary; it sounds to me like the course you're taking, although adaptable to an online environment, is indeed suffering from incompetence or laziness at the teaching level. I would not only complain to the school involved, I would also get in touch with your local state board of education, and tell them what's going on. At the very least, they may be able to start some sort of investigation.
Good luck.
Ralsky, is that you?
Come to think of it, I don't much care which spammer you are. You're a bottom-feeding thief, without even the courage to post as anything other than an AC, and your crap will never be welcome at any servers I'm in charge of. The sooner you're exposed for what you are, and thrown off the Internet permanently, the better.
Please accept my most cordial invitation to take your parasitical, thieving, spam operation and implode at your earliest convenience.
Lazlo wrote:
"To explain this a bit, first imagine a spherical cow with uniform density, floating in empty space..."
Ohhhh, so THAT's how they make those malted milk candy balls... 'Whoppers,' yeah. That's them...
That's a good point. Lord knows they couldn't do any WORSE than the Shrub and his cronies! ;-)
User 'falsification' wrote...
"The day the Internet died. Sure, it will be more "efficient" then. No spam. But it won't be free..."
Actually, to my mind, the original Internet "died" when the NSF's controlling influence went away in the mid-90's, taking their prohibition against commercial traffic with it.
I think if they, or the IETF, had simply thought ahead about the likely consequences of opening 'net access to the "consumer" arena, to people who probably didn't even know what the term 'Internet' meant, they would have thought twice about simply throwing the barn doors wide open.
I've always believed that there should have been some sort of multi-tier licensing system -- one level for end users, another for those who run servers, perhaps another for ISPs -- for ANYone who wanted 'net access.
If that kind of basic screening had been implemented from the word 'Go,' if for no other reason than to provide a path of accountability for one's own online actions, I don't think spam would be anywhere near the nightmare it is today.
User 'falsification' continued:
"Don't cry about it. It happens to all technology. Those who need anonymous communications will just move to something else. Maybe web-based discussion, for example. Just no more truly private, truly anonymous, or truly free e-mail..."
If spam keeps up at its current rate, E-mail will be rendered useless in any case. It's damn near that point now.
As for anonymizing, it's easy enough to encrypt your E-mail. PGP and GNU-PG still work, no matter who's using them. The only thing that shows up in the clear under such a system is your E-addy, that of the recipient, the datestamp, and maybe the subject line. That info has, to the best of my knowledge, never been anonymous.
As for the 'net being "free," in the sense of freedom, remember that along with freedom comes responsibility; to yourself, to others around you, and to your environment. One who is truly responsible will measure, in their own mind, how their actions affect those around them, and will act accordingly.
Those who send spam, no matter if it's some college student floating a get-rich-quick chain letter or a (supposedly) reputable company like Microsoft or Network Associates (yes, both of them do spam), have clearly demonstrated that they are not responsible because they do not care. They don't care how their abusive behavior affects the rest of the 'net, and they don't care about the private property (servers, routers, bandwidth pipes) of others.
They care only about one thing; making as many $$ as they can in the shortest time possible, often by ANY means.
I still believe that spam is more a social problem than a technological one. If it were purely technological, it would have shown up prior to the Internet's barn doors being thrown wide open to anyone with a credit card and a cheap computer.
Because of this belief, I question whether the IETF's proposed changes, as strong as they have the potential to be, are really going to help. Personally, I'm not holding my breath.
I will, however, do what it takes to keep my servers connected and running. If that means going along with changes that I don't think, in the long run, are going to make much difference, then so be it.
Put another way: I would far rather see spam blown out of existence by the proposed authentication mechanisms, even if it means the loss of anonymity or "freedom," than see E-mail itself go down in flames because a bunch of greedy and irresponsible people (and I use the term loosely in referring to spammers) couldn't keep themselves under control.
Keep the peace(es).
Opt-out is a cop-out. Why should ANYone ever be required to opt-out of any E-mail list that they never opted into in the first place?
You, like many others (thieving parasites like Scelson included), are still overlooking one critical fact:
The Internet is not now, nor has it ever been, a truly "public" resource. Nobody in the government pays me any subsidy to operate my servers, and I don't know of any ISPs in the U.S. that are receiving any similar subsidies.
I pay, out of my own pocket, for the electricity and bandwidth that my servers require to work as they do, just as anyone from a mom-n'-pop ISP to a giant like Earthlink pays for the electricity and bandwidth to run theirs.
In each case, whether you're a single individual or a multinational conglomerate, or anywhere in between, your servers are YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY, along with the mailboxes on them. You might rent them to others, as ISPs do, but the only guarantee that ANYone has in terms of sending and receiving mail is whatever guarantees are in the contract that gets signed between an Internet provider and their customers.
When spammers spam, they're violating private property rights. Period. When someone spams me, or one of my other users, they're STEALING from me. When someone spams AOL, they're stealing from AOL and its users. When someone spams ANYone with a 'net-connected system, it is theft of resources. Period.
I will do whatever it takes to protect my systems from such intrusions. If that means risking the loss or delay of some legitimate E-mail, so be it.
Apparently, AOL is taking a similar path. That's fine. They have absolute and final authority over their own equipment. Scelson can scream "censorship!" all he wants, but he still has no right to mail to someone else's network if they don't want to receive his (or any other spammer's) crap.
You must not have been paying attention back in May of 2000, when GPS's 'Selective Availability' was permanently turned off. As of midnight on May 1, 2000, all GPS units, civilian or military, became accurate to within 15 meters.
On the subject of GPS accuracy, the development to be watching at the moment is the FAA's WAAS project. Typical GPS accuracy using WAAS correction data will be less than 3 meters. The kicker is that your receiver must be WAAS-enabled in order to use the system. WAAS will eventually replace the Coast Guard's current system of DGPS beacon stations.
FWIW: The WAAS network must already be at least partly functional, at least in the Puget Sound region. I just upgraded our mobile receiver to a WAAS-enabled engine (the Garmin GPS-15), and I noticed an immediate improvement.
I just can't help myself. Every time I hear someone say the word 'Pikachu,' my gut-level reaction is to offer them a Kleenex and say 'Gesundheit.'
I know, I know... Probably off-topic... There go my karma points (again).
...is "Don't Spam."
Ralsky has no one to blame but himself. If he didn't make a career out of abusing other people's private property, none of the crap that's happening to him would ever have happened.
No matter if it's 'right' or 'wrong' to take someone's personal info and feed it to catalog houses, it still comes back to one simple idea; You Reap What You Sow, or 'Do Unto Others,' etc. Ralsky has been heaping abuse on other people's in-boxes, servers, etc. for years, and now he's reaping the fruits of his labors. If they're inedible, it's his own fault.
...that an ex-cop, who should certainly know the difference between 'Right' and 'Wrong,' would not see spamming for the ongoing theft of bandwidth and resources that it truly is. He got out of it because of all the hate mail and such that he was getting, not because it was just plain unethical.
I still think the best possible defense against spam is to be self-hosted, server-wise. I would also be interested to know how often this guy had to change ISPs thanks to being (rightfully) shut down for abuse of resources.
Then again, if he were hosted on AT&T/Comcast, that might never have happened. AT&T likes spammer money too much.
Remember, folks; There's always the used/surplus market.
Computers are plentiful, and dirt cheap, especially if you don't need the latest/fastest/flavor-of-the-week machine (and there are darn few applications that really do -- video editing comes immediately to mind).
...to something that's been going on since there have been "tinkerers" and "the public."
There have always been, and always will be, Those who Know (how to tinker) and Those who Do Not Know (and, in many cases, don't seem to want to know) how to work with computer innards, or solder, or build electronic kits, or even design their own stuff. It's all different levels of the same bar.
An example; Joe and Jane Consumer are thrilled to death about being able to send E-mail with pictures of the kids to granny, but they don't have Clue One about the processes involved, nor do they want one. They're under the belief that any such details are far too messy or complex for their comprehension, even though Joe may have a Ph.d in Astrophysics and Jane in Mathematics.
Belief is a very powerful thing. Far more so than people realize. If you truly believe, in mind and spirit, that something is too tough or too complex for you to learn or do, you will not be able to learn or do it, no matter how hard you try, until you completely shed the belief that is holding you back. That's not easy to do either, because a belief that takes root is just as hard to get rid of as a bad infestation of weeds.
As another example, there are those who have at least a basic understanding of computers and networks (I'm talking the SysAdmins and network techs of the world), but that don't have Clue One about the most basic electrical or electronic principles, or how the very hardware they maintain is put together. Mention Ohm's Law to such people, and you would likely get as blank a stare as if you'd said "The Internet uses TCP/IP protocols" to Joe and Jane. These same admins and techs are just as likely to burn themselves with a soldering iron as they would be to use it right.
There's another tier. Those who take electronics seriously enough to really learn how to work with it, or that know enough about construction practices to be able to design and build a useful circuit, or modify something else to suit their purposes. And there are tiers above that, for those that are (or were, in times past) pioneers in the sciences (Tesla, Marconi, Bell, etc.)
My point is simple; It all boils down to how much you choose to teach yourself about the world we share, and the tools we use in it. The more you choose to learn, the easier a time you'll have working with those same tools. A high IQ, a dexterous touch, or other physical and mental gifts can help, but you never know what you're truly capable of until you push your OWN limits -- hard!
If you want to be led around by the nose, and don't mind paying for the privilege, then anything Microsoft puts out, hardware or software, will be a good match.
If you would rather be doing the leading, of yourself or others, then you need to learn enough about the hardware and/or software you're working with to do something more sophisticated than click a mouse. Period. Learning may not be easy, or fun (most of the time), but the rewards are usually well worth the effort.
It's all the same dance, folks. It's just a question of whether you want to be a dancer or a musician (or somewhere in between).
...a Beowulf cluster of...
Whups! Sorry, wrong script. Uhhh.... here, how's this? Micr0$platt Suckz!
Did I spell it right?
Not until Drizzle's network guru calls me up and tells me "Hey, we're switching over to IPv6, you'll need to update your DNS boxen."
I've tried -- hard -- to understand the IPv6 FAQ, the structure of IPv6 setups, and how those setups relate to DNS. Maybe I'm dense, maybe I just don't work well with the FAQ the way it's written, but so far I've not had much luck.
I will say that the FAQs seem to put out nothing but pure theory, and they expect the reader to make the intuitive leap as to how to set up v6 for their own network.
I definitely don't work like that. I usually need to be shown, explicitly, HOW to do something first (as in comparing what my v4 and v6 DNS setups would look like side-by-side), and my gray matter will then pick up the theory along the way.
In other words: If someone can show me, in a PRACTICAL manner instead of bombarding me with the theoreticals first, how to make the switch and how my current addresses relate to IPv6, then I will create the appropriate setup for my domains and keep it mothballed until the time comes to use it.
Until then, well... my current setup is definitely not broken. I don't see any reason to "fix" it.
If you can't be bothered to get up from your computer long enough to take a potty break, you've got a much bigger problem than just 'holding it.'
All of a sudden, Microsoft's closing line from the old W95 shutdown process comes to mind.
"It is now safe to turn off your computer."
Think about it.
I could not disagree more!
;-)
Every year, I make it a point to attend a minimum of four ham swap meets; the big Mike & Key event in Puyallup, the two in the Bay Area (Livermore and Foothill), and the Radio Club of Tacoma event. I try to do more if I can.
The quality and quantity of gear at each one fluctuates wildly, year-to-year, as do the prices. That's part of the fun! While Ebay has the greater variety, in many cases, it can never substitute for the fun and satisfaction of making a face-to-face deal. Besides getting the gear on-the-spot, you can get a far better "feel" for whether you want to deal with someone when you're staring them in the face.
You say "The new stuff is better and cheaper than the old stuff." While there is some truth to that, in terms of 'cheaper,' there is also a lot of "WRONG!" in terms of 'better.'
A perfect example is test equipment, especially oscilloscopes. Tektronix completely discontinued their analog 'scope line beginning in 2000. However, their 7000-series (yes, analog) hardware can still beat the crap out of most modern stuff in terms of durability, flexibility, and value for the $$. Earlier this year, I bought a 7904A mainframe, with a basic bandwidth of 500MHz, from a local surplus place for $400. Plug-ins for it would have run around another $200 if I didn't have them already.
Would you like to tell me where I could have gotten a new O-scope, good to at least 500MHz and at least as durable, versatile, and well-made as the Tek unit for $600?
No? I didn't think so.
My point is that ham swap meets and electronic surplus stores still have a firm place in this world. Don't you dare judge them all by what you're seeing in the Bay Area! I've visited some places in Florida (Orlando & Melbourne) that still have Good Stuff at Good Prices, and I had outstanding luck at the 2002 Mike & Key and RCT swap meets.
In fact (shameless plug alert!), I have part of my web site dedicated to listings of Washington state and California (at least the Bay Area) surplus places and ham swap meets. I happen to agree with you on HSC, but there are other spots you should check out.
I guess the best way to say it is that both Ebay and ham swaps still have a firm place in this world. One will never take the place of the other, so you should use them both. Between the two of them, you will likely never lack in whatever you search for.
I think the biggest change I've seen is that the "tinkerers" (those who modify commercial gear for ham purposes, or design their own stuff) are no longer so great a force in the hobby. The hams who take the hobby seriously enough to have a labful of RF test gear, and who know how to use it, seem to be getting increasingly rare. I know, because I'm one of them! ;-)
It used to be that I could turn on any of the local 2m (VHF) or 70cm (UHF) repeater channels, and hear a discussion going on that at least included something technical. It used to be that I could pop onto those same channels with a technical question, and chances were good that someone would know how to answer it.
Not any more. It seems that I can have a conversation with a dozen different hams, and out of them there will be 1-2 that know anything more about their radio than how to turn it on and use it. "Appliance Operators," once a rarity in the ham field, have become largely the norm.
I have mixed feelings about it. On the one wing, it's sad, I think, to see so many people take their exams just for the sake of taking them, and then forget everything they learned and have no further interest in expanding their electronics knowledge.
On the other wing, a big piece of my side business is dependent on those who choose not to do the technical side for themselves. I try to give my customers a bit of free education as they walk out the door with their newly-programmed radio, but I never know where they're going to go with it.
Also, don't forget that tinkerers need stuff to tinker with. The quality and quantity of stuff showing up at many ham swap meets all over the country seems to be going down. I think it's due largely to the depredations of Ebay. Why comb the swaps when you can search for goodies from your easy chair?
I have an answer for that. Social skills! Ham swaps are more than swaps; they're social gatherings, just like the rest of any ham convention. As I've said on my Ebay 'About Me' page, where can you get a clearer impression of who you're buying stuff from? By looking at someone's feedback record, or looking them in the eye and watching how they interact in real time?
Anyway, I've drifted off-topic enough. I plan to make the 'pilgrimage' to Dayton, possibly in 2004. Until then, those of you that are going, good luck and good journey.
73 de KC7GR
No longer required to be skilled in CW? Perhaps not in the UK. In the States, however, one still needs to be proficient to 5 WPM CW to go any higher than a Technician-class license.
The dividing point is HF privileges (1-30MHz). If you want to work HF (with the possible exception of the 10-meter band), and you live in the U.S., you still have to pass a minimal CW test.
The ongoing scorning of practicality and usability, in favor of fluff and glitter, never ceases to amaze me where the cellphone manufacturers are concerned. It seems to go hand-in-hand with their delusion that "Smaller is Always Better!"
Consider: An awful lot (heck, most) of the portable phones made today have keypads that Tinkerbell would have trouble working with, and they just seem to be getting smaller. Anyone with large hands (like me!) is going to have trouble with pressing only a single key. I question whether voice-recognition technology is far enough along to make up for it.
I dread to think what the keypad on these wristphones is going to be like. I doubt that anyone with hands bigger than a midget's will be able to use the thing effectively.
And what about people who are visually impaired, like my wife? We've been looking for a decent cellphone for her for three years now. Nothing that's in the 'consumer' arena will work because she needs an all-black background with bright-white legends on the keys to even be able to see the thing, and said legends need to be bold print to boot.
It would be dead easy for the cellphone makers to turn something like that out, but no... They seem much more concerned with making their products into fashion statements instead of the useful tools they can be.
And how about mobile safety? There are far too many people on the road right now who seem to never have heard the phrase "hands-free kit," let alone installed one. How safe is some driver going to be who suddenly sticks their wrist up to their face to answer a call?
This whole idea seems to me to be another of those points where I have to ask 'Just because we CAN do this with our technology, SHOULD it be done?'
To put it another way, I'd really like to see the makers of this expensive toy devote their resources to something that can actually be USED instead.