ROFLMAO. I don't care whether anyone sees my scribblings here or not, although I do appreciate the gesture. Unlike many, I don't take anything, myself included, that seriously. Why? Well, due to disabilities incurred while in the service, I'm terminal. Heck, I'm supposed to have been dead these last two to four years (although some might argue that I already am from the shoulders up from what I see in my Inbox;-).
It's remarkably freeing in the intellectual sense to be able to sit back, look at the universe, and just laugh. I give my commentary and whether anyone values it or not, I just don't care. Ditto the various hardware and software projects I help around the world. By the time it means anything, I'll be gone. Then you all can laugh. Whether it was right and especially if it was wrong. Have a chuckle on me.
Yes, they don't have a monopoly on God. All three religions are "People of the Book" from the Muslim perspective and I've read all the books as well as the "Book of Mormon", "Bhagavad Vita", and various other works. It helps when your mother is an anthropologist who specializes in religion and your the person typing all her papers. And that's why I don't call myself a Christian as I have no idea who's right in this question of the nature of the universe. When I don't know, I don't know:-).
However at the period of time that the Constitution was written there were only a few people of the Jewish faith in this country and they kept a pretty low profile which is sad and there were no Muslims that anyone has been able to confirm to date although that there were some brought over as slaves or indentured servants is always a possibility. That wouldn't surprise me in the least as my great-great-however-many-great grandparents on my father's side of the family did come over as indentured servants of a rather odd faith.
Interesting point! Back then in order to vote one had to own property either in the form of land or in the form of tools, so you are almost certainly right.
I hope you'll pardon me while I study this some more as it is a posting worthy of great attention (and should be modded up appropriately). I do agree that "liberty", "equal protection" and other aspects of the Constitution and the Amendments should be discussed whenever a Justice is appointed and confirmed.
BTW, I consider Justice Clarence Thomas a libertarian with a small "l" as I am for the most part and as he has demonstrated on the bench to date. The Constitution is one of the great documents in the history of humanity, proving that we can aspire to greater things than simple self-interest and that document is something worthy of our being human. And that's whether there's a creator involved or not.
Firestorm part deux: How about if Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to become the first black Chief Justice? Oh my, can you see the contortions the left in this country would go through to oppose him while supporting the notion? ROFLMAO!
ROFLMAO!! I'm a technician and engineer, we have to admit when we are wrong. As I keep saying, nuclear meltdowns are sooo messy, let alone other failures, so a willingness to admit you are wrong must be part of the job specification. Or at least I hope this would be so although I do wonder looking around at the world.
That's a fallacy pure and simple. Obviously you do not have any understanding of the literature of the eighteenth century. What Jefferson meant by "pursuit of happiness" had nothing to do with chasing or finding happiness, it had everything to do with engaging in a job that gave you satisfaction, something we can't do today what with all the requirements for business licenses, professional licenses, certifications, and the like. Sorry, wrong guess, minus five.
Frankly I don't care one way or the other as I pointed out I'm not a Christian. However, you are entirely correct as I conflated the pledge of allegiance with the Constitution and my oath to this country which ended "so help me God", someone that I don't know whether he/she exists or not.
My apologies. At least I'm willing to admit I'm wrong.
I guess I set off a firestorm. All I can say is that John Adams is certainly no James Madison or Thomas Jefferson, as any study of his Presidency would reveal. However, I have no argument with his position with respect to "Musselmen" or "any Mehomitan" nation as I have spent quite a bit of time over in the middle east, call numerous Muslims friends, from the lower, middle, and upper classes including the various royal families.
So sorry, but I am color blind, sex blind, religion blind, pretty much everything save intelligence blind. I find value in about everyone I have met in this lifetime. If you want to put menorahs, the Koran (which I've read, have you?) or the Ten Commandments up in the public square, go for it. It doesn't offend me as I'm religion neutral. Gee, it seems that Jefferson and Madison were religion neutral as well. Even John Adams. My, my.
As for the other issues which you don't address, again the 10th Amendment covers it very nicely. If it ain't in the Constitution, a document I swore a long time ago to preserve, protect and defend and still hold to that oath despite my country breaking faith from me, it is left to the states or the people. Which is exactly what is wrong with this country.
Pardon me, but how is it activist to actually discuss the law in terms that the founding fathers intended? I'm not a Christian, never have been, but it's part and parcel of the Declaration of Independence (Creator anyone?) and the Constitution (God anyone?). As for abortion, although it existed as did drug abuse in the eighteenth century, neither was addressed as they shouldn't be addressed except in terms of the 10th Amendment which was put in the Bill of Rights for exactly that reason. These are state issues or personal issues. It is no concern of the federal government as are a lot of things that the federal government has decided to become concerned with lately (since the '60's).
Sorry, but Jefferson and Madison knew what the frag they were doing when they set up our structure of government as anyone would know from their writings if they bothered to read, which sad to say is no longer part of the curricula of education today. No surprise that as it would torpedo the so-called liberal agenda today.
I'm still ticked that the left today has stolen our good "liberal" name, so much so that we have to call ourselves "classical liberals". Jefferson, and to a lesser extent Madison, are my mentors.
Actually I agree. I expect the radical left to come out frothing at the mouth given that the actual balance of the court may change with these two appointments. Too many decisions of late have been 5-4 and 6-3. It's going to be lively, that's for sure.
Strange, since I'm radical left, just not the radical left of the so-called Democratic party.
I suppose I should expect this from an AC, and do read to the end please. A wide scale disaster has absolutely nothing to do with normal or peak traffic loads on any network that I've ever dealt with and I've dealt with a lot for the last twenty-four years (the networks before that were really primitive!).
Yes, they do oversell capacity, every provider in the US does to an extreme extent which is why I am very careful in my recommendations about which service providers a particular client goes with when I make that recommendation. This is why I do extensive testing of real-world bandwidth for each service at the site (as I'm doing right now) and when this one comes along I will do the same. My background would demand it if nothing else. I like hard numbers in front of me.
However, your critique is so far off the wall it isn't funny. I know the engineering side as well as the possibilities. Get back to me when you have some hard numbers. As will I if I'm proven wrong. In this case, I admit I don't know if what they are proposing will hold up in the MIMO/multiple subscriber model. Nor do you. We have to wait and see.
BTW, ascribing the "evil" practices of certain US corporations to others is just plain wrong in my book. I take each corporation as an individual, as I do with people, and particular practices of one concern don't color my vision when it comes to other concerns. In other words, I don't stereotype. Never have, never will.
How the Dutch cope with this is pretty simple. They have these large concrete barges with air bladders that they move to points of imminent levy failure and then void the bladders to allow water to flood them. Poof! Instant blockage. Why we don't have anything like that is beyond me save the NIH (Hot Invented Here) syndrome as I've pointed out in all to many places. Sorry, as a systems engineer, this is something as old as Rome given my reading of history.
Interesting blog entry although the author misses the point. The demographic that most advertisers are interested in are not watching television nor are they reading publications. Pure and simple truth which is why we now have/. articles on advertisements in online games!
Despite all this, I'm very, very glad that I'm totally paranoid and don't allow any information to be transmitted from my computer, or to my computer, except for basice HTML, IP address, date and time, unless I lift restrictions here. Experian credit scores? Sheesh!
You are probably on the mark here. What most people don't realize is that business is fundamentally risk adverse except in a bubble where the bandwagon effect seems to overcome that risk adversion. Or at least that is what I've observed over a rather lengthy lifetime. In some ways this resembles the prisoners dilemma in games theory, a fundamental part of current microeconomics.
Actually, I feel you are both right, leaning more towards your critique than his. Whatever we come up with is going to require novel solutions in the electronics engineering arena (phased array antennas is a wonderful idea, IMNSHO) in addition to other technologies we haven't even thought of yet. We are on a cusp here and I wouldn't be surprised if our idiots in charge (FCC et al.) make the wrong decisions here. They always do {sigh}.
It's quite obvious you have no idea of what is possible in the fields of electrical and electronic engineering. Why do you ass-u-me that one antenna is pumping out the signal to 10,000 users. Why do you ass-u-me that there are not overlapping delivery systems. Why do you ass-u-me that multiple users seeing the same feed can't be service by the same signal? What do you know about how MIMO actually works?
Now true, I have no assumptions about how it is going to work in the field when there are multiple users on the same antenna with different feeds, but I wait for the actual data from the field tests before I start to whine.
I'm an engineer. Test it, abuse it, verify it, then publish the data. This article is about possibilities, not actual field test data.
That's my vision of where we are going and the promise of MIMO technology over multiple bandwidths. Whether my vision or the potential matches reality is something we will have to find out as time marches on. I do know that the military isn't sitting around on this stuff.
Ain't that the gods' honest truth! Elsewhere it seems to be a consumer push model whereby they (whoever they are) provide new and novel services to see where consumer demand may occur in the hopes of deriving a new source of income. Here, in the US, it seems to be a consumer pull model whereby consumers must pony up large amounts of money before capital investment occurs to provide a new service and then only when the large enterprises demand such service. The piddly little single consumer is left to suck hind tit until it trickles down to our level.
Sheesh, did I just write that? I did. Reaganomics as applied to telecommunications services. It still seems to be true though. Ouch!
I don't see any reason it wouldn't be feasible from an engineering standpoint unless there is something odd about the building, or the surrounding environs, at your location. If anything, mobility is more of a hazard for these devices than a fixed location where you can adjust the transceiving device location, in my not so humble opinion.
Just for reference I am looking at various wireless solutions here simply due to the fact that the landlord is unwilling to allow me to add cable service and DSL is out of the question. So far, no coverage in my area that is worth a rat-frag but I have hopes. Now if I could convince them that I don't do laptops so I don't need a PC card {sigh}.
This would be really sweet even if it only lived up to 1/10th the bandwidth.
I don't necessarily recommend anyone's software simply because I get it cheap or free. I'm practically buried in CD's and DVD's of software here as an MS Partner (with ActionPack sub), IBM Developer, and beta-tester to practically everyone significant or insignificant. That, however, doesn't color my decision in the least.
I always base my recommendations on the fitness of the software, or hardware, to what the client actually needs as modified by their budgetary and technical support constraints. I was doing that long before MS even came along for everyone. The last thing I need is for someone to bad mouth me and that to pass along by word of mouth. Reputation is everything in the consulting biz. One "Aw shjt" can ruin all those "Atta-boys" as we used to say in the Navy.
Exactly. It is obvious and from an implementation standpoint, trivial. That is why I have a problem with so many of the current crop of software patents.
Look, when I'm working on a project, almost everything that I do can be found somewhere in "The Art of Computer Programming" by Donald Knuth, "Algorithms in..." by Sedgewick (his grad student), or in more recent times, in the various "Proceedings of (fill in the blank)" or other similar journals. I've come up with perhaps four orignal algorithms my whole life that someone else hadn't invented and I have spent my life working on original projects, things no one else has ever done.
I have copyrighted my works, yes, with the additional proviso that they may be extended with attribution. Not unusual when you spend most of your life in government service. However, given that so much is not orginal, just organized differently, should I have a patent? I would say no. And that doesn't even address the ridiculous life-span of patents today.
In this case, it is far worse. Hierarchal systems are a fact of life in organizing information. Heck, hierarchal meta-data organized systems are much older than even the application from Creative. I would be hard put to organize these files any other way although I think if I put my brain on it, I might come up with another way but I wouldn't put money on that. What is original? What is non-obvious? What isn't trivial?
This is of the exact same order as the one-click shopping patent for Amazon. If the USPTO can't get their act together, they should be abolished or software patents (among other things) should be abolished and I speak as an inventor of hardware products on this as well. I wouldn't let a plumber advise me on how to engineer a distributed enterprise-class computing system, I sure don't think the current crop of USPTO so-called experts are qualified to rule on these.
Someone else pointed towards peer review. I'm not exactly thrilled by that as I've seen a LOT of politics in peer review in the scientific and medical fields (I have also worked in those). Still, better than having non-experts doing this work. Either hire the expertise or get out of the game.
Actually there was, it was called the Amiga. I also recall several of the older S-100 based machines that implemented DMA based channel I/O, but that were extremely expensive, even for that time. All gone, sad to say. The engineering was something else. Not the crud we deal with now which requires major changes (reprogramming Northbridge/Southbridge, etc.) to get decent I/O and other optimizations working, which I've done.
No, it is a theory supported by computer models that may or may not have any relation to reality. I've spent my life working in the statistical modeling field and have an extensive background in numerous scientific and damn near every engineering field (see profile) and I can tell you that your model is only a good as whether what it predicts matches reality and exactly how closely.
Current models are all over the place as to what they predict and in almost every case what they predict isn't even close by an order of magnitude to what has happened in that past. Now how are we supposed to rely on models that can't even predict things by a factor of ten? Sheesh, give me a break! Heck, what is even stranger are the journal articles (light reading here) will start with the assumption that global warming is real, find contrary data, and conclude that global warming is real despite the contrary data. This isn't science, it's persuit of funding.
The plain fact of the matter is that to get funding today in various related disciplines to climatology you have to climb on the global warming bandwagon. Sad, but true. It is also interesting that many of the critics of global warming are retired and no longer need funding to persue their interests in the field. In statistics we'd call that strongly correlated.
Now this isn't to say global warming isn't real although I would challenge the notion that it is necessarily related to any man-related activity (that's for another post if anyone is interested). The only constant about the climate on this planet is change and that has been true since it accreted to a planet.
I agree and this trend has only been accelerating. I'm wondering when corporate property will be considered on the same order as a city or nation state with their own legal systems and all the other issues. I don't know if you ever read it but I see more and more that the ShadowRun series of books (and the game) may have been prescient.
Slashdot Mirror
It's remarkably freeing in the intellectual sense to be able to sit back, look at the universe, and just laugh. I give my commentary and whether anyone values it or not, I just don't care. Ditto the various hardware and software projects I help around the world. By the time it means anything, I'll be gone. Then you all can laugh. Whether it was right and especially if it was wrong. Have a chuckle on me.
However at the period of time that the Constitution was written there were only a few people of the Jewish faith in this country and they kept a pretty low profile which is sad and there were no Muslims that anyone has been able to confirm to date although that there were some brought over as slaves or indentured servants is always a possibility. That wouldn't surprise me in the least as my great-great-however-many-great grandparents on my father's side of the family did come over as indentured servants of a rather odd faith.
Interesting point! Back then in order to vote one had to own property either in the form of land or in the form of tools, so you are almost certainly right.
BTW, I consider Justice Clarence Thomas a libertarian with a small "l" as I am for the most part and as he has demonstrated on the bench to date. The Constitution is one of the great documents in the history of humanity, proving that we can aspire to greater things than simple self-interest and that document is something worthy of our being human. And that's whether there's a creator involved or not.
Firestorm part deux: How about if Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to become the first black Chief Justice? Oh my, can you see the contortions the left in this country would go through to oppose him while supporting the notion? ROFLMAO!
ROFLMAO!! I'm a technician and engineer, we have to admit when we are wrong. As I keep saying, nuclear meltdowns are sooo messy, let alone other failures, so a willingness to admit you are wrong must be part of the job specification. Or at least I hope this would be so although I do wonder looking around at the world.
That's a fallacy pure and simple. Obviously you do not have any understanding of the literature of the eighteenth century. What Jefferson meant by "pursuit of happiness" had nothing to do with chasing or finding happiness, it had everything to do with engaging in a job that gave you satisfaction, something we can't do today what with all the requirements for business licenses, professional licenses, certifications, and the like. Sorry, wrong guess, minus five.
My apologies. At least I'm willing to admit I'm wrong.
So sorry, but I am color blind, sex blind, religion blind, pretty much everything save intelligence blind. I find value in about everyone I have met in this lifetime. If you want to put menorahs, the Koran (which I've read, have you?) or the Ten Commandments up in the public square, go for it. It doesn't offend me as I'm religion neutral. Gee, it seems that Jefferson and Madison were religion neutral as well. Even John Adams. My, my.
As for the other issues which you don't address, again the 10th Amendment covers it very nicely. If it ain't in the Constitution, a document I swore a long time ago to preserve, protect and defend and still hold to that oath despite my country breaking faith from me, it is left to the states or the people. Which is exactly what is wrong with this country.
Sorry, but try another shot at my bows.
Sorry, but Jefferson and Madison knew what the frag they were doing when they set up our structure of government as anyone would know from their writings if they bothered to read, which sad to say is no longer part of the curricula of education today. No surprise that as it would torpedo the so-called liberal agenda today.
I'm still ticked that the left today has stolen our good "liberal" name, so much so that we have to call ourselves "classical liberals". Jefferson, and to a lesser extent Madison, are my mentors.
Strange, since I'm radical left, just not the radical left of the so-called Democratic party.
Yes, they do oversell capacity, every provider in the US does to an extreme extent which is why I am very careful in my recommendations about which service providers a particular client goes with when I make that recommendation. This is why I do extensive testing of real-world bandwidth for each service at the site (as I'm doing right now) and when this one comes along I will do the same. My background would demand it if nothing else. I like hard numbers in front of me.
However, your critique is so far off the wall it isn't funny. I know the engineering side as well as the possibilities. Get back to me when you have some hard numbers. As will I if I'm proven wrong. In this case, I admit I don't know if what they are proposing will hold up in the MIMO/multiple subscriber model. Nor do you. We have to wait and see.
BTW, ascribing the "evil" practices of certain US corporations to others is just plain wrong in my book. I take each corporation as an individual, as I do with people, and particular practices of one concern don't color my vision when it comes to other concerns. In other words, I don't stereotype. Never have, never will.
How the Dutch cope with this is pretty simple. They have these large concrete barges with air bladders that they move to points of imminent levy failure and then void the bladders to allow water to flood them. Poof! Instant blockage. Why we don't have anything like that is beyond me save the NIH (Hot Invented Here) syndrome as I've pointed out in all to many places. Sorry, as a systems engineer, this is something as old as Rome given my reading of history.
Despite all this, I'm very, very glad that I'm totally paranoid and don't allow any information to be transmitted from my computer, or to my computer, except for basice HTML, IP address, date and time, unless I lift restrictions here. Experian credit scores? Sheesh!
You are probably on the mark here. What most people don't realize is that business is fundamentally risk adverse except in a bubble where the bandwagon effect seems to overcome that risk adversion. Or at least that is what I've observed over a rather lengthy lifetime. In some ways this resembles the prisoners dilemma in games theory, a fundamental part of current microeconomics.
Actually, I feel you are both right, leaning more towards your critique than his. Whatever we come up with is going to require novel solutions in the electronics engineering arena (phased array antennas is a wonderful idea, IMNSHO) in addition to other technologies we haven't even thought of yet. We are on a cusp here and I wouldn't be surprised if our idiots in charge (FCC et al.) make the wrong decisions here. They always do {sigh}.
Now true, I have no assumptions about how it is going to work in the field when there are multiple users on the same antenna with different feeds, but I wait for the actual data from the field tests before I start to whine.
I'm an engineer. Test it, abuse it, verify it, then publish the data. This article is about possibilities, not actual field test data.
That's my vision of where we are going and the promise of MIMO technology over multiple bandwidths. Whether my vision or the potential matches reality is something we will have to find out as time marches on. I do know that the military isn't sitting around on this stuff.
Sheesh, did I just write that? I did. Reaganomics as applied to telecommunications services. It still seems to be true though. Ouch!
Just for reference I am looking at various wireless solutions here simply due to the fact that the landlord is unwilling to allow me to add cable service and DSL is out of the question. So far, no coverage in my area that is worth a rat-frag but I have hopes. Now if I could convince them that I don't do laptops so I don't need a PC card {sigh}.
This would be really sweet even if it only lived up to 1/10th the bandwidth.
And don't forget that they have a nuclear fuel cell that is deuterium based as well that is used in space probes.
I always base my recommendations on the fitness of the software, or hardware, to what the client actually needs as modified by their budgetary and technical support constraints. I was doing that long before MS even came along for everyone. The last thing I need is for someone to bad mouth me and that to pass along by word of mouth. Reputation is everything in the consulting biz. One "Aw shjt" can ruin all those "Atta-boys" as we used to say in the Navy.
So please, make that brush a little less broad.
Look, when I'm working on a project, almost everything that I do can be found somewhere in "The Art of Computer Programming" by Donald Knuth, "Algorithms in ..." by Sedgewick (his grad student), or in more recent times, in the various "Proceedings of (fill in the blank)" or other similar journals. I've come up with perhaps four orignal algorithms my whole life that someone else hadn't invented and I have spent my life working on original projects, things no one else has ever done.
I have copyrighted my works, yes, with the additional proviso that they may be extended with attribution. Not unusual when you spend most of your life in government service. However, given that so much is not orginal, just organized differently, should I have a patent? I would say no. And that doesn't even address the ridiculous life-span of patents today.
In this case, it is far worse. Hierarchal systems are a fact of life in organizing information. Heck, hierarchal meta-data organized systems are much older than even the application from Creative. I would be hard put to organize these files any other way although I think if I put my brain on it, I might come up with another way but I wouldn't put money on that. What is original? What is non-obvious? What isn't trivial?
This is of the exact same order as the one-click shopping patent for Amazon. If the USPTO can't get their act together, they should be abolished or software patents (among other things) should be abolished and I speak as an inventor of hardware products on this as well. I wouldn't let a plumber advise me on how to engineer a distributed enterprise-class computing system, I sure don't think the current crop of USPTO so-called experts are qualified to rule on these.
Someone else pointed towards peer review. I'm not exactly thrilled by that as I've seen a LOT of politics in peer review in the scientific and medical fields (I have also worked in those). Still, better than having non-experts doing this work. Either hire the expertise or get out of the game.
Actually there was, it was called the Amiga. I also recall several of the older S-100 based machines that implemented DMA based channel I/O, but that were extremely expensive, even for that time. All gone, sad to say. The engineering was something else. Not the crud we deal with now which requires major changes (reprogramming Northbridge/Southbridge, etc.) to get decent I/O and other optimizations working, which I've done.
Current models are all over the place as to what they predict and in almost every case what they predict isn't even close by an order of magnitude to what has happened in that past. Now how are we supposed to rely on models that can't even predict things by a factor of ten? Sheesh, give me a break! Heck, what is even stranger are the journal articles (light reading here) will start with the assumption that global warming is real, find contrary data, and conclude that global warming is real despite the contrary data. This isn't science, it's persuit of funding.
The plain fact of the matter is that to get funding today in various related disciplines to climatology you have to climb on the global warming bandwagon. Sad, but true. It is also interesting that many of the critics of global warming are retired and no longer need funding to persue their interests in the field. In statistics we'd call that strongly correlated.
Now this isn't to say global warming isn't real although I would challenge the notion that it is necessarily related to any man-related activity (that's for another post if anyone is interested). The only constant about the climate on this planet is change and that has been true since it accreted to a planet.
I agree and this trend has only been accelerating. I'm wondering when corporate property will be considered on the same order as a city or nation state with their own legal systems and all the other issues. I don't know if you ever read it but I see more and more that the ShadowRun series of books (and the game) may have been prescient.