I don't know about anyone else but I don't feel I as a web surfer or citizen get much in the way of negotiation, or re-negotation for that matter.
As for reconciliation I don't see them apologizing for assailing my eyeballs in any way shape and form they can even if I see it as rude.
If it's a social contract I'd say its been voided long time go. But if they are up for mediation sign me up...;-)
It's an interesting way to view it but I don't think advertisers and marketers are up for the flip-side of the argument if you start viewing it as a contract, social or otherwise.
Just some thoughts from days from working at an ISP.
Know your scope, technically you are setting up WiFi but you need to forget about the technology for a moment and have AT LEAST a prioritized list of what this network is to be used for. Without that guiding light it will do what it does, but it may not do what anybody (or perhaps a particular high ranking somebody) will want it to do. You won't have anything to guide your decisions or your priorities.
Second, LATENCY! I haven't played with WiFi meshes so this may not come in to play but from past experience with Wireless solutions ala ISP you have to remember that cabling and bandwidth is VERY IMPORTANT. Donot be tempted to use wireless repeaters with abandon. You need to be able to have a greater amount of backbone, node to node bandwidth than the nodes themselves will provide. If the wireless nodes get overloaded and TCP retransmissions (or retransmissions by the WiFi repeaters themselves) will climb and there will be a point no packets will move. The latency of WiFi will cause this packet storm (if you will) way quicker than wired solutions. Without a good amount of bandwidth behind the nodes, or even a backup landline for administration bringing it back could be quite a pain.
The ISP I worked for tried to deploy point to point wireless bypassing the telco. Rather than run cable to the tower, they used point to point to the tower and then point to point to their customer. It didn't take long (since all of the point to point links were rated the same) for the whole solution to get snarled up bottlenecked on the point to point between the ISP and the tower. With the latency of wireless it would be unusable REALLY quick. (If only we had SQUID and bandwidth limiters back then... SIGH...)
Lastly, you have the greatest opportunity to win through control. Your watchwords should be metrics and design. As you roll out your nodes you best be pulling metrics so you know how your design will handle load and how it will fail. This will be knowledge that is good as gold, and will allow you to re-design and re-deploy. Your first attempt will be a guess but if you capture the metrics and track as most information as you can, whether that be the temperature of the wireless nodes (do they overheat, are they sheltered, is there a pattern to failure) or the packet retransmissions; all of that information will be vital to learn how to tune it up, engineer it and deploy it.
**DISCLAIMER ON** I've seen this question in different forms before. I know there has to be something out there indexed on freshmeat that will handle it, but I have yet to see it done the way I would do it. And the idea is only in my head, I haven't yet the chance to play with an actual implementation so I may be mispeaking Linuxes capabilities or how specifically to go about this. **DISCLAIMER OFF**
The way I would look at doing it would be a simple cheap linux box with a WiFi card and a LAN Card. You can turn the linux box into a WiFi gateway with a 192.168.x.x on one side and the "real" network on the other. Add in NAT.
Now as for the authentication/control/lock down that will be accomplished via firewall rules and a webpage. If they are "authenticated" then you add the appropriate firewall rules to allow them to get out. You have a script check every 5 minutes for expires and remove them out of the firewall rules when they expire. Those that are expired are presented with a webpage that will allow them to get out again. This can all be done with firewall rules. A rule to let them out, or a rule that directs all port 80 traffic to a special web server that presents them with one page only.
This web page can take whatever input you want (ala PHP or Perl) and add them in again. I liked the idea of the reciepts. You could even have the a Linux POS/WiFi router that handles it all;-). When it prints the reciepts with the "code" it can also add it into another database to check against when they use the webpage.
Would love the chance to put one together. If there are any coffee shops in the Boise Idaho drop me a line...
How does it fail? And when it fails what's the consequences? What's the repair time?
How do they want it used? How do the *NOT* want it used?
Memories of restoring and chown'ing gigs of data with management crawling all over me because something that failed was back online in an hour, but the infrastructure and restore took 12-14 hours. (Don't trust motherboard RAID without MUCH RESEARCH!;-)
They will usually tell you the gotcha's or limitations.. 50ft cable Cat6e and no more. Only x^2 connections at a time. etc...
I want to know worse case scenario how it will fail.
If it can handle x per second, what happens at 0.95x? or 1.15x? Does it slow down gracefully, does it crash, does it hang?
It's one thing to give the engineering limits of a piece of equipment but those truly tough times are when the equipment is overloaded with usage (for whatever reason) and you've got to handle it. If we lived in a perfect world we would never push anything past 50-70% of its engineered design limits but having worked for an ISP 120-150% of its design limits was more the norm. And then when a customer/client/user does something patently stupid to overload the system it's still your problem to get the infrastructure stable and back online.
The above thoughts are just my opinion since I've been doing more support than engineering of late so I'm curious to read others responses as well.
Not sure how difficult these actually are but they look cool.
SG1 - Entering the stargate. Passing through portals or mirrors is a cool effect. The reverse side is nifty too. Having a face or body suspended in space as it peers through a portal but doesn't crossover completely.
SciFi General - Energy barrier or effect. A Shield covering an archway or deflecting something.
GhostBusters - Proton Packs and their light streams. I think those were actually done with artist/paintings overlaid on existing shots but I always like those shots.
Energy or liquid light is a cool effect. Collecting it as a ball in a hand or throwing it around.
Morphs - A transformation is cool. Having a face come out of a wall or object is pretty cool too.
Most of the effects come out of the need to carry a particular part of a story. Think LOTR when it only existed as a possibility in Peter Jackson's mind. If you want cool new ideas take the most fantastic sci-fi or fantasy story you've read and try to think how you could pull off that scene.
Robert Jordan's books come to mind, Wheel of Time. Raymond Feist's Riftwar Saga. Hyperion by Dan Simmons.
Any other amazing scenes come to mind? Feel free to add to.
Obviously this guy has gotten cross ways with reality as most people know it. And occasionally different firms and folks have gotten in the crossfire while he catches up. Sounds like he's headed toward the realm of geniuses and eccentrics but his odds are getting slimmer for the former I'd think;-)
At every point folks have to choose to express their wants, whatever they may be, in a constructive fashion or a destructive fashion. To be critical of myself, I'm not always so good at it. But I think in time I come around to the more constructive side. This guy looks like he's a little less discriminating, a LOT more energetic, definitely more accomplished and it takes him a wee bit more time to come around.
So if you lack faith in the man's decency to man, which is in short supply these days then feel free to consider the third option: A lawyer. In the end you may still not achieve your goals ( in this case it would be retaining merkey.net in its current fashion I would suppose) but that's up to Matt Merkey to decide how much its worth to him.
I would also suggest a path of reconcillation backed up by law/lawyer/judge, rather than "legal victory at all costs". In the end you just want Mr. Jeff Merkey to realize their is a better way to achieve his peace of mind and move along.
Mayhap yournamesake.com is the modern equivalent of that hated doppleganger which shows that which you don't wish to see. I haven't looked mine up. Mayhap I should... Probably better if I don't.
Hmmm... I actually liked Voyager but Deep Space Nine sucked. Enterprise is not much better.
What made Star Trek great is that rode a wave. At the time it portrayed a positive view of the future that we wanted to see, mixed in with some good ole 50's esque SciFi plots.
I'm not sure the next Star Trek is really meant for die hard Trekkers, since we all have varying views as what we want.
But I think it's time for Star Trek to turn the page. The 5 year mission of exploration as a structure for the stories is kinda broken. I didn't really get into ST:TNG until season 3 when the characters were established and I started to see what was going to happen to them next.
Somehow Trek has to turn the page. Maybe eschewing starships for a mass transit / wormhole system (I know it's not SG1, but that's the tuff part.) Maybe it's time to take some of those old universe shattering story lines and let the Trek universe have a "shocking change". Not just the Klingons becoming an ally, of sorts, but something that changes the entire context of the stories.
That always seemed the weird part of Star Trek, they kept meeting/finding people or technology that could change "everything" and nothing changed.
The only other thought I could think of would be a montage of "mini-series". Look through the multiverse of star trek literature out there and pick a few of the gems of smaller stories and make some mini series or episodes out of those. See what takes off, see what doesn't. Allow the stories to stand by themselves, and not always have a continuation.
I acknowledge my bias. I revel in my bias. If I don't, I'm lying to you.
The base truth is this: There's is no OBJECTIVE, only SUBJECTIVE.
So in the end, who is being more logical, you or me? I'm just expanding the scope of the discussion, you are limiting it to make your point.
My point is this: Linux is not just software. If you donot acknowledge this you are simply speaking to your bias and to your point. Karma points for you. RAH!
But that's my "attempt" at a point. Linux is a word coined by Linus Torvalds. It is a kernel. It became an OS. It exists because people, who you decide to characterize "negatively" because they don't share the same technical judgements you do, continue to use it and support it because of who they are. You can't seperate the people and the OS with "technical" discussion. You are splitting the issue simply to make your point.
You can not have one without the other. Linux exists because people use it. People use it because it exists. Recursion forever, amen. Enjoy.
Granted, my point is subtle and abstract. But I speak it, because if you don't choose to "see it" then you will never understand to use Linux or add to the Linux community. If you don't seek the deeper context then you are rolling statistical dice, or just following a majority that may or may not be correct.
You will only adopt it when the vendor your company chooses mandates Linux. And then, why did your vendor "mandate" Linux?
So in that scenario, you just chose to have someone else make the decision on non-technical issues, then participating in the discussion... How sad.
That's my point and attempt at discussion. The quandry is that Linux has been "technically" viable for years but it continually it is not adopted.
And I'm getting sick of this "look at the other side of the coin" crap. Are you guys employed by M$ or something? Where do you come from? Why do you keep piping up?!?!?!
Look at the all the FUD that Microsoft and their ilk exude in WAVES at every media outlet every minute of the day.
Overall there may be balance, but our views, whether technically grounded or not, are part of that balance. Slashdot readers are Linux users. Being a linux user over the years has required a *HIGH* degree of grit and committment to make it work. And at every turn that committment is going to be tested AGAIN and AGAIN. Remember, Linux is "not supposed to work" but yet it does?
Sheer will and determination man! From whatever source it may spring that's what was needed to make it happen.
You slam that, but it wouldn't exist without it. It wouldn't *BE* without it.
And the differences between Linux and M$ are fundamental. When we read about the Enlightenment and DaVinci I haven't seen any footnotes about Patent Lawyers or Intellectual Property Rights. But yet M$ is marshalling its patents. Why? Because they have a stronger "technical product"?
All of these issues are interconnected and go *WAY* beyond the technical.
What good is a product you make today when it will be obsoleted or deprecated requiring a rebuild in x number of time units, when you expected to use that unit for 3-4x number of time units? And when you may very well pay an additional licensing fee of 4 times y, y being what you paid for it? or y being why were you so silly to think you could do something with a M$ product with out paying more $$$'s at their time schedule down the road.
I will *NEVER* use a M$ where a linux or open source one will do. That's it. No discussion will sway me, and I will speak when I feel I must.
I must.
There will come a point that you will realize that the world is actually based on many faulty premises. It's usually referred to as "growing up." This is not pessimism, it just is. What you do with that is up to you. You will then be labeled accordingly by the self guided interests of those around you, enlightened or otherwise.
I judge you annoying. Slashdot. You know what it is. It's not a rant, it's a person speaking. Don't change it, go where you would rather be.
Sheesh...
Note: The above is probably a rant...;-) And I always tell the truth... Except when I'm lying...
I remember liking games like the Tex Murphy series. Good story line, lots of little gags, and a hint system that would allow me to just stumble through. You lost points when you used the built in hints but you could let the story line continue.
I remember Grim Fandango. One of the last games I played all the way through. Weird..
Any other games I should check out?
Plan other tasks on a timed interval schedule.
on
Workplace Monotony?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Make up a list of other things you want to do. Here are some thoughts:
Email an old friend. Add something to your website. Research a weekend trip. Check out a new gadget via web research. Read some trade/industrial websites in your field. Research something of interest to you, your hobbies or a potential interest.
Then when you have that list, just every 20-30 minutes (or whatever interval) switch over to one of those tasks for 5-10 minutes, and then switch back to your work tasks. The day will go *MUCH* faster.
If the job is really that bad I would work on tasks or accomplishments that move you to a different position, whatever that may be but it's your list. It will be like giving you positive feedback at regular intervals. The drudgery should just slide by.
A few years back I remember doing the whole "convert the world to Linux thing" and was knocked off my stride by the need for project management, Gant Charts and required access to Outlook so Microsoft Project could be used. So sayeth the Project Lead!
But at my newest job they are using dotproject. Works well, has Gant charts. If only I had it back then. Muhuhahhahhahaha!
Seriously, check it out. www.dotproject.net
As for the rest... Just my.02 but you are looking more at slow and easy deployment. There are lots of programs out there that can do it. I'll try to post another response with a few I've found on freshmeat.net
The fun part won't be finding and/or implementing the software. The fun part will be convincing the folks to use it and making peace with whatever biases they have. It's not as cliche as "They'll choose Microsoft when given the choice" but more like "If they feel they have a choice, they will want to exercise it." And what they want may not necessarily be what is out there, open source, and that works reliable.
So coming up with a list of applications that they should learn is kinda tough. It's going to change no matter what.
Let the fun begin!
Good basic linux skills will get them farther, let the vendors drive for a particular choice. Just make them good compu learners...
UN*X/Linux doesn't work that way. You are looking for a one size fits all administrative interface and it doesn't exist.
But I can sum up some the key points and bits of wisdom I have picked up over the years.
1) Ascii text is your friend. 98% of all the configuration files for UN*X programs live in ascii files and they "usually" live in/etc. You can use this to write program to update different pieces as needed. Any problem you do, you can undo. You can then run a program or use "kill -HUP" to get a process to reread that configuration.
2) Pick a programming language. Perl, AWK, Sed, ksh, all of them. You can use that programming language to role out changes as needed, or make a lot of changes really quickly. RSH/SSH allows you to do that across multiple systems. Use it carefully!
3) Design your environment. If you know what you are going to be using the servers, workstations and/or Linux embedded appliances for you can better decide how to automate it.
4)"Crunchy Cookie, Liquid Center". In the end you will be automating certain administrative tasks over and over, but not all of them. That's why one size fits all won't work. It becomes a bloated security hole, so you only automate what you need and you automate it in an original and secure fashion.
As for some rock solid TLA recommendations.
SSH - SSH is your friend and as a replacement for RSH and its ilk you can use it to securely automate tasks. read up on ssh-agent for automating ssh access across multiple machines.
mon - How do you know it's working if you don't test it? You need to turn on monitoring, the more specific the test and monitor the better. mon is a good PERL framework for performing any test, and it has a lot of prepackaged/contributed test scripts that come in handy.
LDAP - Lots of UN*X environments are moving to LDAP to store enterprise wide information. It depends on how big of a UN*X environment you are setting up but having a centralized directory ala LDAP can be quite handy.
PAM/NIS - Plug In Authentication Modules. You can use these to have a centralized authentication server, cuts down on password updates. NIS+ is a tried and true system for stitching UNIX Systems together but I've only seen it installed in 1 UN*X environment and I've worked in several.
If you are looking for a prebuilt system or paradigm like Microsoft Server then you need to look to Redhat, Debian, else you are going to work from the need/application outwards.
Whatever you do more than once you will automate. When you no longer can budget the amount of UN*X Admins you will need you will start to build "tools" to delegate routine tasks, these will eventually become web pages, the web page will become an application. The application will become an acronym. The acronym will become a skill. The skill will become a job requirement HR will use to backfill a position. That's the way it goes.
Use to be a email administrator for an ISP. One of the common tales of woe were for folks with common names. Bob was the worst but I'm sure John and Sue were close seconds. This was from 1998-2000, spam was bad but nowhere as bad as it is today.
I remember our particular "Bob" was quite irate at all the junk/misrouted email he started getting but that was just the curse of a common name. Whoever sets up those domains or email addresses just has to expect it, or morbidly curious and wants to read it.
Just like have a 555-5555 phone number. It's the way it goes.
Didn't Steve Wozniak get ahold of a number like that? 888-8888, just to see who would call it? There's a flipside to everything I guess.
Laser Tag is unrealistic by nature. It's a real world attempt to approximate a form of combat that only exists in fiction, IMHO.
Do you want "realistic" Star Wars or "realistic" Star Trek? Or better yet, PHOTON... Cough... hack....
Ok. That's not going to work but you can take the premise of laser tag and play with it. Ideas below (feasibility will vary):
Remember "Laser Tag" was meant to be just that. Tag. Our imaginations automatically take the guns and vests somewhere they may not be able to go.
Add in scenarios like "Capture the Flag" or "Hold Hill 529". Or better yet a grenade like gadget that will exploded if handled for more than x number of seconds or minutes. A weird form of "Hot Potato".
Modify the gear for team play. Different sensors can disable the entire teams in different ways. Add in a randomizer so you can have a "Critical Hit". You'll have to continually experiment but it could be fun.
If you add in the scenarios or campaigns with hardware that doesn't "die" but renders an inactive penalty for being scored a hit that can make for a funner game. Or reacts in either ways, lights up their vest making them an easier target.
You could even have a multitude of "gear" and reactions. A RadioFrequency gadget that may make vests "sing out" like a sonar ping, or a remote control gadget that allows you to trigger someone's gun or grenade.
Rather than one team versus another team, you could have multiple teams with different scenarios or goals intermixing.
I always thought it would be fun to add in robotics or a "remote" component. Automated defenses or some players that remotely control certain defenses. Maybe some more advanced or hardier embedded or fixed weaponry. Or a series of trips and traps that can placed, moved, and or modified.
The cool thing is if you work on the gear it's reusable, and tweakable. That could add some fun to the game but it could also kill it. Some folks can't handle having a game where the rules can be tweaked. For those regulation tennis may be more suited to them.
Technology can be something to play with. If you've got the folks who want to play. If Society for Creative Anachronisms can go at each other with swords and armor, why not this?
Someone asks a sincere question, that's not out of bounds (Look around ye, Slashdot, see the banner? News for Nerds?!?!?), and all I see is humor and derision!
Buy a GOAT?!?!?! What is that?!?!?!
Excusing fetish humour, and obvious jibes (and there are *MANY*) the point of the exercise is not to revolutionize anything its to "play" with technology. Just like those folks who modify cars, build their own homes, or do whatever makes their boat float. Its about building it yourself so you learn from the experience.
Is he going to be the next Einstein? Maybe. But irregardless of the outcome I think it's cool to work on these projects.
How many of us have drooled over a homebuilt idea that turned out cool? If you didn't answer yes, you may need to change your homepage away from Slashdot! <BULLHORN> Sir! Step away from the computer and nobody gets hurt!</BULLHORN>
Explore, Invent, Enjoy, (Be Safe!)
So more power to ya man!
<SOAPBOX>
Now for constructive comment. You need to decide how expensive you want this thing to be. The more intelligent it is the more expensive it will be.
If you choose more expensive, powerful hardware (like mini-itx boards) then you will get more wiggle room to work around problems and flaws. If you choose more embedded hardware then you are going to do more coding and figuring to lock the hardware into doing what you want it do by design.
Myself I'd go for the mini-itx boards. You get reusable parts if the project goes astray. I've also seen a wireless RS232 bridge, but nowadays you could probably just hook it up with WiFi.
The biggest hurdle I see is handling the mapping and autonomous functionality. Making it stay within bounds all within a cost effective package. So in quick summary, some recommendations.
1: Choose reusable hardware. Don't buy one use embedded electronics, tend for reusable pieces like mini-itx, WiFi, standard batteries or modify and exhisting lawn mower. You can use these in other projects after you've worked through some prototypes. After several prototypes you may then decide to buy the pieces for a "finished" lawn moyer. Up to you.
2: Check with other groups, mailing lists, or local robot enthusiasts. You've probably heard it before but one of these folks may either have the idea/resource you need, or give you an idea where to go.
3: Design,Design,Design. Before you start tinkering you should have thought out 2-3 designs of how you want the system to work. Not talking 3D CAD drawings here, napkins will do, but if it doesn't look like it will work in theory, it won't work in practice.
4: Be clear to yourself why you are doing this. This is not a timesaver, this is not effective use of time. This is tinkering and a hobby. The pure joy of it. By the time you are done you will have no excuse for how you spent your time that will work for anybody (Wives, Neighbors, and Friends). You did it because you wanted to, any other reason you will only lead to humour and derision. That will make you regret the project and the time you've spent. Keep your humour about you.
Don't know why people have these attitudes but that's just the way we humans be. It's always easier/safer to doubt than to believe I guess.
Good hacking to you!
Note: I realize I did not directly answer his question but after looking through the highscores I wanted to step up with some answers/responses. I've not built one, but I've been looking at some similar projects myself. Hope my thoughts are helpful in some way.
My biggest gripe against current space exploration is the monolithic design.
What if our history dictated everyone flying around in huge "Hindenburg" like aircraft, would there be any innovation in the Aerospace industry?
Or instead of individual cars everyone was fixated on a limited number of grand double decker transports that only professional drivers could handle?
The point I'm trying to get at is why don't we make small solid technologies rather than huge technologies? Why rockets with huge payloads? Why not something more like the X-Prize?
Part of what seems to be killing NASA and the space industry is the view that only a certain type of technologies will work in space. I'm not sure how to change it but would more modular technologies be more fitting? Smaller payloads, more spacecraft, longer reaching technologies?
Just my two cents. It just seems exploration is always a dangerous when you don't have redundancy. Christopher Columbus at least could build another raft but our explorers run the risk of death by oxygen deprivation or burning up in the atmosphere because we only have a few spacecraft that costs billions of dollars. Doesn't make sense to me.
Even if it takes 50-100 years a few solid designs would be more interesting to me rather than these barely flying monoliths.
Ok... What you are asking for is not going to exist in a HOWTO but I'll try to give you some technical bits to get you on the right track.
Think router. You are basically going to setup a Wireless Access Point bridged and open and with a linux box handling all the low level routing.
I actually spec'd some of this for a new ISP startup. While I grant I never set it up (they were having money woes and other issues) I've worked for 3 ISPs so I think this is good advice, but like all advice... well.. it's freely given so here we go with no guarantees.
When these WiFi computers hook in they are going to look for a DHCP address. So you'll need a DHCP server. That DHCP server *SHOULD* give them DNS information. So you'll need a DNS server. That DHCP Server will also give them a gateway which will be your linux box.
I'd recommend giving them IP address with 255.255.255.255 as the subnet (I believe this is possible) and in that way all traffic will route through the Linux Box. (You could also tighten this down even more by just installing a WiFi card in the Linux box and have *IT* be the WiFi Router). What you are after is that they can't/won't route to each other, but only to your Linux box.
Once you have that in place you start work work on the routing table. This is where I'll wax vague. Linux has the ability to handle Layer 4 router. You can route every request for port 80 traffic to a specific IP address. Anywhere they go they will get your BBS Webserver, whatever that happens to be.
Cable ISPs use the same thing. When you turn a box up on their network with a new MAC every attempt to port 80 gets routed to a web server you have to register with and then when you enter a valid username/password through their web page then it gets added into a routing table that lets you pass.
I don't mean to make it sound easy, you are going to have some testing to do but that's most of it. The devils in the details. But I'd recommend doing most of your work in the routing table of Linux system. You don't want those WiFi users talking to each other at the IP level (or lower for those OSI model folks at there). They should only being able to talk to your Linux Router and that's it!
Once your linux box has all the traffic you can route anything anywhere. Could even get fancy. Any attempt route a particular protocol gets fed back into your BBS. They want a MP3 over port 80? Feed them a soundbite. They want a WMA file over port 80? Feed them your own doctored version. (Though that would probably done with the help of a specially written web server. Perhaps perl or Regex to match http requests and file names to a list of substitutes...;-)
College is just an institution. It's easy to walk into cliche space with any advice but the best advice I can give as I sit on the precipice of 30 is to devise your own plan and stick with it.
Or realize you have no "plan" as such and pick some areas you want to know more about. Whether it's bridge engineering, Inca history, or pearl diving, you know what you want to do. At 18 you have enough life history to know yourself and what you're interests are. Don't let *ANYTHING* stand in the way of delving into those interests. You will find people, mates and friends that share those interests and make your life AMAZING!
If you are going into college, find a college that speaks to those interests. Find PEOPLE that live and know those interests; Buy them a cup of coffee and learn from them when you can. If you don't know what those interests are then be honest and find a way to explore them. Whether that's traveling or throwing darts at a dewey decimal chart and picking a destination based on that.
Nothing has to happen at a certain time, you just have to be willing to explore it when you find it. The rest will figure it out on its own. When you're ready to settle down, you'll know it. A recent study shows emotions are a quick path to decision making, no emotion equates to the inability to make decisions quickly and effectively. Use that gut instinct, it will serve you well.
And if you never live in the mainstream, you'll define it for yourself. If the way you live is truly amazing the mainstream will come to you.
One cool but slightly dated book is Making a Living without a Job but all I can say is don't feel trapped. If you have an interest in something there is a niche that you can make a living at it. Granted, when you juggle in living in a particular place, a family or a particular lifestyle it will get more difficult but you don't have to drudge your life away!
We're just a bunch folks trying to be as happy as we can, we just tend to get a little confused on the way. We don't always see things through the eyes of the other guy/gal.
Intelligence will give you "depth" but it's not an end all beat all. You will see "more" but you still have the same life and spiritual hurdles we all do. It's up to you, as everyone, to use the gifts you have to the best of your advantage. Try to find the humour of a situation. Your intelligence gives you the best seat to the show, but not an all access stage pass but don't despair over it. Learn to enjoy the view!
Nothing else I can think of say in less than pages and hours so...
Ok... So we are in a transition period. NAFTA / Outsourcing is the wave of the future. But is any CEO or Economist looking at the long term?
Outsourcing makes sense in the short-term 3-5 years. But what about the long term? After the transition?
If you outsource manufacturing and assembly don't you cut out a potential resource? New talent? If someone doesn't have the hard knocks of manufacturing or assembling without an International Airline ticket and a stipend what will happen to *OUR* innovation?
I never hear an innovator say "Thanks to my Harvard Degree I was able to design the new next clothing fad." I tend to hear of someone who worked hands on then found a niche that wasn't being covered and they went for it. If you outsource the lower industries you outsource our innovation. Does this concern anyone else but me? And if so, what is the answer? Strictly for American Defense do you want all of our clothes manufacturing being handled outside of the United States? Would that be our new ration item if we were forced to go to war?
I'm for the long term. But I'd like to know what strategically American Business Leaders want that to be. Right now all I see is a bleeding out of our dollars to other countries with economists worried about deflation. And personally I don't think Business Leaders are knowledgeable or equipped, this is where government should step in and slow the transition for our own stability.
I've asked alot of questions for thought fodder but this is my A#1.
What would 5 conceptual business be in 20 years, and what are supposed to do to get there?
Myself, I think technical communes or cooperatives are the answer but... Right now I only see my class being asked to do the cooperating while the upper 10% are whooping it up overseas. I spent 15 years of my professional life climbing the ladder while working under executives that never understood how to turn on their computer. Now that I have the skills they've outsourced overseas.
I never got my invite to the Hilton B-Day party, did you? Perhaps a cookout hosted by HP and Carly? Naw, she was so vindictive about HP Site Boise not being a cheerleader squad in her battle with HP's Heirs that she's cutting Boise (and other domestic sites I'm sure) whenever she can.
I don't like revolution, but I get the impression the upper CEO's are dolling out the economic equivalent of let them eat cake... More accurately, buy my stuff at inflated stupid rates... Please tell me what I'm not seeing!!!!
You're talking about the Springwalker. I always like that big hurking exoskeleton. I heard that it was going to be developed with SoloFlex but that was 4-5 years ago. Site is still up. Anybody know if there are any new developments on it?
Short of it being used for a Burningman Project, I think it's life is over. (Sniff...)
This keys into the concept of idea ownership but anyone can have an idea... I have many ideas but actually turning an idea into a realized piece of technology is a large task...
Jim sounds like he's done the research and is vanguarding the idea, but to think he should get something is simplistic and in the end may be part of Jim's problem...
Does he have a prototype? Does he have a manufacturing plan? Does he know who will buy it? Can he produce them now? Or is he still missing critical technologies?
If you even break down the concept completely you'll see how stupid it is... A paper computer... That's like a plastic car...
You can use ocmposites and near magical engineering but it's going to be no more a paper computer than you're going to have a plastic car... The engineering is too complex...
You could market it as a "paper computer" in that you engineered it to be like paper and thats how you want people to think of it... But the true device will need either 2-3 years of hard R&D to make it work *OR* when the technologies have been discovered and the right mix of time, resources, and people come together it will happen...
Or it won't... If Jim really wants to make it happen I'd recommend making the prototype and researching a viable manufacturing path... Then find a high cost, high profile application first...(Based on the 5 minute scan of his page I can't tell how far along he is or what the potential difficulties are with his manufacturing procedure and design..)
Business cards... Greeting Cards... Legally protect as much ownership of the idea as he can and then go forward... If he only sells 5 a year he will have proven it can be done and then funding would be easier...
Realistically there is no way Jim will get 100% control or revenue from his idea... But if works on it in the right way he may get a good 20-30% if it takes off...
But going after government ballot boxes when the technology is not even realized or produce-able is... nonviable... Anyone who thinks government is the place to try new technologies... is... well.. Going to have a tough time of it...
The proving ground is the caveat emptor marketplace... Take a lesson from Jobs and Wozniak.. Make the prototype and try the best you can... If the time is ready it will take off... In the meantime you've proven that you can make it, and legally you've done all you can to show it's yours... Then you just have to make a deal that it's in a company's best financial interest to work with you than to R&D it on their own...
All else fails you sue them for all their worth...
But if you going to just complain that after 10 years no one handed you an R&D budget because you aren't a friend... Well.. that makes sense actually.. Perhaps via this article or the internet you can find someone.. Maybe a college to work with you on a manufacturing plan and prototype... That will go farther...
I'd die to see how far he's gotten and where he's getting stucked... But from all the articles ten years looks pretty silly to be honest... Was their nothing of his research that produce a viable product? Perhaps a paper thin novelty watch/address book?
Imagine a construct, whether it's a web page, a book, or even an AI program. It contains large amounts of information indexed on a particular topic. (Ok.. not just a paper book but...)
Say a Volkswagen Bug (I love them myself)
A knexus on a Volkswagen Bug could contain the history of the Volkswagen Bug, Schematics, Driver testimonials, views of the bug with emphasis on aerodynamics, fuel flow, energy distribution, engine design, repair stories, tips, common breakdowns, engineer notes translated from German... etc...;-)
Now if to that, you can add an AI that asks questions, tests answers, and based on deficiencies or curiosities offers more content.
A pedagogue in a box...
And one of the tunable parameters is the more you work with it, the more you know..
If you can go through say 60-70% of the content.. You need to get out more... But if you make it through 20% of the content you have good knowledge, 40-50% you are absorbed enough information via interaction to be well rounded..
I just know the things I remember and retain have real life examples attached or good breadth and scope. Just facts don't hold. But if the content is an exploration it holds better...
Now if I could just find a knexus on Electrical Engineering cross ref'd with a knexus on Mathematics and Physics... *SIGH*
With one of those I wouldn't want to go to college... Actually...;-)
But a degree and the knowledge it will grant me is currently my only path...
Slashdot Mirror
and reconciliation...
;-)
I don't know about anyone else but I don't feel I as a web surfer or citizen get much in the way of negotiation, or re-negotation for that matter.
As for reconciliation I don't see them apologizing for assailing my eyeballs in any way shape and form they can even if I see it as rude.
If it's a social contract I'd say its been voided long time go. But if they are up for mediation sign me up...
It's an interesting way to view it but I don't think advertisers and marketers are up for the flip-side of the argument if you start viewing it as a contract, social or otherwise.
You know I hate the sentiment of this post because I want to disagree with it. But I can't.
In part I feel for what Mann is doing but I have to agree his attempt to throw light on the issue is infantile and silly.
Is there a better way to make the point? Or does the point need more sharpening/definition?
I'm at a loss...
Just some thoughts from days from working at an ISP.
Know your scope, technically you are setting up WiFi but you need to forget about the technology for a moment and have AT LEAST a prioritized list of what this network is to be used for. Without that guiding light it will do what it does, but it may not do what anybody (or perhaps a particular high ranking somebody) will want it to do. You won't have anything to guide your decisions or your priorities.
Second, LATENCY!
I haven't played with WiFi meshes so this may not come in to play but from past experience with Wireless solutions ala ISP you have to remember that cabling and bandwidth is VERY IMPORTANT. Donot be tempted to use wireless repeaters with abandon. You need to be able to have a greater amount of backbone, node to node bandwidth than the nodes themselves will provide. If the wireless nodes get overloaded and TCP retransmissions (or retransmissions by the WiFi repeaters themselves) will climb and there will be a point no packets will move. The latency of WiFi will cause this packet storm (if you will) way quicker than wired solutions. Without a good amount of bandwidth behind the nodes, or even a backup landline for administration bringing it back could be quite a pain.
The ISP I worked for tried to deploy point to point wireless bypassing the telco. Rather than run cable to the tower, they used point to point to the tower and then point to point to their customer. It didn't take long (since all of the point to point links were rated the same) for the whole solution to get snarled up bottlenecked on the point to point between the ISP and the tower. With the latency of wireless it would be unusable REALLY quick. (If only we had SQUID and bandwidth limiters back then... SIGH...)
Lastly, you have the greatest opportunity to win through control. Your watchwords should be metrics and design. As you roll out your nodes you best be pulling metrics so you know how your design will handle load and how it will fail. This will be knowledge that is good as gold, and will allow you to re-design and re-deploy. Your first attempt will be a guess but if you capture the metrics and track as most information as you can, whether that be the temperature of the wireless nodes (do they overheat, are they sheltered, is there a pattern to failure) or the packet retransmissions; all of that information will be vital to learn how to tune it up, engineer it and deploy it.
Have fun... I'm envious...
**DISCLAIMER ON**
;-). When it prints the reciepts with the "code" it can also add it into another database to check against when they use the webpage.
I've seen this question in different forms before. I know there has to be something out there indexed on freshmeat that will handle it, but I have yet to see it done the way I would do it. And the idea is only in my head, I haven't yet the chance to play with an actual implementation so I may be mispeaking Linuxes capabilities or how specifically to go about this.
**DISCLAIMER OFF**
The way I would look at doing it would be a simple cheap linux box with a WiFi card and a LAN Card. You can turn the linux box into a WiFi gateway with a 192.168.x.x on one side and the "real" network on the other. Add in NAT.
Now as for the authentication/control/lock down that will be accomplished via firewall rules and a webpage. If they are "authenticated" then you add the appropriate firewall rules to allow them to get out. You have a script check every 5 minutes for expires and remove them out of the firewall rules when they expire. Those that are expired are presented with a webpage that will allow them to get out again. This can all be done with firewall rules. A rule to let them out, or a rule that directs all port 80 traffic to a special web server that presents them with one page only.
This web page can take whatever input you want (ala PHP or Perl) and add them in again. I liked the idea of the reciepts. You could even have the a Linux POS/WiFi router that handles it all
Would love the chance to put one together. If there are any coffee shops in the Boise Idaho drop me a line...
Happy Hacking!
How does it fail? And when it fails what's the consequences? What's the repair time?
;-)
How do they want it used? How do the *NOT* want it used?
Memories of restoring and chown'ing gigs of data with management crawling all over me because something that failed was back online in an hour, but the infrastructure and restore took 12-14 hours. (Don't trust motherboard RAID without MUCH RESEARCH!
They will usually tell you the gotcha's or limitations.. 50ft cable Cat6e and no more. Only x^2 connections at a time. etc...
I want to know worse case scenario how it will fail.
If it can handle x per second, what happens at 0.95x? or 1.15x? Does it slow down gracefully, does it crash, does it hang?
It's one thing to give the engineering limits of a piece of equipment but those truly tough times are when the equipment is overloaded with usage (for whatever reason) and you've got to handle it. If we lived in a perfect world we would never push anything past 50-70% of its engineered design limits but having worked for an ISP 120-150% of its design limits was more the norm. And then when a customer/client/user does something patently stupid to overload the system it's still your problem to get the infrastructure stable and back online.
The above thoughts are just my opinion since I've been doing more support than engineering of late so I'm curious to read others responses as well.
Not sure how difficult these actually are but they look cool.
SG1 - Entering the stargate. Passing through portals or mirrors is a cool effect. The reverse side is nifty too. Having a face or body suspended in space as it peers through a portal but doesn't crossover completely.
SciFi General - Energy barrier or effect. A Shield covering an archway or deflecting something.
GhostBusters - Proton Packs and their light streams. I think those were actually done with artist/paintings overlaid on existing shots but I always like those shots.
Energy or liquid light is a cool effect. Collecting it as a ball in a hand or throwing it around.
Morphs - A transformation is cool. Having a face come out of a wall or object is pretty cool too.
Most of the effects come out of the need to carry a particular part of a story. Think LOTR when it only existed as a possibility in Peter Jackson's mind. If you want cool new ideas take the most fantastic sci-fi or fantasy story you've read and try to think how you could pull off that scene.
Robert Jordan's books come to mind, Wheel of Time. Raymond Feist's Riftwar Saga. Hyperion by Dan Simmons.
Any other amazing scenes come to mind? Feel free to add to.
Obviously this guy has gotten cross ways with reality as most people know it. And occasionally different firms and folks have gotten in the crossfire while he catches up. Sounds like he's headed toward the realm of geniuses and eccentrics but his odds are getting slimmer for the former I'd think
At every point folks have to choose to express their wants, whatever they may be, in a constructive fashion or a destructive fashion. To be critical of myself, I'm not always so good at it. But I think in time I come around to the more constructive side. This guy looks like he's a little less discriminating, a LOT more energetic, definitely more accomplished and it takes him a wee bit more time to come around.
So if you lack faith in the man's decency to man, which is in short supply these days then feel free to consider the third option: A lawyer. In the end you may still not achieve your goals ( in this case it would be retaining merkey.net in its current fashion I would suppose) but that's up to Matt Merkey to decide how much its worth to him.
I would also suggest a path of reconcillation backed up by law/lawyer/judge, rather than "legal victory at all costs". In the end you just want Mr. Jeff Merkey to realize their is a better way to achieve his peace of mind and move along.
Mayhap yournamesake.com is the modern equivalent of that hated doppleganger which shows that which you don't wish to see. I haven't looked mine up. Mayhap I should... Probably better if I don't.
Good luck to you Matt!
Hmmm... I actually liked Voyager but Deep Space Nine sucked. Enterprise is not much better.
What made Star Trek great is that rode a wave. At the time it portrayed a positive view of the future that we wanted to see, mixed in with some good ole 50's esque SciFi plots.
I'm not sure the next Star Trek is really meant for die hard Trekkers, since we all have varying views as what we want.
But I think it's time for Star Trek to turn the page. The 5 year mission of exploration as a structure for the stories is kinda broken. I didn't really get into ST:TNG until season 3 when the characters were established and I started to see what was going to happen to them next.
Somehow Trek has to turn the page. Maybe eschewing starships for a mass transit / wormhole system (I know it's not SG1, but that's the tuff part.) Maybe it's time to take some of those old universe shattering story lines and let the Trek universe have a "shocking change". Not just the Klingons becoming an ally, of sorts, but something that changes the entire context of the stories.
That always seemed the weird part of Star Trek, they kept meeting/finding people or technology that could change "everything" and nothing changed.
The only other thought I could think of would be a montage of "mini-series". Look through the multiverse of star trek literature out there and pick a few of the gems of smaller stories and make some mini series or episodes out of those. See what takes off, see what doesn't. Allow the stories to stand by themselves, and not always have a continuation.
I'm adding weight to your "BIAS" with every word.
So be it.
I acknowledge my bias. I revel in my bias. If I don't, I'm lying to you.
The base truth is this:
There's is no OBJECTIVE, only SUBJECTIVE.
So in the end, who is being more logical, you or me? I'm just expanding the scope of the discussion, you are limiting it to make your point.
My point is this:
Linux is not just software. If you donot acknowledge this you are simply speaking to your bias and to your point. Karma points for you. RAH!
But that's my "attempt" at a point. Linux is a word coined by Linus Torvalds. It is a kernel. It became an OS. It exists because people, who you decide to characterize "negatively" because they don't share the same technical judgements you do, continue to use it and support it because of who they are. You can't seperate the people and the OS with "technical" discussion. You are splitting the issue simply to make your point.
You can not have one without the other. Linux exists because people use it. People use it because it exists. Recursion forever, amen. Enjoy.
Granted, my point is subtle and abstract. But I speak it, because if you don't choose to "see it" then you will never understand to use Linux or add to the Linux community. If you don't seek the deeper context then you are rolling statistical dice, or just following a majority that may or may not be correct.
You will only adopt it when the vendor your company chooses mandates Linux. And then, why did your vendor "mandate" Linux?
So in that scenario, you just chose to have someone else make the decision on non-technical issues, then participating in the discussion... How sad.
That's my point and attempt at discussion. The quandry is that Linux has been "technically" viable for years but it continually it is not adopted.
That to me, is the discussion.
But it's off topic... So I cease...
And I'm getting sick of this "look at the other side of the coin" crap. Are you guys employed by M$ or something? Where do you come from? Why do you keep piping up?!?!?!
;-)
Look at the all the FUD that Microsoft and their ilk exude in WAVES at every media outlet every minute of the day.
Overall there may be balance, but our views, whether technically grounded or not, are part of that balance. Slashdot readers are Linux users. Being a linux user over the years has required a *HIGH* degree of grit and committment to make it work. And at every turn that committment is going to be tested AGAIN and AGAIN. Remember, Linux is "not supposed to work" but yet it does?
Sheer will and determination man! From whatever source it may spring that's what was needed to make it happen.
You slam that, but it wouldn't exist without it.
It wouldn't *BE* without it.
And the differences between Linux and M$ are fundamental. When we read about the Enlightenment and DaVinci I haven't seen any footnotes about Patent Lawyers or Intellectual Property Rights. But yet M$ is marshalling its patents. Why? Because they have a stronger "technical product"?
All of these issues are interconnected and go *WAY* beyond the technical.
What good is a product you make today when it will be obsoleted or deprecated requiring a rebuild in x number of time units, when you expected to use that unit for 3-4x number of time units? And when you may very well pay an additional licensing fee of 4 times y, y being what you paid for it? or y being why were you so silly to think you could do something with a M$ product with out paying more $$$'s at their time schedule down the road.
I will *NEVER* use a M$ where a linux or open source one will do. That's it. No discussion will sway me, and I will speak when I feel I must.
I must.
There will come a point that you will realize that the world is actually based on many faulty premises. It's usually referred to as "growing up." This is not pessimism, it just is. What you do with that is up to you. You will then be labeled accordingly by the self guided interests of those around you, enlightened or otherwise.
I judge you annoying. Slashdot. You know what it is. It's not a rant, it's a person speaking. Don't change it, go where you would rather be.
Sheesh...
Note: The above is probably a rant...
And I always tell the truth... Except when I'm lying...
I thought I was just a bad gamer... Who knew?
I remember liking games like the Tex Murphy series. Good story line, lots of little gags, and a hint system that would allow me to just stumble through. You lost points when you used the built in hints but you could let the story line continue.
I remember Grim Fandango. One of the last games I played all the way through. Weird..
Any other games I should check out?
Make up a list of other things you want to do. Here are some thoughts:
Email an old friend.
Add something to your website.
Research a weekend trip.
Check out a new gadget via web research.
Read some trade/industrial websites in your field.
Research something of interest to you, your hobbies or a potential interest.
Then when you have that list, just every 20-30 minutes (or whatever interval) switch over to one of those tasks for 5-10 minutes, and then switch back to your work tasks. The day will go *MUCH* faster.
If the job is really that bad I would work on tasks or accomplishments that move you to a different position, whatever that may be but it's your list. It will be like giving you positive feedback at regular intervals. The drudgery should just slide by.
Hope that helps!
A few years back I remember doing the whole "convert the world to Linux thing" and was knocked off my stride by the need for project management, Gant Charts and required access to Outlook so Microsoft Project could be used. So sayeth the Project Lead!
.02 but you are looking more at slow and easy deployment. There are lots of programs out there that can do it. I'll try to post another response with a few I've found on freshmeat.net
But at my newest job they are using dotproject. Works well, has Gant charts. If only I had it back then. Muhuhahhahhahaha!
Seriously, check it out. www.dotproject.net
As for the rest... Just my
The fun part won't be finding and/or implementing the software. The fun part will be convincing the folks to use it and making peace with whatever biases they have. It's not as cliche as "They'll choose Microsoft when given the choice" but more like "If they feel they have a choice, they will want to exercise it." And what they want may not necessarily be what is out there, open source, and that works reliable.
So coming up with a list of applications that they should learn is kinda tough. It's going to change no matter what.
Let the fun begin!
Good basic linux skills will get them farther, let the vendors drive for a particular choice. Just make them good compu learners...
UN*X/Linux doesn't work that way. You are looking for a one size fits all administrative interface and it doesn't exist.
/etc. You can use this to write program to update different pieces as needed. Any problem you do, you can undo. You can then run a program or use "kill -HUP" to get a process to reread that configuration.
But I can sum up some the key points and bits of wisdom I have picked up over the years.
1) Ascii text is your friend. 98% of all the configuration files for UN*X programs live in ascii files and they "usually" live in
2) Pick a programming language. Perl, AWK, Sed, ksh, all of them. You can use that programming language to role out changes as needed, or make a lot of changes really quickly. RSH/SSH allows you to do that across multiple systems. Use it carefully!
3) Design your environment. If you know what you are going to be using the servers, workstations and/or Linux embedded appliances for you can better decide how to automate it.
4)"Crunchy Cookie, Liquid Center".
In the end you will be automating certain administrative tasks over and over, but not all of them. That's why one size fits all won't work. It becomes a bloated security hole, so you only automate what you need and you automate it in an original and secure fashion.
As for some rock solid TLA recommendations.
SSH - SSH is your friend and as a replacement for RSH and its ilk you can use it to securely automate tasks. read up on ssh-agent for automating ssh access across multiple machines.
mon - How do you know it's working if you don't test it? You need to turn on monitoring, the more specific the test and monitor the better. mon is a good PERL framework for performing any test, and it has a lot of prepackaged/contributed test scripts that come in handy.
LDAP - Lots of UN*X environments are moving to LDAP to store enterprise wide information. It depends on how big of a UN*X environment you are setting up but having a centralized directory ala LDAP can be quite handy.
PAM/NIS - Plug In Authentication Modules. You can use these to have a centralized authentication server, cuts down on password updates. NIS+ is a tried and true system for stitching UNIX Systems together but I've only seen it installed in 1 UN*X environment and I've worked in several.
If you are looking for a prebuilt system or paradigm like Microsoft Server then you need to look to Redhat, Debian, else you are going to work from the need/application outwards.
Whatever you do more than once you will automate. When you no longer can budget the amount of UN*X Admins you will need you will start to build "tools" to delegate routine tasks, these will eventually become web pages, the web page will become an application. The application will become an acronym. The acronym will become a skill. The skill will become a job requirement HR will use to backfill a position. That's the way it goes.
Enjoy!
Use to be a email administrator for an ISP. One of the common tales of woe were for folks with common names. Bob was the worst but I'm sure John and Sue were close seconds. This was from 1998-2000, spam was bad but nowhere as bad as it is today.
I remember our particular "Bob" was quite irate at all the junk/misrouted email he started getting but that was just the curse of a common name. Whoever sets up those domains or email addresses just has to expect it, or morbidly curious and wants to read it.
Just like have a 555-5555 phone number. It's the way it goes.
Didn't Steve Wozniak get ahold of a number like that? 888-8888, just to see who would call it? There's a flipside to everything I guess.
Laser Tag is unrealistic by nature. It's a real world attempt to approximate a form of combat that only exists in fiction, IMHO.
Do you want "realistic" Star Wars or "realistic" Star Trek? Or better yet, PHOTON... Cough... hack....
Ok. That's not going to work but you can take the premise of laser tag and play with it. Ideas below (feasibility will vary):
Remember "Laser Tag" was meant to be just that. Tag. Our imaginations automatically take the guns and vests somewhere they may not be able to go.
Add in scenarios like "Capture the Flag" or "Hold Hill 529". Or better yet a grenade like gadget that will exploded if handled for more than x number of seconds or minutes. A weird form of "Hot Potato".
Modify the gear for team play. Different sensors can disable the entire teams in different ways. Add in a randomizer so you can have a "Critical Hit". You'll have to continually experiment but it could be fun.
If you add in the scenarios or campaigns with hardware that doesn't "die" but renders an inactive penalty for being scored a hit that can make for a funner game. Or reacts in either ways, lights up their vest making them an easier target.
You could even have a multitude of "gear" and reactions. A RadioFrequency gadget that may make vests "sing out" like a sonar ping, or a remote control gadget that allows you to trigger someone's gun or grenade.
Rather than one team versus another team, you could have multiple teams with different scenarios or goals intermixing.
I always thought it would be fun to add in robotics or a "remote" component. Automated defenses or some players that remotely control certain defenses. Maybe some more advanced or hardier embedded or fixed weaponry. Or a series of trips and traps that can placed, moved, and or modified.
The cool thing is if you work on the gear it's reusable, and tweakable. That could add some fun to the game but it could also kill it. Some folks can't handle having a game where the rules can be tweaked. For those regulation tennis may be more suited to them.
Technology can be something to play with. If you've got the folks who want to play. If Society for Creative Anachronisms can go at each other with swords and armor, why not this?
Have Fun!
Someone asks a sincere question, that's not out of bounds (Look around ye, Slashdot, see the banner? News for Nerds?!?!?), and all I see is humor and derision!
Buy a GOAT?!?!?! What is that?!?!?!
Excusing fetish humour, and obvious jibes (and there are *MANY*) the point of the exercise is not to revolutionize anything its to "play" with technology. Just like those folks who modify cars, build their own homes, or do whatever makes their boat float. Its about building it yourself so you learn from the experience.
Is he going to be the next Einstein? Maybe. But irregardless of the outcome I think it's cool to work on these projects.
How many of us have drooled over a homebuilt idea that turned out cool? If you didn't answer yes, you may need to change your homepage away from Slashdot! <BULLHORN> Sir! Step away from the computer and nobody gets hurt!</BULLHORN>
Explore, Invent, Enjoy, (Be Safe!)
So more power to ya man!
<SOAPBOX>
Now for constructive comment. You need to decide how expensive you want this thing to be. The more intelligent it is the more expensive it will be.
If you choose more expensive, powerful hardware (like mini-itx boards) then you will get more wiggle room to work around problems and flaws. If you choose more embedded hardware then you are going to do more coding and figuring to lock the hardware into doing what you want it do by design.
Myself I'd go for the mini-itx boards. You get reusable parts if the project goes astray. I've also seen a wireless RS232 bridge, but nowadays you could probably just hook it up with WiFi.
The biggest hurdle I see is handling the mapping and autonomous functionality. Making it stay within bounds all within a cost effective package. So in quick summary, some recommendations.
1: Choose reusable hardware. Don't buy one use embedded electronics, tend for reusable pieces like mini-itx, WiFi, standard batteries or modify and exhisting lawn mower. You can use these in other projects after you've worked through some prototypes. After several prototypes you may then decide to buy the pieces for a "finished" lawn moyer. Up to you.
2: Check with other groups, mailing lists, or local robot enthusiasts. You've probably heard it before but one of these folks may either have the idea/resource you need, or give you an idea where to go.
3: Design,Design,Design. Before you start tinkering you should have thought out 2-3 designs of how you want the system to work. Not talking 3D CAD drawings here, napkins will do, but if it doesn't look like it will work in theory, it won't work in practice.
4: Be clear to yourself why you are doing this. This is not a timesaver, this is not effective use of time. This is tinkering and a hobby. The pure joy of it. By the time you are done you will have no excuse for how you spent your time that will work for anybody (Wives, Neighbors, and Friends). You did it because you wanted to, any other reason you will only lead to humour and derision. That will make you regret the project and the time you've spent. Keep your humour about you.
Don't know why people have these attitudes but that's just the way we humans be. It's always easier/safer to doubt than to believe I guess.
Good hacking to you!
Note: I realize I did not directly answer his question but after looking through the highscores I wanted to step up with some answers/responses. I've not built one, but I've been looking at some similar projects myself. Hope my thoughts are helpful in some way.
What if our history dictated everyone flying around in huge "Hindenburg" like aircraft, would there be any innovation in the Aerospace industry?
Or instead of individual cars everyone was fixated on a limited number of grand double decker transports that only professional drivers could handle?
The point I'm trying to get at is why don't we make small solid technologies rather than huge technologies? Why rockets with huge payloads? Why not something more like the X-Prize?
Part of what seems to be killing NASA and the space industry is the view that only a certain type of technologies will work in space. I'm not sure how to change it but would more modular technologies be more fitting? Smaller payloads, more spacecraft, longer reaching technologies?
Just my two cents. It just seems exploration is always a dangerous when you don't have redundancy. Christopher Columbus at least could build another raft but our explorers run the risk of death by oxygen deprivation or burning up in the atmosphere because we only have a few spacecraft that costs billions of dollars. Doesn't make sense to me.
Even if it takes 50-100 years a few solid designs would be more interesting to me rather than these barely flying monoliths.
Think router. You are basically going to setup a Wireless Access Point bridged and open and with a linux box handling all the low level routing.
I actually spec'd some of this for a new ISP startup. While I grant I never set it up (they were having money woes and other issues) I've worked for 3 ISPs so I think this is good advice, but like all advice... well.. it's freely given so here we go with no guarantees.
When these WiFi computers hook in they are going to look for a DHCP address. So you'll need a DHCP server. That DHCP server *SHOULD* give them DNS information. So you'll need a DNS server. That DHCP Server will also give them a gateway which will be your linux box.
I'd recommend giving them IP address with 255.255.255.255 as the subnet (I believe this is possible) and in that way all traffic will route through the Linux Box. (You could also tighten this down even more by just installing a WiFi card in the Linux box and have *IT* be the WiFi Router). What you are after is that they can't/won't route to each other, but only to your Linux box.
Once you have that in place you start work work on the routing table. This is where I'll wax vague. Linux has the ability to handle Layer 4 router. You can route every request for port 80 traffic to a specific IP address. Anywhere they go they will get your BBS Webserver, whatever that happens to be.
Cable ISPs use the same thing. When you turn a box up on their network with a new MAC every attempt to port 80 gets routed to a web server you have to register with and then when you enter a valid username/password through their web page then it gets added into a routing table that lets you pass.
I don't mean to make it sound easy, you are going to have some testing to do but that's most of it. The devils in the details. But I'd recommend doing most of your work in the routing table of Linux system. You don't want those WiFi users talking to each other at the IP level (or lower for those OSI model folks at there). They should only being able to talk to your Linux Router and that's it!
Once your linux box has all the traffic you can route anything anywhere. Could even get fancy. Any attempt route a particular protocol gets fed back into your BBS. They want a MP3 over port 80? Feed them a soundbite. They want a WMA file over port 80? Feed them your own doctored version. (Though that would probably done with the help of a specially written web server. Perhaps perl or Regex to match http requests and file names to a list of substitutes... ;-)
Sounds fun!!!
Best wishes from an old BBS'er....
Or realize you have no "plan" as such and pick some areas you want to know more about. Whether it's bridge engineering, Inca history, or pearl diving, you know what you want to do. At 18 you have enough life history to know yourself and what you're interests are. Don't let *ANYTHING* stand in the way of delving into those interests. You will find people, mates and friends that share those interests and make your life AMAZING!
If you are going into college, find a college that speaks to those interests. Find PEOPLE that live and know those interests; Buy them a cup of coffee and learn from them when you can. If you don't know what those interests are then be honest and find a way to explore them. Whether that's traveling or throwing darts at a dewey decimal chart and picking a destination based on that.
Nothing has to happen at a certain time, you just have to be willing to explore it when you find it. The rest will figure it out on its own. When you're ready to settle down, you'll know it. A recent study shows emotions are a quick path to decision making, no emotion equates to the inability to make decisions quickly and effectively. Use that gut instinct, it will serve you well.
And if you never live in the mainstream, you'll define it for yourself. If the way you live is truly amazing the mainstream will come to you.
One cool but slightly dated book is Making a Living without a Job but all I can say is don't feel trapped. If you have an interest in something there is a niche that you can make a living at it. Granted, when you juggle in living in a particular place, a family or a particular lifestyle it will get more difficult but you don't have to drudge your life away!
We're just a bunch folks trying to be as happy as we can, we just tend to get a little confused on the way. We don't always see things through the eyes of the other guy/gal.
Intelligence will give you "depth" but it's not an end all beat all. You will see "more" but you still have the same life and spiritual hurdles we all do. It's up to you, as everyone, to use the gifts you have to the best of your advantage. Try to find the humour of a situation. Your intelligence gives you the best seat to the show, but not an all access stage pass but don't despair over it. Learn to enjoy the view!
Nothing else I can think of say in less than pages and hours so...
Good Journey!!!!
Ok... So we are in a transition period. NAFTA / Outsourcing is the wave of the future. But is any CEO or Economist looking at the long term?
Outsourcing makes sense in the short-term 3-5 years. But what about the long term? After the transition?
If you outsource manufacturing and assembly don't you cut out a potential resource? New talent? If someone doesn't have the hard knocks of manufacturing or assembling without an International Airline ticket and a stipend what will happen to *OUR* innovation?
I never hear an innovator say "Thanks to my Harvard Degree I was able to design the new next clothing fad." I tend to hear of someone who worked hands on then found a niche that wasn't being covered and they went for it. If you outsource the lower industries you outsource our innovation. Does this concern anyone else but me? And if so, what is the answer? Strictly for American Defense do you want all of our clothes manufacturing being handled outside of the United States? Would that be our new ration item if we were forced to go to war?
I'm for the long term. But I'd like to know what strategically American Business Leaders want that to be. Right now all I see is a bleeding out of our dollars to other countries with economists worried about deflation. And personally I don't think Business Leaders are knowledgeable or equipped, this is where government should step in and slow the transition for our own stability.
I've asked alot of questions for thought fodder but this is my A#1.
What would 5 conceptual business be in 20 years, and what are supposed to do to get there?
Myself, I think technical communes or cooperatives are the answer but... Right now I only see my class being asked to do the cooperating while the upper 10% are whooping it up overseas. I spent 15 years of my professional life climbing the ladder while working under executives that never understood how to turn on their computer. Now that I have the skills they've outsourced overseas.
I never got my invite to the Hilton B-Day party, did you? Perhaps a cookout hosted by HP and Carly? Naw, she was so vindictive about HP Site Boise not being a cheerleader squad in her battle with HP's Heirs that she's cutting Boise (and other domestic sites I'm sure) whenever she can.
I don't like revolution, but I get the impression the upper CEO's are dolling out the economic equivalent of let them eat cake... More accurately, buy my stuff at inflated stupid rates... Please tell me what I'm not seeing!!!!
Short of it being used for a Burningman Project, I think it's life is over. (Sniff...)
This keys into the concept of idea ownership but anyone can have an idea... I have many ideas but actually turning an idea into a realized piece of technology is a large task...
;-)
Jim sounds like he's done the research and is vanguarding the idea, but to think he should get something is simplistic and in the end may be part of Jim's problem...
Does he have a prototype? Does he have a manufacturing plan? Does he know who will buy it? Can he produce them now? Or is he still missing critical technologies?
If you even break down the concept completely you'll see how stupid it is... A paper computer... That's like a plastic car...
You can use ocmposites and near magical engineering but it's going to be no more a paper computer than you're going to have a plastic car... The engineering is too complex...
You could market it as a "paper computer" in that you engineered it to be like paper and thats how you want people to think of it... But the true device will need either 2-3 years of hard R&D to make it work *OR* when the technologies have been discovered and the right mix of time, resources, and people come together it will happen...
Or it won't... If Jim really wants to make it happen I'd recommend making the prototype and researching a viable manufacturing path... Then find a high cost, high profile application first...(Based on the 5 minute scan of his page I can't tell how far along he is or what the potential difficulties are with his manufacturing procedure and design..)
Business cards... Greeting Cards... Legally protect as much ownership of the idea as he can and then go forward... If he only sells 5 a year he will have proven it can be done and then funding would be easier...
Realistically there is no way Jim will get 100% control or revenue from his idea... But if works on it in the right way he may get a good 20-30% if it takes off...
But going after government ballot boxes when the technology is not even realized or produce-able is... nonviable... Anyone who thinks government is the place to try new technologies... is... well..
Going to have a tough time of it...
The proving ground is the caveat emptor marketplace... Take a lesson from Jobs and Wozniak.. Make the prototype and try the best you can... If the time is ready it will take off... In the meantime you've proven that you can make it, and legally you've done all you can to show it's yours... Then you just have to make a deal that it's in a company's best financial interest to work with you than to R&D it on their own...
All else fails you sue them for all their worth...
But if you going to just complain that after 10 years no one handed you an R&D budget because you aren't a friend... Well.. that makes sense actually.. Perhaps via this article or the internet you can find someone.. Maybe a college to work with you on a manufacturing plan and prototype... That will go farther...
I'd die to see how far he's gotten and where he's getting stucked... But from all the articles ten years looks pretty silly to be honest... Was their nothing of his research that produce a viable product? Perhaps a paper thin novelty watch/address book?
I'm done now...
Oh one more thing...
www.wearlogic.com
And perhaps I can learn to spell... or is that parse?
Is it bare with me?
Hmmm.. I see English 101 in my future...
*SIGH*
It's word play but bear with me...
;-)
;-)
Imagine a construct, whether it's a web page, a book, or even an AI program. It contains large amounts of information indexed on a particular topic. (Ok.. not just a paper book but...)
Say a Volkswagen Bug (I love them myself)
A knexus on a Volkswagen Bug could contain the history of the Volkswagen Bug, Schematics, Driver testimonials, views of the bug with emphasis on aerodynamics, fuel flow, energy distribution, engine design, repair stories, tips, common breakdowns, engineer notes translated from German... etc...
Now if to that, you can add an AI that asks questions, tests answers, and based on deficiencies or curiosities offers more content.
A pedagogue in a box...
And one of the tunable parameters is the more you work with it, the more you know..
If you can go through say 60-70% of the content..
You need to get out more... But if you make it through 20% of the content you have good knowledge, 40-50% you are absorbed enough information via interaction to be well rounded..
I just know the things I remember and retain have real life examples attached or good breadth and scope. Just facts don't hold. But if the content is an exploration it holds better...
Now if I could just find a knexus on Electrical Engineering cross ref'd with a knexus on Mathematics and Physics... *SIGH*
With one of those I wouldn't want to go to college... Actually...
But a degree and the knowledge it will grant me is currently my only path...