Somrehing I forgot to mention in my other reply: as you fly in and out of the Bay Area you may find it interesting that the FAA's first ASR-11 is up and running at Stockton. Actually, it's been up and running for perhaps two years now, maybe closer to three. Testing continues, and I hope things get straightened out soon. Don't be concerned though: this radar is not used to control air traffic yet: that won't happen until all the bugs are worked out and everyone's happy with it.
I thought Stockton was a clever choice: very little traffic goes in and out of Stockton, but tons of traffic is in the vicinity (in and out of the Bay Area) so the heavy AT environment can be used to judge various aspects of the radar's performance. I've heard this second/third hand, so I can't ceritify it's veracity, but it does make sense.
Thanks for the compliment. Based on your post I should clarify a bit: My gripe is with the reporting done by non-aviation periodicals & cable/tv news programs. I imagine that the reporting of renowned aviation periodicals like Aviation Week and Space Technology is of a higher quality. However, as I haven't even seen a copy of AWST since my Air Force days (many years ago) I can only guess.
(Before I get started with my critique of the article and my take on the STARS issue, for those of you more interested in the fact that Sun/Solaris is at the heart of STARS, skip to the bottom of the page)
I've been an Air Traffic Control Radar Tech for the better part of 20 years and, after watching/reading years worth of inaccurate FAA Technology reporting (such as this CNN piece) I'm convinced that aviation journalists are, for the most part, clueless about the technology that they report on. Combine ignorance of that calibre with the natural alarmist tendencies of journalists and editors seeking incresed circulation/viewership and you end up with pieces like this one. Alternatively, and even more unpalatable, it might just be that all journalists are mere dilettantes, and actually have the barest grasp of the issues about which they write. Perhaps, as radar/air traffic control is my field of expertise, I'm only accutely aware of their shortcomings in that field, whereas they may be just as ignorant in many, or all, others. I hope that's not the case, but reporting that's as slipshod as this makes one wonder.... The fourth estate is just as prone to error and exaggeration as the other three.
Obviously, there are problems with STARS, just as the DOT IG report describes. There are problems with ALL new major FAA systems. I've been involved with the ASR-11 program, off and on, for several years now. The ASR-11 is a short range (airport) radar that, like STARS, is a Raytheon product and is currently undergoing a variety of tests to assess it's suitability for inclusion into the Air Traffic Control system. The STARS and ASR-11 sagas have similarites: both have been undergoing testing and some forms of development for years. A portion of the agony involved in equipment acceptance is rooted in the diverging interests of the vendor and the FAA. The vendor claims that the system will perform in such and such a manner, and it's up to the FAA to verify that their claim is accurate. If the claim cannot be verified, then a fix must be proposed, then agreed upon, then implemented, and then verified. Of course, the vendor and the FAA will interpret various aspects of the contract differently, and therefore problem resolution can, and apparently often does, involve disputes about funding: who pays for the resolution? does the FAA cough up more cash or does the vendor eat the cost? I don't use the word 'agony' as hyperbole: it most certaily is agonising for both the vendor and the FAA. However, don't be too quick to blame beuracrats. The FAA is attempting to walk a very fine line: save costs where possible, and therefore give the taxpayer better bang for the buck, while ensuring that the system in question is as safe, and reliable, as possible. Of course, altruism isn't the only motivating factor: I imagine that Congressional oversight certainly helps, particularly when it comes to bang-for-the-buck considerations. However, I genuinely believe that engineering/testing personel, system maintainers, and air traffic controllers are supremely interested in the safety of the flying public, and act accordingly.
Now on to a critique of the CNN piece:
"The only STARS system now in use, in El Paso, Texas, has been plagued with problems, according to.....the Professional Airways Systems Specialists, the union that represents the FAA employees who certify and maintain air traffic control equipment."
My experience with the ASR-11 project has convinced me that the Technician's Union, Professional Airways Systems Specialists (PASS), doesn't give much of a shit about truly relevant equipment funtionality issues. I don't doubt that their assessment of STARS suffers from the same self-interested myopia. As I've heard it told, a Union's involvement in an early round of STARS testing turned into a fiasco, and a potentially significant opportunity was squandered. I've also heard that the union has learned a bit from the experience and that, perhaps, future Union involvement in STARS testing will be more productive. I have direct knowledge of some ridiculous Union demands vis-a-vis the ASR-11.
Unions are a more than a mild source of irritation to me, for a variety of reasons the reader could likely care less about. However, there is one aspect of unions that is crucial to this and other stories involving unions: a union, even one which whose membership comprises a fraction of the 'baragining unit' employees (those who could be in the union if they chose to be) is the sole representative of that group of employees and management looks to the union for all things to do with the employees, and seeks union write-off of all employee-related matters. Journalists follow the same pattern: they spout whatever line the union gives them as if the union actually, rather than technically, spoke for all the employees. If you follow aviation reporting you will see this proven true time and time again.
An aside: my opinion of the Union has nothing to do with my opinion of the average FAA technician. Anyone that's been exposed to unions understands that the official union position often bears no resemblance to the employee's position. FAA technicians are highly trained and, generally, highly motivated, and appreciate the serious nature of their profession.
"The old system remained in place as a backup, because "tower managers stated controllers were not comfortable relying solely on STARS,"....
Now this really turns my stomach....the fact that the 'old system' remains in place is somehow condemnation of the new system (STARS). Of course the old system remains in place as a backup: it would be grossly negligent to uneccesarily remove it while testing on the new system continues. What's so stomach-churning is that this hypocritical journalist, who obviously has a minimal grasp of the complexity of FAA equipment and the air traffic control system, would very likely be the among the first to accuse the FAA of negligence if the 'old system' was uneccesarily discarded and a failure of the new system resulted in crashed planes and mangled bodies. Look, the FAA KNOWS that, while the 'old system' is technically, well, OLD, it's tried and true and, therefore, safe. Obviously they're going to want to retain it as a backup, especially considering the birth pangs that STARS is experiencing. Keep in mind that STARS is not merely a new hardware backbone: it's a completely new interface as well, so it's new to both Air Traffic Controllers and Maintenance personel. Air Traffic Controllers take their responsibility to the flying public VERY seriously, and they're almost always, if not always, going to err on the side of caution. Any one that flies should appreciate this fact.
"Union vice president Tom Brantley said the radar doesn't always work, and it may require several minutes before controllers realize the problem. In addition, he said, the system has failed several diagnostic tests."
I don't know what the hell this means: STARS isn't a radar, of course, so I assume that he must be referring to the radar/s that feed the STARS. I have heard that there is an issue with lag under certain unique and rare circumstances. Those issues will most certainy be resolved prior to acceptance, or at least examined for validity. More to the point, this sentance is a perfect example of a cursory treatment of a very complex matter by someone that obviously has no idea what he's talking about (I mean the journalist, not the Union VP). It's confusing and meaningless, rather than informative and clarifying. Sloppy reporting, at best.
Now, back to a subject perhaps more interesting to the average geek: STARS systems are based on Sun/Solaris boxes, and LOTS of them. STARS, and other imminent and existing FAA systems, such as the ASR-11 (an airport/short-range radar), the WSP (Weather System Processor), all use Sun boxes. I believe that, between the Department of Defense (DOD) and the FAA there are going to be hundreds of STARS, and a couple of hundred ASR-11s, and over the next 5 to 15 years many hundreds, if not thousands, of technicians will receive various forms of Unix training. For several years the FAA has offered a three-week instructor-led Unix course and, I believe, requires this course as a prerequisite for those technicians who will be taking the STARS and ASR-11 Maintenance courses, among others. The course is based on Redhat and PCs, rather then Ultra or Sunblade and Solaris, which is a bit of a sore spot with me, as it would obviously be advantageous for the tech to know about OBP abd other Sparc/Solaris-unique issues. However, the FAA has systems that use other flavors of Unix (AIX and/or HP-UX) so it might not be ideal to use Sparc/Solaris alone, but I can't help but think that it would be better than using Redhat/PC. Anyway, perhaps I'll write a bit more about this and try to post it one day, to see what others here think...
Getting back on track, the perceptive reader will have already realized that the training of hundreds/thousands of military and FAA technicians in the ways of Unix will be good for the Unix community. I can use myself as an example: I've been working with the ASR-11 program for three years: my first contact with Unix was three years ago at the Raytheon ASR-11 school. Now I use a laptop running Redhat (previoulsy Solaris x86, but couldn't get the darn NIC to work), an Ultra 5 and a Sparc 5 on my desk/s at work, and at home I've two PCs with two drive-racks per PC, and swap between RedHat, Solaris x86, and XP. The FAA has also been generous enough to spring for a Sunkey memebership for me and I'm going to be doing as much training as possible this year. I'll have a go at the Sun SysAdmin tests later this year and then top it all of with the Sun Network Admin test. I'd then like to move into a part-time job with some local business that uses Sun boxes. I've discussed the possiblity with various classmates in the Sun courses I've taken, and apparently, and understandably, there's little demand for part-time network administrators. however, I'll settle for less: I'd really like the opportunity to hone my skills in the private sector, just to see how far my interest and talents might take me (perhaps out of civil sevice altogether and into the private sector full time? a fantasy perhaps, but one I occasionally indulge in).
To sum-up: the fallout from the implementation of these new systems will result in an even more widespread interest in Unix, and an enlarged geek contingent.
Genius vs High Intelligence
on
Enigma
·
· Score: 1
Reminds me of the two hour PBS/Nova documentary on the Enigma effort at Bletchley Park and something one of the still living (American) scientists said about Turing and his genius. He said that, upon learning of the invention or idea of a very intelligent mind, one could sense that given enough time and resources the same invention/idea might occur to one's self. However, upon learning of the invention/idea of a genius the likes of Turing's one sensed immediately that such an invention/idea was beyond reach, regardless of the time and resources available. I got the impression that the old scientist believed that ideas of Turing's sort sprung from an entirely different place than the ideas that most of us have. In that sense, the wellspring of mathematical/techinical genius resembles the wellspring of artistic genius: like Turing, Beethoven, Michelangelo, Shakespeare and others have all created works that are far beyond the achievements of less divinely gifted contemporaries.
I was touched by the old man's obvious awe of Turing: he chose not to play Salieri to Turing's Mozart.
For those, like me, used to the old ways of the Palm (my first was a Palm 5000 bought in a Pawn shop, second was a IIIx) the new Sony's are a giant step ahead. I've recently bought a Clie T615 and am amazed by it's features. While considering my next Palm device purchase, I'd read that the NR70 had been released in Japan, and an impending release was likely in the States, but the cost factor left me cold, so I satisified that immediate-gratification urge and went with the 615 rather than wait for the significantly more expensive NR70. And I'm glad I did....
Typical of a Sony product (I own many, including one of those 400 cd players with the nifty remote) the device is chock full of interesting, useful features. Foremost among them: the memory stick. In many ways, the stick capabilty negates concerns about built-in memory capacity: applications, files, and entire backup images can be effortlessly stored on memory sticks. For instance:
Using Isilo ( http://www.isilo.com/ ) I've captured and stored to my 64 MByte mem stick the entire Solaris 8 man pages for User Commands, System Administrator Commands, and File Formats ( http://docs.sun.com:80/ab2/coll.40.6/@Ab2CollView? Ab2Lang=C&Ab2Enc=iso-8859-1 ). The total file size is approx 8 MBytes. I have a Sunkey membership ( http://www.sun.com/service/servicelist/us/sunkey_s olutions.html ) and am in the process of honing my Unix/Solaris/Linux skills, so having the entire set of most-often-used man pages in the palm of my hand is tremendously helpful.
Another example of the advantages of the mem stick: resident in rom on the Clie is a backup/restore application that allows backups of the entire contents of memory to the mem stick. As I said, it's resident in ROM so, even after a hard reset, the app is reinstalled. You can hard-reset and immediately restore the device to some prior-saved condition. Recently, this was especially helpfull to me: I'd installed, and misconfigured a security app called PDA defense. It locked me out of some important palm features. Furthermore, I was unable to erase the app from memory (it was 'locked'). I was away from home for an extended length of time (3 weeks in the Dallas Sun Training facility) and didn't have acces to my home PC/cradle/Internet Connection to reconfigure the device (my laptop was running Solaris 8 x86 at the time and wasn't much help with the Clie). However, I was able to make a backup copy of memory to the mem stick, and was then able to remove the offensive app from the backup copy (the backup image can be browsed, and files can be deleted, with a handy little Sony app that's also burned into ROM). I then restored the image to the Clie, and solved the whole problem.
The NR70 has all of that and more, but the cost is a real kick in the teeth for me, especially considering the limitations of the camera. Basically, I'm going to have to buy a Sony camera anyway, to take decent pictures so, at lease for me, I can't justify the expense of the NR70. B ut I'm completely sold on the entire memory stick concept.
Long before I'd ever heard of a mouse I was familar with trackballs. I'm a radar maintainer and, as the article mentions, trackballs were, and are, used in radar applications. However, in the radar world, the mouse is slowly achieving ascendancy over the trackball. Old habits die hard, though, and many trackballs are still hanging round (because they're attached to older radar systems that were desinged for use with the trackball). Newer systems are designed for mouse use, but a part of that is coincidental: newer systems are also based on Sun workstations and Solaris, and use the peripherals supplied with Sparcs/Ultras.
I hope to submit a piece to/. eventually, detailing the rise of Unix in the Radar environment (at least in my corner of the radar environment, Air Traffic Control). Many geeks here might be surprised to learn that the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration, the US agency that is responsible for our nation's Air Traffic infrastructure, for you international readers) has a variety of equipment based on Sun Hardware. Although such systems are in the minority, the trend for newer systems is definitely towards Unix. Furthermore, in anticipation of a large influx of Unix-based equipment, many (most?) FAA technicians are required to complete both a 3 week resident Unix course (using Redhat 7.x on a PC) and a 3 week resident networking course, covering TCP/IP, Ethernet, etc.
Of course, the initial reaction by many of you might be "OMG, only 3 weeks each? What can they possibly learn?" I won't go into too much detail (save that for the piece) but they learn enough to be Operators/Maintenares, and to follow plainly written procedures with some idea of what's going on behind the scenes. In most cases, Sparc/Ultra failure will prompt replacement, and the new box will have the OE, neccesary Patches, and Application software preloaded: only site customization will have to be installed, and I expect that that will be done by scripting (to make it as simple and fool-proof as possible for the Maintainer). Much more to write, but that will have to wait.
BTW, getting back to trackballs: never have liked the damn things, glad to see the mouse is finally coming on strong.
As a side note, Open Windows will not be included with Solaris 9. Remember all those pop-ups in Solaris's Open Windows warning of it's impending abandonment? They meant it.
Dammit, a half-dozen versions of the movie available for home viewing, and the only (real) soundtrack available are pirates from Eastern Euro. Thanks God for MP3: I nearly wet myself when, a couple of years ago ago, wnile browsing some of the alt.binary.sounds.mp3 hierarchy I stumbled across the entire set. I'd waited for years for that music. However, although they sound good, I believe they were ripped from vinyl or, at most, from Audio CDs based on sub-standard originals. If we could just get Vangelis's originals remastered..... Not sure what it was that set Vangelis and Scott at odds, but sure wish they'd bury the hatchet and give the public a chance to enjoy (legally) one of the greatest soundtracks of all time (second, at least, to "The Graduate").
A side note: I enjoy Japanese traditional music and, several years ago I purchased a CD by Ensemble Nipponia (can't remember the name). After listening to it I was certain that I'd heard one of the tracks before, but couldn't place it. It wasn't untill I next saw Bladerunner (at an old theater in Waterloo, Canada that specialized in classic/cult movies) did I realize that it was exact same vocal track from the "Blimp Advertising" song sung by a Japanese female. Very haunting, and perfect as a device to complement the heavy asian influence of Scott's future LA.
Amazing accomplishment? Come on. Of those likely to know what the hell the IMDB is, where is is, and how to vote, then actually vote: how many do you think have read Puzo and loved his works? Now, how many voters have read and loved Tolkien? Yes, the movie is good, but better than Citizen Kane (#6), and Casablance (#7)? FOTR voting at IMDB is a byproduct of the quality of the book rather than the move, and I'd describe that as "disappointing" rather than "amazing".
I remember the Dig, and that it was a Lucas creation, but didn't realize that Spielberg was involved. I played a bit of the demo but I was never much for adventure games, and XCOM-TFTD, Descent (or maybe Descent 2 by then) and Doom/Doom 2 were eating up most of my gametime in those days. Man I spent a lot of time fighting those underwater aliens in TFTD, what a great game....
Who cares if Spielberg is in the credits? He has no gaming credentials at all (unlike contemporary Gerorge Lucas). Well, none that I'm aware of anyway. After playing the demo I can tell why he's listed: the publisher is trying to compensate for a lackluster product.
Granted, different strokes for different folks, but IMHO the one-word summary is: weak. The graphics are average (how bout those closets all with the same perfet purple pattern wallpaper, and the player models), the multiplay/netcode buggy (talk about lagging, even with reported 70ms pings), and the gameplay is unexciting (that's "always run"?). And then there's friggin Gamespy, which as far as I'm concerned is to online gaming what AOL is to the Internet. Basically, unlike RTCW multiplayer test, final, and demo, which allow collection of internet servers in-game, selecting multiplayer Internet with MOH, assuming that you don't have a specific IP#, closes the game and invokes Gamespy. You then have to configure Gamespy and select a server, etc, a big giant friggin pain IMHO, and a ridiculous requirement. Reminds me of the days of Descent 2 and Kali. Deja-vu all over again.
Unfortunately, MOH's been billed as a demo, but it looks like a beta. Hell RTCW multiplayer TEST was miles ahead of this thing. I hope that they can refine it before it's release, cause if what I've seen is close to the finished product I'll stick with RTCW.
RTCW has it all over this demo: atmosphere is the first thing I noticed upon my first beach-storming in RTCW multiplayer test: everything I experienced, except for the venom:) , fealt like all of the old war movies I've seen. The game just fealt, and feels, like I've always imagined the ETO in WW2 was. Sadly, MOHAAN misses the mark widely.
I tweaked the config a bit before starting: res set to 1024, changed connect to Cable, turned up the graphical bells/whistles.
Here's the hardware platform I played on:
CPU: AMD Athlon 1.33 GHz
Mainboard: Asus A7M266
RAM: 512 MByte Samsung PC2100 (256x2)
Video Card: Asus V7700 32 Mbyte GEForce2 Pure
Audio Card: Soundblaster Live! Value
CD-R/W Drive: LiteOn 24X
CD-R Drive: LG CRD-8522B (52X)
Mouse: MS Intellimouse Explorer (USB)
K/B: Logitech Internet Navigator
Case: Superpower
P/S: 350 Watt
CPU Fan: Cooler Master #EP5-6I11 (AMD Approved up to 1.4 GHz)
Intake Fan: Cooler Master #AF8-251M-74
Exhaust Fan: " "
Connect: Cable Modem (@home)
Slashdot Mirror
Somrehing I forgot to mention in my other reply: as you fly in and out of the Bay Area you may find it interesting that the FAA's first ASR-11 is up and running at Stockton. Actually, it's been up and running for perhaps two years now, maybe closer to three. Testing continues, and I hope things get straightened out soon. Don't be concerned though: this radar is not used to control air traffic yet: that won't happen until all the bugs are worked out and everyone's happy with it.
I thought Stockton was a clever choice: very little traffic goes in and out of Stockton, but tons of traffic is in the vicinity (in and out of the Bay Area) so the heavy AT environment can be used to judge various aspects of the radar's performance. I've heard this second/third hand, so I can't ceritify it's veracity, but it does make sense.
Thanks for the compliment. Based on your post I should clarify a bit: My gripe is with the reporting done by non-aviation periodicals & cable/tv news programs. I imagine that the reporting of renowned aviation periodicals like Aviation Week and Space Technology is of a higher quality. However, as I haven't even seen a copy of AWST since my Air Force days (many years ago) I can only guess.
Thanks again.
(Before I get started with my critique of the article and my take on the STARS issue, for those of you more interested in the fact that Sun/Solaris is at the heart of STARS, skip to the bottom of the page)
I've been an Air Traffic Control Radar Tech for the better part of 20 years and, after watching/reading years worth of inaccurate FAA Technology reporting (such as this CNN piece) I'm convinced that aviation journalists are, for the most part, clueless about the technology that they report on. Combine ignorance of that calibre with the natural alarmist tendencies of journalists and editors seeking incresed circulation/viewership and you end up with pieces like this one. Alternatively, and even more unpalatable, it might just be that all journalists are mere dilettantes, and actually have the barest grasp of the issues about which they write. Perhaps, as radar/air traffic control is my field of expertise, I'm only accutely aware of their shortcomings in that field, whereas they may be just as ignorant in many, or all, others. I hope that's not the case, but reporting that's as slipshod as this makes one wonder.... The fourth estate is just as prone to error and exaggeration as the other three.
Obviously, there are problems with STARS, just as the DOT IG report describes. There are problems with ALL new major FAA systems. I've been involved with the ASR-11 program, off and on, for several years now. The ASR-11 is a short range (airport) radar that, like STARS, is a Raytheon product and is currently undergoing a variety of tests to assess it's suitability for inclusion into the Air Traffic Control system. The STARS and ASR-11 sagas have similarites: both have been undergoing testing and some forms of development for years. A portion of the agony involved in equipment acceptance is rooted in the diverging interests of the vendor and the FAA. The vendor claims that the system will perform in such and such a manner, and it's up to the FAA to verify that their claim is accurate. If the claim cannot be verified, then a fix must be proposed, then agreed upon, then implemented, and then verified. Of course, the vendor and the FAA will interpret various aspects of the contract differently, and therefore problem resolution can, and apparently often does, involve disputes about funding: who pays for the resolution? does the FAA cough up more cash or does the vendor eat the cost? I don't use the word 'agony' as hyperbole: it most certaily is agonising for both the vendor and the FAA. However, don't be too quick to blame beuracrats. The FAA is attempting to walk a very fine line: save costs where possible, and therefore give the taxpayer better bang for the buck, while ensuring that the system in question is as safe, and reliable, as possible. Of course, altruism isn't the only motivating factor: I imagine that Congressional oversight certainly helps, particularly when it comes to bang-for-the-buck considerations. However, I genuinely believe that engineering/testing personel, system maintainers, and air traffic controllers are supremely interested in the safety of the flying public, and act accordingly.
Now on to a critique of the CNN piece:
"The only STARS system now in use, in El Paso, Texas, has been plagued with problems, according to.....the Professional Airways Systems Specialists, the union that represents the FAA employees who certify and maintain air traffic control equipment."
My experience with the ASR-11 project has convinced me that the Technician's Union, Professional Airways Systems Specialists (PASS), doesn't give much of a shit about truly relevant equipment funtionality issues. I don't doubt that their assessment of STARS suffers from the same self-interested myopia. As I've heard it told, a Union's involvement in an early round of STARS testing turned into a fiasco, and a potentially significant opportunity was squandered. I've also heard that the union has learned a bit from the experience and that, perhaps, future Union involvement in STARS testing will be more productive. I have direct knowledge of some ridiculous Union demands vis-a-vis the ASR-11.
Unions are a more than a mild source of irritation to me, for a variety of reasons the reader could likely care less about. However, there is one aspect of unions that is crucial to this and other stories involving unions: a union, even one which whose membership comprises a fraction of the 'baragining unit' employees (those who could be in the union if they chose to be) is the sole representative of that group of employees and management looks to the union for all things to do with the employees, and seeks union write-off of all employee-related matters. Journalists follow the same pattern: they spout whatever line the union gives them as if the union actually, rather than technically, spoke for all the employees. If you follow aviation reporting you will see this proven true time and time again.
An aside: my opinion of the Union has nothing to do with my opinion of the average FAA technician. Anyone that's been exposed to unions understands that the official union position often bears no resemblance to the employee's position. FAA technicians are highly trained and, generally, highly motivated, and appreciate the serious nature of their profession.
"The old system remained in place as a backup, because "tower managers stated controllers were not comfortable relying solely on STARS,"....
Now this really turns my stomach....the fact that the 'old system' remains in place is somehow condemnation of the new system (STARS). Of course the old system remains in place as a backup: it would be grossly negligent to uneccesarily remove it while testing on the new system continues. What's so stomach-churning is that this hypocritical journalist, who obviously has a minimal grasp of the complexity of FAA equipment and the air traffic control system, would very likely be the among the first to accuse the FAA of negligence if the 'old system' was uneccesarily discarded and a failure of the new system resulted in crashed planes and mangled bodies. Look, the FAA KNOWS that, while the 'old system' is technically, well, OLD, it's tried and true and, therefore, safe. Obviously they're going to want to retain it as a backup, especially considering the birth pangs that STARS is experiencing. Keep in mind that STARS is not merely a new hardware backbone: it's a completely new interface as well, so it's new to both Air Traffic Controllers and Maintenance personel. Air Traffic Controllers take their responsibility to the flying public VERY seriously, and they're almost always, if not always, going to err on the side of caution. Any one that flies should appreciate this fact.
"Union vice president Tom Brantley said the radar doesn't always work, and it may require several minutes before controllers realize the problem. In addition, he said, the system has failed several diagnostic tests."
I don't know what the hell this means: STARS isn't a radar, of course, so I assume that he must be referring to the radar/s that feed the STARS. I have heard that there is an issue with lag under certain unique and rare circumstances. Those issues will most certainy be resolved prior to acceptance, or at least examined for validity. More to the point, this sentance is a perfect example of a cursory treatment of a very complex matter by someone that obviously has no idea what he's talking about (I mean the journalist, not the Union VP). It's confusing and meaningless, rather than informative and clarifying. Sloppy reporting, at best.
Now, back to a subject perhaps more interesting to the average geek: STARS systems are based on Sun/Solaris boxes, and LOTS of them. STARS, and other imminent and existing FAA systems, such as the ASR-11 (an airport/short-range radar), the WSP (Weather System Processor), all use Sun boxes. I believe that, between the Department of Defense (DOD) and the FAA there are going to be hundreds of STARS, and a couple of hundred ASR-11s, and over the next 5 to 15 years many hundreds, if not thousands, of technicians will receive various forms of Unix training. For several years the FAA has offered a three-week instructor-led Unix course and, I believe, requires this course as a prerequisite for those technicians who will be taking the STARS and ASR-11 Maintenance courses, among others. The course is based on Redhat and PCs, rather then Ultra or Sunblade and Solaris, which is a bit of a sore spot with me, as it would obviously be advantageous for the tech to know about OBP abd other Sparc/Solaris-unique issues. However, the FAA has systems that use other flavors of Unix (AIX and/or HP-UX) so it might not be ideal to use Sparc/Solaris alone, but I can't help but think that it would be better than using Redhat/PC. Anyway, perhaps I'll write a bit more about this and try to post it one day, to see what others here think...
Getting back on track, the perceptive reader will have already realized that the training of hundreds/thousands of military and FAA technicians in the ways of Unix will be good for the Unix community. I can use myself as an example: I've been working with the ASR-11 program for three years: my first contact with Unix was three years ago at the Raytheon ASR-11 school. Now I use a laptop running Redhat (previoulsy Solaris x86, but couldn't get the darn NIC to work), an Ultra 5 and a Sparc 5 on my desk/s at work, and at home I've two PCs with two drive-racks per PC, and swap between RedHat, Solaris x86, and XP. The FAA has also been generous enough to spring for a Sunkey memebership for me and I'm going to be doing as much training as possible this year. I'll have a go at the Sun SysAdmin tests later this year and then top it all of with the Sun Network Admin test. I'd then like to move into a part-time job with some local business that uses Sun boxes. I've discussed the possiblity with various classmates in the Sun courses I've taken, and apparently, and understandably, there's little demand for part-time network administrators. however, I'll settle for less: I'd really like the opportunity to hone my skills in the private sector, just to see how far my interest and talents might take me (perhaps out of civil sevice altogether and into the private sector full time? a fantasy perhaps, but one I occasionally indulge in).
To sum-up: the fallout from the implementation of these new systems will result in an even more widespread interest in Unix, and an enlarged geek contingent.
Reminds me of the two hour PBS/Nova documentary on the Enigma effort at Bletchley Park and something one of the still living (American) scientists said about Turing and his genius. He said that, upon learning of the invention or idea of a very intelligent mind, one could sense that given enough time and resources the same invention/idea might occur to one's self. However, upon learning of the invention/idea of a genius the likes of Turing's one sensed immediately that such an invention/idea was beyond reach, regardless of the time and resources available. I got the impression that the old scientist believed that ideas of Turing's sort sprung from an entirely different place than the ideas that most of us have. In that sense, the wellspring of mathematical/techinical genius resembles the wellspring of artistic genius: like Turing, Beethoven, Michelangelo, Shakespeare and others have all created works that are far beyond the achievements of less divinely gifted contemporaries.
I was touched by the old man's obvious awe of Turing: he chose not to play Salieri to Turing's Mozart.
It was very moving statement, in a 'geekish' way.
For those, like me, used to the old ways of the Palm (my first was a Palm 5000 bought in a Pawn shop, second was a IIIx) the new Sony's are a giant step ahead. I've recently bought a Clie T615 and am amazed by it's features. While considering my next Palm device purchase, I'd read that the NR70 had been released in Japan, and an impending release was likely in the States, but the cost factor left me cold, so I satisified that immediate-gratification urge and went with the 615 rather than wait for the significantly more expensive NR70. And I'm glad I did....
? Ab2Lang=C&Ab2Enc=iso-8859-1 ). The total file size is approx 8 MBytes. I have a Sunkey membership ( http://www.sun.com/service/servicelist/us/sunkey_s olutions.html ) and am in the process of honing my Unix/Solaris/Linux skills, so having the entire set of most-often-used man pages in the palm of my hand is tremendously helpful.
Typical of a Sony product (I own many, including one of those 400 cd players with the nifty remote) the device is chock full of interesting, useful features. Foremost among them: the memory stick. In many ways, the stick capabilty negates concerns about built-in memory capacity: applications, files, and entire backup images can be effortlessly stored on memory sticks. For instance:
Using Isilo ( http://www.isilo.com/ ) I've captured and stored to my 64 MByte mem stick the entire Solaris 8 man pages for User Commands, System Administrator Commands, and File Formats ( http://docs.sun.com:80/ab2/coll.40.6/@Ab2CollView
Another example of the advantages of the mem stick: resident in rom on the Clie is a backup/restore application that allows backups of the entire contents of memory to the mem stick. As I said, it's resident in ROM so, even after a hard reset, the app is reinstalled. You can hard-reset and immediately restore the device to some prior-saved condition. Recently, this was especially helpfull to me: I'd installed, and misconfigured a security app called PDA defense. It locked me out of some important palm features. Furthermore, I was unable to erase the app from memory (it was 'locked'). I was away from home for an extended length of time (3 weeks in the Dallas Sun Training facility) and didn't have acces to my home PC/cradle/Internet Connection to reconfigure the device (my laptop was running Solaris 8 x86 at the time and wasn't much help with the Clie). However, I was able to make a backup copy of memory to the mem stick, and was then able to remove the offensive app from the backup copy (the backup image can be browsed, and files can be deleted, with a handy little Sony app that's also burned into ROM). I then restored the image to the Clie, and solved the whole problem.
The NR70 has all of that and more, but the cost is a real kick in the teeth for me, especially considering the limitations of the camera. Basically, I'm going to have to buy a Sony camera anyway, to take decent pictures so, at lease for me, I can't justify the expense of the NR70. B ut I'm completely sold on the entire memory stick concept.
Long before I'd ever heard of a mouse I was familar with trackballs. I'm a radar maintainer and, as the article mentions, trackballs were, and are, used in radar applications. However, in the radar world, the mouse is slowly achieving ascendancy over the trackball. Old habits die hard, though, and many trackballs are still hanging round (because they're attached to older radar systems that were desinged for use with the trackball). Newer systems are designed for mouse use, but a part of that is coincidental: newer systems are also based on Sun workstations and Solaris, and use the peripherals supplied with Sparcs/Ultras.
/. eventually, detailing the rise of Unix in the Radar environment (at least in my corner of the radar environment, Air Traffic Control). Many geeks here might be surprised to learn that the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration, the US agency that is responsible for our nation's Air Traffic infrastructure, for you international readers) has a variety of equipment based on Sun Hardware. Although such systems are in the minority, the trend for newer systems is definitely towards Unix. Furthermore, in anticipation of a large influx of Unix-based equipment, many (most?) FAA technicians are required to complete both a 3 week resident Unix course (using Redhat 7.x on a PC) and a 3 week resident networking course, covering TCP/IP, Ethernet, etc.
I hope to submit a piece to
Of course, the initial reaction by many of you might be "OMG, only 3 weeks each? What can they possibly learn?" I won't go into too much detail (save that for the piece) but they learn enough to be Operators/Maintenares, and to follow plainly written procedures with some idea of what's going on behind the scenes. In most cases, Sparc/Ultra failure will prompt replacement, and the new box will have the OE, neccesary Patches, and Application software preloaded: only site customization will have to be installed, and I expect that that will be done by scripting (to make it as simple and fool-proof as possible for the Maintainer). Much more to write, but that will have to wait.
BTW, getting back to trackballs: never have liked the damn things, glad to see the mouse is finally coming on strong.
As a side note, Open Windows will not be included with Solaris 9. Remember all those pop-ups in Solaris's Open Windows warning of it's impending abandonment? They meant it.
Dammit, a half-dozen versions of the movie available for home viewing, and the only (real) soundtrack available are pirates from Eastern Euro. Thanks God for MP3: I nearly wet myself when, a couple of years ago ago, wnile browsing some of the alt.binary.sounds.mp3 hierarchy I stumbled across the entire set. I'd waited for years for that music. However, although they sound good, I believe they were ripped from vinyl or, at most, from Audio CDs based on sub-standard originals. If we could just get Vangelis's originals remastered..... Not sure what it was that set Vangelis and Scott at odds, but sure wish they'd bury the hatchet and give the public a chance to enjoy (legally) one of the greatest soundtracks of all time (second, at least, to "The Graduate").
A side note: I enjoy Japanese traditional music and, several years ago I purchased a CD by Ensemble Nipponia (can't remember the name). After listening to it I was certain that I'd heard one of the tracks before, but couldn't place it. It wasn't untill I next saw Bladerunner (at an old theater in Waterloo, Canada that specialized in classic/cult movies) did I realize that it was exact same vocal track from the "Blimp Advertising" song sung by a Japanese female. Very haunting, and perfect as a device to complement the heavy asian influence of Scott's future LA.
Amazing accomplishment? Come on. Of those likely to know what the hell the IMDB is, where is is, and how to vote, then actually vote: how many do you think have read Puzo and loved his works? Now, how many voters have read and loved Tolkien? Yes, the movie is good, but better than Citizen Kane (#6), and Casablance (#7)? FOTR voting at IMDB is a byproduct of the quality of the book rather than the move, and I'd describe that as "disappointing" rather than "amazing".
I remember the Dig, and that it was a Lucas creation, but didn't realize that Spielberg was involved. I played a bit of the demo but I was never much for adventure games, and XCOM-TFTD, Descent (or maybe Descent 2 by then) and Doom/Doom 2 were eating up most of my gametime in those days. Man I spent a lot of time fighting those underwater aliens in TFTD, what a great game....
Anyway, thanks for the correction.
Who cares if Spielberg is in the credits? He has no gaming credentials at all (unlike contemporary Gerorge Lucas). Well, none that I'm aware of anyway. After playing the demo I can tell why he's listed: the publisher is trying to compensate for a lackluster product.
:) , fealt like all of the old war movies I've seen. The game just fealt, and feels, like I've always imagined the ETO in WW2 was. Sadly, MOHAAN misses the mark widely.
Granted, different strokes for different folks, but IMHO the one-word summary is: weak. The graphics are average (how bout those closets all with the same perfet purple pattern wallpaper, and the player models), the multiplay/netcode buggy (talk about lagging, even with reported 70ms pings), and the gameplay is unexciting (that's "always run"?). And then there's friggin Gamespy, which as far as I'm concerned is to online gaming what AOL is to the Internet. Basically, unlike RTCW multiplayer test, final, and demo, which allow collection of internet servers in-game, selecting multiplayer Internet with MOH, assuming that you don't have a specific IP#, closes the game and invokes Gamespy. You then have to configure Gamespy and select a server, etc, a big giant friggin pain IMHO, and a ridiculous requirement. Reminds me of the days of Descent 2 and Kali. Deja-vu all over again.
Unfortunately, MOH's been billed as a demo, but it looks like a beta. Hell RTCW multiplayer TEST was miles ahead of this thing. I hope that they can refine it before it's release, cause if what I've seen is close to the finished product I'll stick with RTCW.
RTCW has it all over this demo: atmosphere is the first thing I noticed upon my first beach-storming in RTCW multiplayer test: everything I experienced, except for the venom
I tweaked the config a bit before starting: res set to 1024, changed connect to Cable, turned up the graphical bells/whistles.
Here's the hardware platform I played on:
CPU: AMD Athlon 1.33 GHz
Mainboard: Asus A7M266
RAM: 512 MByte Samsung PC2100 (256x2)
Video Card: Asus V7700 32 Mbyte GEForce2 Pure
Audio Card: Soundblaster Live! Value
CD-R/W Drive: LiteOn 24X
CD-R Drive: LG CRD-8522B (52X)
Mouse: MS Intellimouse Explorer (USB)
K/B: Logitech Internet Navigator
Case: Superpower
P/S: 350 Watt
CPU Fan: Cooler Master #EP5-6I11 (AMD Approved up to 1.4 GHz)
Intake Fan: Cooler Master #AF8-251M-74
Exhaust Fan: " "
Connect: Cable Modem (@home)