I don't think that at all, but I'm sure Baden Powell did (well at least publicly - perhaps he privately liked the wiggle of a young boy's bum, I don't know or care). The founding purpose of the Boy Scouts was to bury kids heads in the sand. Make little British Bulldogs not PC correct types. Baden Powell would not tolerate this at all!
The Boy Scouts were formed to make boys of upright character to serve the military and the Empire well.
The new Political Correctness, Explore Your Feminine Side, Gay Is OK, and now IP merit badges would surely make him choke on his undercooked damper-bread.
I don't know who this JM dude is, and I don't care. It seems though he's one of these "historical novel" writers that does not mind bending facts for a good story and a quick sale.
To make it in this biz you need to continuously find a new angle to make a new book that sells. Let's see: nobody has done a book on PCs were a result of drugged-up hippies. Dig a few facts, polish them up and add some poetic license and we're away with another best seller.
My theory on Silicon Valley is that a bunch of hippies in SF decided to migrate. They all jumped in their VW kombies and headed south. One broke down and they all stopped to help, but first let's do some drugs... They soon forgot where they were going and settled down. I bet I could scrounge enough "facts" to make this work.
To business/whatever folk, leaders mean people in a position of authority, not just people who are followed. That distinction was the main thrust of what I was saying. MS cannot make any agreements with "the leaders" because they are not binding.
The people you have mentioned have no authority to speak for the OSS movement (though Raymond is the self-proclaimed OSS historian/scribe/whatever-you-want-me-to-be-if-you -buy-me-a-beer). Bill Gates can't get any of them to sign an agreement on behalf of OSS.In the OSS movement any of that kind of shit will soon see the emergence of a new band of leaders.
I contribute significantly to OSS. I take on some of what Linus says, and yes I am inspired by some of what he says. However I would not call him *my* leader. I'd only follow him while it makes sense.
Let's say the lunch is worth $10 to the employee, but is given to the employee free. Even then the company makes a wad of cash out of this:
1)First up, this perk is factored in during remuneration negotiations:"We might pay the same as Company xxx, but we give you a free lunch worth $10 x 200 = $2k tax free."
2) Next, theres the saved time. Instead of leaving for an hour to eat out, lunch only takes 15 minutes: 45 minutes of your time is probably worth more than $10.3) The time you do spend eating is probably spent brainstorming/discussing a business related problem anyway. Even if you're discussing personal stuff you'd probably have talked about this during working hours anyway.
Essentially you get a meal, the company gets 1 hour of your time + is seen as a "nice company" because they give a perk.
On many/most RISC you can grow the stack in any direction. By convention, most ARM code runs a down-growing stack,
The stack direction has nothing to do with security. You can still have stack protection running up or down stacks. Once you have a reasonable MMU, all further problems are due to software design.
Surely if thiis is a tax it gives you a right to listen to the music. It's a bit like paying for cable TV - you can watch the shows and record them for you own use, but you can't record them and sell them.
The US govt will piss any amount of money at "Homeland Security". To get a slice of the action you just need to draw some tentative link between your new technology and the "War on terrorism".
Competition is killing long distance calls, and not just competition from VoIP. Here in New Zealand I can make a call on my cellphone to Canada, UK and various other locations for the same cost as a local call.
Whatever, if that were the rule, I'd just create a VoIP service with devices that don't look like phones.
Yes. Make it into something that does not look like a phone. Or better still, provide as much 911 service as you can.
It isn't impossible to provide location at least most of the time anyway. Sure you can't come up with a single mechanism that covers all cases, but the same is true of cellphone triangualtion etc too. Considering my case: where I live I can only see one cell site (ie no triangulation). I can access the cell site from ~15 miles away with a regular phone (ie something like 150sq mile of searching for where I might be. I could stretch that that to ~30+ miles (ie. over 600sq miles) with a Cantenna etc. That would provide me with no useful 911 location. Still, the basic triangulation does a good job for perhaps 99% of cases.
I will hazard a guess that **most VoIP is used from a static location and you could do something like enter a location as part of yhe VoIP setup. Most VoIP is used over some sort of network that can determine the location of the call to an extent.
To be of assitance does not require that all cases are covered all the time, just that most are most of the time.
The 911 in cellphones thing has been mandated for a long time now, but the cell providers have been pushing back because of cost etc. On landlines you can at least get the calling number from all US phones.
I also thought "WTF is this news for nerds? WTF is this stuff that matters?" Then I recall that, as a geek I also dress badly. Sure, I normally get my underwear on the inside, but I don't dress like a sales droid.
Also, we've all been knocked around by jock-types and have this secret superhero thing... maybe we'll save the world somehow and eventtually get some oohs and aahs from the citizens.
What has limited wiretapping in the past has really been real or perceived resistance from the public (ie. either Joe citizen sqealing or the fear that he will squeal). What these numbers really show is that the "justice system" thinks that Joe citizen has been desensitised and will not squeal.
Even though these numbers don't include terror investigations (which are no doubt being used quite liberally [that kid who shoplifted from the Seven Eleven **might** be doing it to feed terrorists]) the net effect is that people still feel threatened and feel that intrusions are part of the "War on drugs/terror/whatever".
I think you've made a very good point here. Moores Law is not about increase in size, it is really about decreasing the size of the transistors. The first transistors were huge things and it's all about preserving the physics while making things smaller.
This is a fundamentally different thing to using Moores Law as a prediction on scaling up something that only happens on a very small scale (eg. nano tubes or fusion or whatever).
" was surprised to find, however, that the typical VoIP user doesn't understand that the phone.. is fundamentally different "
If you make it look the same then how will they know the difference? If a neighbour picks up the phone to dial how will they know?
People using technology should not have to be burdened with how it works, and most people don't know how their stuff works (do you know how lag and advance work in your car's ignition?). Most people see their PC + Google + internet + the rest of the web as "the computer" and don't know what lives where. That's why you get calls like: "If I sell my monitor will people be able to read my email?"
Same goes for a phone. If it looks like a phone, and for 99% of use behaves like a phone, then in an emergency (== time when people are not thinking), it should also act like a phone.
Providing 911 location is a very hard thing to do with VoIP. By pushing hard on this, it could almost become a fatal flaw in VoIP. It makes you wonder whether this is just a ploy by existing cariers to stomp VoIP.
The difference is that cellphones already have RF processing elements etc and adding GPS is not a big deal. Adding GPS to all VoIp phones is going to cost...
I've been doing firmnware development for the last 20 years and have this to say. I studied CompSc, but should have studied Electrical Engineering.
The reason for this is simple: It is much easier to study computer science as a second degree at home since you need no specail tools etc. Use the chance at University to have access to the instruments etc that you don't have at home.
But, once you have a BSEE, spend some time getting a CompSc degree (perhaps after hours correspondence) or spend some time getting those skills by contributing to an OpenSource project.
But, just remember, you will meet less girls in EE. You have a better chance getting laid in CompSc.
I love the way the scientists make rash predictions about any discovery: "one day an egg-sized thruster...". Remids me of superconductors in the 1980s.
Sure, superconductors have proven useful for a **few** niche uses, but the big hype was all about superconducting power lines etc... Twenty years on and the only place I've really seen superconductors has been in my flying car.
Why do scientists, supposedly conservative types, make these wild predictions? Is it to hype for funding?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think that at all, but I'm sure Baden Powell did (well at least publicly - perhaps he privately liked the wiggle of a young boy's bum, I don't know or care). The founding purpose of the Boy Scouts was to bury kids heads in the sand. Make little British Bulldogs not PC correct types. Baden Powell would not tolerate this at all!
Those damn Martians will rip you off!
The new Political Correctness, Explore Your Feminine Side, Gay Is OK, and now IP merit badges would surely make him choke on his undercooked damper-bread.
Simple. Of course it won't crash if you can't even start it and get it out the driveway.
To make it in this biz you need to continuously find a new angle to make a new book that sells. Let's see: nobody has done a book on PCs were a result of drugged-up hippies. Dig a few facts, polish them up and add some poetic license and we're away with another best seller.
My theory on Silicon Valley is that a bunch of hippies in SF decided to migrate. They all jumped in their VW kombies and headed south. One broke down and they all stopped to help, but first let's do some drugs... They soon forgot where they were going and settled down. I bet I could scrounge enough "facts" to make this work.
The heat comes from them thar Watt things. If a CPU uses less Watts it produces less heat. End of story.
The people you have mentioned have no authority to speak for the OSS movement (though Raymond is the self-proclaimed OSS historian/scribe/whatever-you-want-me-to-be-if-you -buy-me-a-beer). Bill Gates can't get any of them to sign an agreement on behalf of OSS.In the OSS movement any of that kind of shit will soon see the emergence of a new band of leaders.
I contribute significantly to OSS. I take on some of what Linus says, and yes I am inspired by some of what he says. However I would not call him *my* leader. I'd only follow him while it makes sense.
1)First up, this perk is factored in during remuneration negotiations:"We might pay the same as Company xxx, but we give you a free lunch worth $10 x 200 = $2k tax free."
2) Next, theres the saved time. Instead of leaving for an hour to eat out, lunch only takes 15 minutes: 45 minutes of your time is probably worth more than $10.3) The time you do spend eating is probably spent brainstorming/discussing a business related problem anyway. Even if you're discussing personal stuff you'd probably have talked about this during working hours anyway.
Essentially you get a meal, the company gets 1 hour of your time + is seen as a "nice company" because they give a perk.
I an amazed that software custom designed for a task is better at that task than something not!
The stack direction has nothing to do with security. You can still have stack protection running up or down stacks. Once you have a reasonable MMU, all further problems are due to software design.
Microsoft cannot get the OSS community to agree to anything. They can't say: "Do xxx we have a signed agreement from your CEO".
Even Linus can only speak for 10% or so of the Linux code base.
It is really stuck in gridlock!
Surely if thiis is a tax it gives you a right to listen to the music. It's a bit like paying for cable TV - you can watch the shows and record them for you own use, but you can't record them and sell them.
The US govt will piss any amount of money at "Homeland Security". To get a slice of the action you just need to draw some tentative link between your new technology and the "War on terrorism".
Competition is killing long distance calls, and not just competition from VoIP. Here in New Zealand I can make a call on my cellphone to Canada, UK and various other locations for the same cost as a local call.
Yes. Make it into something that does not look like a phone. Or better still, provide as much 911 service as you can.
It isn't impossible to provide location at least most of the time anyway. Sure you can't come up with a single mechanism that covers all cases, but the same is true of cellphone triangualtion etc too. Considering my case: where I live I can only see one cell site (ie no triangulation). I can access the cell site from ~15 miles away with a regular phone (ie something like 150sq mile of searching for where I might be. I could stretch that that to ~30+ miles (ie. over 600sq miles) with a Cantenna etc. That would provide me with no useful 911 location. Still, the basic triangulation does a good job for perhaps 99% of cases.
I will hazard a guess that **most VoIP is used from a static location and you could do something like enter a location as part of yhe VoIP setup. Most VoIP is used over some sort of network that can determine the location of the call to an extent.
To be of assitance does not require that all cases are covered all the time, just that most are most of the time.
The 911 in cellphones thing has been mandated for a long time now, but the cell providers have been pushing back because of cost etc. On landlines you can at least get the calling number from all US phones.
Also, we've all been knocked around by jock-types and have this secret superhero thing... maybe we'll save the world somehow and eventtually get some oohs and aahs from the citizens.
Even though these numbers don't include terror investigations (which are no doubt being used quite liberally [that kid who shoplifted from the Seven Eleven **might** be doing it to feed terrorists]) the net effect is that people still feel threatened and feel that intrusions are part of the "War on drugs/terror/whatever".
I think you've made a very good point here. Moores Law is not about increase in size, it is really about decreasing the size of the transistors. The first transistors were huge things and it's all about preserving the physics while making things smaller.
This is a fundamentally different thing to using Moores Law as a prediction on scaling up something that only happens on a very small scale (eg. nano tubes or fusion or whatever).
I hate to blow your stack, but there are EEs outside of Silicon Valley. Even outside California!
If you make it look the same then how will they know the difference? If a neighbour picks up the phone to dial how will they know?
People using technology should not have to be burdened with how it works, and most people don't know how their stuff works (do you know how lag and advance work in your car's ignition?). Most people see their PC + Google + internet + the rest of the web as "the computer" and don't know what lives where. That's why you get calls like: "If I sell my monitor will people be able to read my email?"
Same goes for a phone. If it looks like a phone, and for 99% of use behaves like a phone, then in an emergency (== time when people are not thinking), it should also act like a phone.
Providing 911 location is a very hard thing to do with VoIP. By pushing hard on this, it could almost become a fatal flaw in VoIP. It makes you wonder whether this is just a ploy by existing cariers to stomp VoIP.
The difference is that cellphones already have RF processing elements etc and adding GPS is not a big deal. Adding GPS to all VoIp phones is going to cost...
The reason for this is simple: It is much easier to study computer science as a second degree at home since you need no specail tools etc. Use the chance at University to have access to the instruments etc that you don't have at home.
But, once you have a BSEE, spend some time getting a CompSc degree (perhaps after hours correspondence) or spend some time getting those skills by contributing to an OpenSource project.
But, just remember, you will meet less girls in EE. You have a better chance getting laid in CompSc.
Sure, superconductors have proven useful for a **few** niche uses, but the big hype was all about superconducting power lines etc... Twenty years on and the only place I've really seen superconductors has been in my flying car.
Why do scientists, supposedly conservative types, make these wild predictions? Is it to hype for funding?