Wednesday, January 28, 2009

DDOS attacks

This is not too hard to solve. (Score:3, Interesting)
by John Sokol (109591) on Saturday January 24, @12:57AM (#26585821) Homepage Journal

by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 24, @10:40AM (#26588965)
Thanks for posting an article from 2001.
Re:This is not too hard to solve. (Score:2)
by John Sokol (109591) on Saturday January 24, @01:36PM (#26590587) Homepage Journal
So what, it's 2001. Does that somehow make it less valid? If your right your right, 10 minutes or 10 years doesn't change that.
It's my article, and it will work, even it they choose to keep letting things like this happen.
At some point we will have to implement something, but the longer they put it off, the harder it will be to fix later.
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 26, @05:31PM (#26614189)
Dude, there is sooooo prior art on this.
See these documents:
Predates Sokol by three years.
All my customer-facing VLANs/subnets get hardened with anti-spoofing ACLs, strict URPF, or both. Anybody who runs a network of any size that doesn't do this is a lazy boob.
Great stuff.
But you prove my point even further then.
Didn't you...
So it's even more embarrassing that there are RFC already out there to solve this and they choose not to implement this.
I don't claim to be the first to figure this out.
I didn't even bother to research it, just put my idea out there for what ever it's worth back in 2001.

OS's are now part of National Security!

I can't believe someone modded this down!

OS's are now part of National Security! (Score 0, Offtopic) on Monday January 26, @01:12PM

by John Sokol on Monday January 26, @01:12PM (#26609925)
Attached to: EU Could Force Bundling Firefox With Windows
Governments globally are starting to realize that the OS that it's citizens use are more then just some toy, but an integral part of communications and a nations GNP, and security.
As govs become more aware of how damaging cyberattacks are, they are realizing that they need to start regulating the Operating system that 90% of there population is using.
So they are just running out of patients with Microsoft's games. It's not just the EU, but India, Russia, China, and many Asian and South American countries.
So we are just seeing the beginning of a trend. A good one if you ask me too.
One that will really level the playing field of Linux.
We really need Windows to ship with something like the Synaptic package manager, that allow many applications to be searchable and super easy online installation.
This way user and see a menu of browsers to choose from and can install several with just the click of a mouse.

Mobile Phone electronic payment systems

Comment: Most a just using credit card numbers! (Score 1) on Monday January 26, @01:31PM

by John Sokol on Monday January 26, @01:31PM (#26610143)
Attached to: Bickering Blocks US Mobile Phone Payments
These idiots are still tiring to just use credit card numbers stored in people phones.
Like this isn't a security disaster just waiting to happen. If someone get a CC number tied to some ones checking account, they could take 10's of 1000's of dollars from just one individual.
There is no way to limit ones exposure of the vulnerability like paper money does.
With paper money, if I loose my wallet, they only get the $200 or what ever I just took from my ATM and no more. But with the cards, sky's the limit, they can take it all, and even run up debt at 30% interest. .
If I have a CC card with a 10K limit they can take it all, and leave me on the hook for it! is my solution. my patent.
This limits one liability, not with legalize but technology, where cash is transferred to the phone like real money. It's done like you would with an ATM! If the phone is compromised, they only get the cash loaded onto the phone and more more.

My view on the future with global warming

I think this is a bad assumption. (Score 1) on Tuesday January 27, @01:24PM Comments: 1031

by John Sokol on Tuesday January 27, @01:24PM (#26626075)
Attached to: Global Warming Irreversible, NOAA Scientist Finds
This assumes we just stop outputting CO2 at some point and are passive. But humans are anything but passive, this is what got us into this mess in the first place.
So the article doesn't take into things like sequestration and other active attempts to reverse the trend.
I am confident in 50 year we will be able to completely re-terraform earth back to normal.
We will be able to deliberately control the amount of atmospheric gases, solar radiation reaching earth, and chemistry of the oceans and become the masters of our climate.
Why do I think this?
GA, AI, super computers.
And progress in Material science, renewable energy, Self replicating robotics, genetics and artificially accelerated evolution, Computational chemistry and simulation of quantum molecular dynamics.
The machines (beyond computers) under human guidance will do the research needed to reverse things.
So it's will be just a matter of energy required needed to do this.
I believe it will take more power to put the CO2 back then when we released it from burning fossil fuels. Essentially give back that energy that we used for the past 100 years + interest.
As much as I disagree with Kurzwell on many things, some parts of his Singularity theory are dead on and will be able to reverse this trend.
So getting fusion working, space solar or some other massive power source going is critical to do this.
The key here is to use the amount of available resources as best as possible to devise future solutions before we get wiped out as a species.
I have faith that technology will save us.
But it may get a lot worse before it gets better.

Friday, January 16, 2009

Our world may be a giant hologram

From : NewScientist

Has GEO600's laser probed the fundamental fuzziness of space-time? (Image: Wolfgang Filser / Max Planck Society)

Has GEO600's laser probed the fundamental fuzziness of space-time? (Image: Wolfgang Filser / Max Planck Society)

DRIVING through the countryside south of Hanover, it would be easy to miss the GEO600 experiment. From the outside, it doesn't look much: in the corner of a field stands an assortment of boxy temporary buildings, from which two long trenches emerge, at a right angle to each other, covered with corrugated iron. Underneath the metal sheets, however, lies a detector that stretches for 600 metres.

For the past seven years, this German set-up has been looking for gravitational waves - ripples in space-time thrown off by super-dense astronomical objects such as neutron stars and black holes. GEO600 has not detected any gravitational waves so far, but it might inadvertently have made the most important discovery in physics for half a century.

For many months, the GEO600 team-members had been scratching their heads over inexplicable noise that is plaguing their giant detector. Then, out of the blue, a researcher approached them with an explanation. In fact, he had even predicted the noise before he knew they were detecting it. According to Craig Hogan, a physicist at the Fermilab particle physics lab in Batavia, Illinois, GEO600 has stumbled upon the fundamental limit of space-time - the point where space-time stops behaving like the smooth continuum Einstein described and instead dissolves into "grains", just as a newspaper photograph dissolves into dots as you zoom in. "It looks like GEO600 is being buffeted by the microscopic quantum convulsions of space-time," says Hogan.

If this doesn't blow your socks off, then Hogan, who has just been appointed director of Fermilab's Center for Particle Astrophysics, has an even bigger shock in store: "If the GEO600 result is what I suspect it is, then we are all living in a giant cosmic hologram."

The idea that we live in a hologram probably sounds absurd, but it is a natural extension of our best understanding of black holes, and something with a pretty firm theoretical footing. It has also been surprisingly helpful for physicists wrestling with theories of how the universe works at its most fundamental level.

The holograms you find on credit cards and banknotes are etched on two-dimensional plastic films. When light bounces off them, it recreates the appearance of a 3D image. In the 1990s physicists Leonard Susskind and Nobel prizewinner Gerard 't Hooft suggested that the same principle might apply to the universe as a whole. Our everyday experience might itself be a holographic projection of physical processes that take place on a distant, 2D surface.

The "holographic principle" challenges our sensibilities. It seems hard to believe that you woke up, brushed your teeth and are reading this article because of something happening on the boundary of the universe. No one knows what it would mean for us if we really do live in a hologram, yet theorists have good reasons to believe that many aspects of the holographic principle are true.

Susskind and 't Hooft's remarkable idea was motivated by ground-breaking work on black holes by Jacob Bekenstein of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel and Stephen Hawking at the University of Cambridge. In the mid-1970s, Hawking showed that black holes are in fact not entirely "black" but instead slowly emit radiation, which causes them to evaporate and eventually disappear. This poses a puzzle, because Hawking radiation does not convey any information about the interior of a black hole. When the black hole has gone, all the information about the star that collapsed to form the black hole has vanished, which contradicts the widely affirmed principle that information cannot be destroyed. This is known as the black hole information paradox.

Bekenstein's work provided an important clue in resolving the paradox. He discovered that a black hole's entropy - which is synonymous with its information content - is proportional to the surface area of its event horizon. This is the theoretical surface that cloaks the black hole and marks the point of no return for infalling matter or light. Theorists have since shown that microscopic quantum ripples at the event horizon can encode the information inside the black hole, so there is no mysterious information loss as the black hole evaporates.

Crucially, this provides a deep physical insight: the 3D information about a precursor star can be completely encoded in the 2D horizon of the subsequent black hole - not unlike the 3D image of an object being encoded in a 2D hologram. Susskind and 't Hooft extended the insight to the universe as a whole on the basis that the cosmos has a horizon too - the boundary from beyond which light has not had time to reach us in the 13.7-billion-year lifespan of the universe. What's more, work by several string theorists, most notably Juan Maldacena at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, has confirmed that the idea is on the right track. He showed that the physics inside a hypothetical universe with five dimensions and shaped like a Pringle is the same as the physics taking place on the four-dimensional boundary.

According to Hogan, the holographic principle radically changes our picture of space-time. Theoretical physicists have long believed that quantum effects will cause space-time to convulse wildly on the tiniest scales. At this magnification, the fabric of space-time becomes grainy and is ultimately made of tiny units rather like pixels, but a hundred billion billion times smaller than a proton. This distance is known as the Planck length, a mere 10-35 metres. The Planck length is far beyond the reach of any conceivable experiment, so nobody dared dream that the graininess of space-time might be discernable.

That is, not until Hogan realised that the holographic principle changes everything. If space-time is a grainy hologram, then you can think of the universe as a sphere whose outer surface is papered in Planck length-sized squares, each containing one bit of information. The holographic principle says that the amount of information papering the outside must match the number of bits contained inside the volume of the universe.

Since the volume of the spherical universe is much bigger than its outer surface, how could this be true? Hogan realised that in order to have the same number of bits inside the universe as on the boundary, the world inside must be made up of grains bigger than the Planck length. "Or, to put it another way, a holographic universe is blurry," says Hogan.

This is good news for anyone trying to probe the smallest unit of space-time. "Contrary to all expectations, it brings its microscopic quantum structure within reach of current experiments," says Hogan. So while the Planck length is too small for experiments to detect, the holographic "projection" of that graininess could be much, much larger, at around 10-16 metres. "If you lived inside a hologram, you could tell by measuring the blurring," he says.

When Hogan first realised this, he wondered if any experiment might be able to detect the holographic blurriness of space-time. That's where GEO600 comes in.

Gravitational wave detectors like GEO600 are essentially fantastically sensitive rulers. The idea is that if a gravitational wave passes through GEO600, it will alternately stretch space in one direction and squeeze it in another. To measure this, the GEO600 team fires a single laser through a half-silvered mirror called a beam splitter. This divides the light into two beams, which pass down the instrument's 600-metre perpendicular arms and bounce back again. The returning light beams merge together at the beam splitter and create an interference pattern of light and dark regions where the light waves either cancel out or reinforce each other. Any shift in the position of those regions tells you that the relative lengths of the arms has changed.

"The key thing is that such experiments are sensitive to changes in the length of the rulers that are far smaller than the diameter of a proton," says Hogan.

So would they be able to detect a holographic projection of grainy space-time? Of the five gravitational wave detectors around the world, Hogan realised that the Anglo-German GEO600 experiment ought to be the most sensitive to what he had in mind. He predicted that if the experiment's beam splitter is buffeted by the quantum convulsions of space-time, this will show up in its measurements (Physical Review D, vol 77, p 104031). "This random jitter would cause noise in the laser light signal," says Hogan.

In June he sent his prediction to the GEO600 team. "Incredibly, I discovered that the experiment was picking up unexpected noise," says Hogan. GEO600's principal investigator Karsten Danzmann of the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics in Potsdam, Germany, and also the University of Hanover, admits that the excess noise, with frequencies of between 300 and 1500 hertz, had been bothering the team for a long time. He replied to Hogan and sent him a plot of the noise. "It looked exactly the same as my prediction," says Hogan. "It was as if the beam splitter had an extra sideways jitter."

Incredibly, the experiment was picking up unexpected noise - as if quantum convulsions were causing an extra sideways jitter

No one - including Hogan - is yet claiming that GEO600 has found evidence that we live in a holographic universe. It is far too soon to say. "There could still be a mundane source of the noise," Hogan admits.

Gravitational-wave detectors are extremely sensitive, so those who operate them have to work harder than most to rule out noise. They have to take into account passing clouds, distant traffic, seismological rumbles and many, many other sources that could mask a real signal. "The daily business of improving the sensitivity of these experiments always throws up some excess noise," says Danzmann. "We work to identify its cause, get rid of it and tackle the next source of excess noise." At present there are no clear candidate sources for the noise GEO600 is experiencing. "In this respect I would consider the present situation unpleasant, but not really worrying."

For a while, the GEO600 team thought the noise Hogan was interested in was caused by fluctuations in temperature across the beam splitter. However, the team worked out that this could account for only one-third of the noise at most.

Danzmann says several planned upgrades should improve the sensitivity of GEO600 and eliminate some possible experimental sources of excess noise. "If the noise remains where it is now after these measures, then we have to think again," he says.

If GEO600 really has discovered holographic noise from quantum convulsions of space-time, then it presents a double-edged sword for gravitational wave researchers. One on hand, the noise will handicap their attempts to detect gravitational waves. On the other, it could represent an even more fundamental discovery.

Such a situation would not be unprecedented in physics. Giant detectors built to look for a hypothetical form of radioactivity in which protons decay never found such a thing. Instead, they discovered that neutrinos can change from one type into another - arguably more important because it could tell us how the universe came to be filled with matter and not antimatter (New Scientist, 12 April 2008, p 26).

It would be ironic if an instrument built to detect something as vast as astrophysical sources of gravitational waves inadvertently detected the minuscule graininess of space-time. "Speaking as a fundamental physicist, I see discovering holographic noise as far more interesting," says Hogan.

Small price to pay

Despite the fact that if Hogan is right, and holographic noise will spoil GEO600's ability to detect gravitational waves, Danzmann is upbeat. "Even if it limits GEO600's sensitivity in some frequency range, it would be a price we would be happy to pay in return for the first detection of the graininess of space-time." he says. "You bet we would be pleased. It would be one of the most remarkable discoveries in a long time."

However Danzmann is cautious about Hogan's proposal and believes more theoretical work needs to be done. "It's intriguing," he says. "But it's not really a theory yet, more just an idea." Like many others, Danzmann agrees it is too early to make any definitive claims. "Let's wait and see," he says. "We think it's at least a year too early to get excited."

The longer the puzzle remains, however, the stronger the motivation becomes to build a dedicated instrument to probe holographic noise. John Cramer of the University of Washington in Seattle agrees. It was a "lucky accident" that Hogan's predictions could be connected to the GEO600 experiment, he says. "It seems clear that much better experimental investigations could be mounted if they were focused specifically on the measurement and characterisation of holographic noise and related phenomena."

One possibility, according to Hogan, would be to use a device called an atom interferometer. These operate using the same principle as laser-based detectors but use beams made of ultracold atoms rather than laser light. Because atoms can behave as waves with a much smaller wavelength than light, atom interferometers are significantly smaller and therefore cheaper to build than their gravitational-wave-detector counterparts.

So what would it mean it if holographic noise has been found? Cramer likens it to the discovery of unexpected noise by an antenna at Bell Labs in New Jersey in 1964. That noise turned out to be the cosmic microwave background, the afterglow of the big bang fireball. "Not only did it earn Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson a Nobel prize, but it confirmed the big bang and opened up a whole field of cosmology," says Cramer.

Hogan is more specific. "Forget Quantum of Solace, we would have directly observed the quantum of time," says Hogan. "It's the smallest possible interval of time - the Planck length divided by the speed of light."

More importantly, confirming the holographic principle would be a big help to researchers trying to unite quantum mechanics and Einstein's theory of gravity. Today the most popular approach to quantum gravity is string theory, which researchers hope could describe happenings in the universe at the most fundamental level. But it is not the only show in town. "Holographic space-time is used in certain approaches to quantising gravity that have a strong connection to string theory," says Cramer. "Consequently, some quantum gravity theories might be falsified and others reinforced."

Hogan agrees that if the holographic principle is confirmed, it rules out all approaches to quantum gravity that do not incorporate the holographic principle. Conversely, it would be a boost for those that do - including some derived from string theory and something called matrix theory. "Ultimately, we may have our first indication of how space-time emerges out of quantum theory." As serendipitous discoveries go, it's hard to get more ground-breaking than that.

Thursday, January 15, 2009

red digital cameras

John Sokol Jan 14 (1 day ago)


Are you referring to

Haven't really been following this stuff for the past 3 years, but I don't have the money to play with these high end digital cinema gear first hand. When I have been luck I have been able to get some access, but it's hard.

Mysterium cmos

Get's lots of good hits on this.

The sensor seems very good, haven't been able to find a detailed of a technical specification as I'd like, considering how high end the camera is supposed to be.

I spent more time studying the Dalsa cameras and sensors.

They don't even say what format the digital cinema output is. Probably camera link .

paradigm shift

3:55pm John
4:21pm Gibran
it's a concept that talks about the paradigm shift that is happening in the world more specifically consumer to prosumer.
4:22pm John
Which one, there are many all happening at once.
Oh you said it
4:22pm Gibran
corporations losing power to the people and people taking control over their own lives and technology is allowing it to happen governments becoming holacratic in the way they operate a dissolving of the command and control systems that are in place
you're aware of the symbiotic relationship between corporations/governments and people and the people being the larger organism receives the lesser of the benefits from that relationship
4:27pm John
yes, seems to, I'd need to think on that one.
4:28pm Gibran

well look at how the government takes advantage of the people and how the corporations take advantage of the people in the system we live one can't exist without the other because the life of both organisms depend on the other
corporations may have more, benefits and influence on our environment and money money but there are less of them than there are of people it is the proletarian emergence concept from Marxism

that's SHIFT MANIFESTO in short it's my idea of how I think society will move based on things I've observed
really not my idea totally because I haven't been living in a vacuum
4:51pm John
There is a feedback look that self regulates so some extent. But if corporations get too much, people will run of cash and the whole system shuts down, this is what's happening now.
At the same time too much in the other direction also self corrects.
Because when the people run out of cash the corporations die!
But normally it oscillates back and forth, between people and the corp/gov.
left and right but basically the sweet spot is in the middle.
4:54pm John
One side too far and the whole society will collapse like (USSR) and will eventually restart over and over till it's back in the middle and stable again.
5:39pm Gibran
I agree with you there has to be a balance but the control should be on the side of the people and not the corporations
6:57pm John
It needs to be both
But under GW Bush it's now very lopsided in favor of the Gov and Corp and the people are really f*cked.
But they are so committed to winning at all costs that they didn't take in to account that they just f*cked themselves too in the process.
It's like the left hand and right hand fighting
If one wins they both loose.
7:00pm Gibran
I was gonna say the unseen hand
7:00pm John
I don't believe in the unseen hand, but just the hand that most people can not see.
Some of us can clearly see it.
7:11pm Gibran
I agree that if one wins they both Lose that is zero sum but what about changing the game to use cooperative dynamics or non zero sum game where there is a payout for everyone
7:39pm John
It's an ecosystem
wolves eat rabbits with eat plants that are pollinated by bees.
if the wolves over eat rabbits they staved and plants population explode
if the wolves die off your overrun with rabbits, then the plants get wiped out.
if the plants die the bees die, etc...
4:06am Gibran
yes but man has the power to change his own ecosystem, change environment, the ecosystem we live in is a man made ecosystem designed by those who want to prey upon others. We are not living in a natural ecosystem and are not in harmony. Look at South Korea and how their society is functioning now, group is more important than the individual,

9:13am John
Yes, man has the power to change his own ecosystem, but we are not in a man made ecosystem designed by those who want to prey upon others.
9:15am John
The current system evolved. We have influence that somewhat. Many have tried design new societies, but all fail, because we are not in control.
We can tweak it where and there, but we can not engineer change. We can't out think Evolution/god
Our attempts at change, often lead to totally unpredictable outcomes that are not in any ones control. This is my belief of why we are in this economic mess.

Good TV quote.

Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative.
- Kurt Vonnegut

Television is the opium of the masses. - John Sokol, but I am sure I am not the first one to say it.

I'm starting to get some ideas for business and I would like your advice.

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Fábio wrote:

I just saw your slashdot comment
( and I
was wondering if you were avaiable for some discussion of this? I'm
starting to get some ideas for business and I would like your advice.

My questions to you would be:
- Do you think that these companies, because of their resources, can
push a technology to mass usage independently of the current state in
technology? YouTube for instance, isn't more than well scalable
streaming video. Do you think it had work if you deployed 5 years
before them?
- Have you considered finding a business partner? person or company
that would push further for your technologies, maybe in ways you
- My current project is to manufacture some hardware gadgets. Any advice?

Keep the good work.



From: John Sokol
Date: Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: Slashdot Comment
To: Fábio


I have had many partners over the years.
As an inventor I find partners come in 2 flavors.
1.) Well meaning but not up to the job.
2.) Scammers and cheats.

The reason for this is the real business guys that can do the job, don't need an inventor, or an invention. They could make just as much money selling soap or dog food. Why pay me? Why deal with a risky new technology.

The scammers just use the real technology and inventor to pass the sniff tests and then steal the investors money.

Bottom line, you can't let any else control your business and expect not to get cheated.

There is no magical business partner going to come along and take care of these other matters.

I have had partners sink most of these companies in the end.
All it takes is one bad apple to ruin the barrel.
I could write a book on it at this point.

> - My current project is to manufacture some hardware gadgets. Any advice?

I have done quite a few gadgets. I'd look at manufacturing in China.

As an engineer it's our tendency to focus on what we are good at when things aren't going well. But more engineering in a company weak in marketing or sales doesn't help.

I'd focus on the least comfortable, most uncertain things first.
Usually this is the Business plan, projections, presentation, sales and marketing for technical people.

Bottom line is customers drive a business. Doesn't matter what you have, if that part isn't worked out first, you not going to get very far.

What demographic are you targeting, what is the target market?
How large is that market? What competition is there?
What volume do you plan to start production with?

Usually manufacturing has to be done in stages with developers and testing.
Start with a small run, maybe 10 units, to make sure it's working. Then a beta run, maybe 300 and put them in to some customers hands to test, then production, 10's of thousands.

I hope this helps some.


Re:Only the paranoid survive (not)

by John Sokol (109591) on Tuesday January 06, @02:30PM (#26346961) On Slashdot
I partly agree.
Most ideas are considered stupid by most people.
Even more ideas that are good, were already thought of and may even be on the market already.
But still there are the few really ground breaking ones.
If I had a dime for every one of my ideas stolen I'd be rich.
Here is where I disagree, execution is a matter of resources.
I had the very first audio every on most computer platforms. From digital audio on the Apple II, Lisa and Mac, C64, IBM PC and XT and even the Tandy Model 2 and 3.
I had the first PC digital audio products on the market the Sound Byte, then someone literally took my name trade marked and and sent me a cease and desists on the name! So I renamed it Audio byte. []
Then another company (first byte) reverse engineered my Digital Audio on the PC speaker and patented it, and tried to sue a number of game companies who also reverse engineered my code and used it. This was Intel Assembly language, almost as easy to reverse as JAVA. So many of these paid me and used my Prior Art to toss out the patent suits.
But the kicker was after 3 years and selling some 5000 units at $30 each, Creative Labs came out with an inferior product for $115 and sold 47,000 units in there first month. Past us by like we were standing still. I found out that the same VC we pitch financed them while not financing me. And there plan used us as an example of market feasibility!
So much for execution. It's all a matter of resources. If you don't start off with enough money, and try to boot strap from sales like I was doing, you going to get killed if it's a really important product.
I have repeatedly had this happen with different ideas. Many I did execute on and for some was even selling and making a profit.
* Wearable computers with VR goggles 1984
* Hand held Oscilloscope 1984
* VOIP (internet phone calls) in 1987
* Streaming internet video 1988.
* 13000 streaming video viewers (VQ) with 384 video servers on SUN Microsystems network 1990
* Online Banking for Wells Fargo, 1992
* Livecam (JPEG, GIF, and MPEG1 & 2, modified H.261) 1994
* The CDN where I built the first on for video in 1994. IN 1997 we had over 1M simultaneous views at 56K. One of the largest consumers of Bandwidth on the Internet, and no one knew who we were, because it was adult.
I can directly trace back to specific individuals where Genutity's Hopscotch network and Digital Islands CDN directly copied what I was doing!
Peer1 that host Youtube is now using one of my methods that I pioneered for CDN.
* load balancing of internet servers 1995
* Caching web servers 1996
* TCP/IP Selective Acknowledgment implemented in my ECIP. 1996 []
* Streaming H.263/MPEG4 video and MP3 1996/1997
* the first Stand alone IP Camera 1996
* Fanless servers to improve reliably in our CoLo's 1997 (used heat pipes on CPU, HD and PS)
* The first CCTV DVR 1997 done in Partnership with Korean company. Also included the first multichannel(16 input) video capture board.
* Cell processors & Blade servers []
* silent computers * computer cooling in 2002
My new stuff I am keeping under wraps now till I can get better resources lined up.
I am not listing these to brag, but to show how much effort I have put in over the past 20 years, with great technical success but only partial business success.
It's always boiled down to one thing, lack marketing budget. Lack of money to manufacture. Lack of the "right connections" to raise money or make large sales because I wasn't part of the good old boys/rich kids club. There is a class system in this country whether you believe it or not.
Almost every one of these ideas I filed or tried to file a patent on, then ran out of money to compete them! On some of the later stuff, I have seen Tecktronix, Fluke, Intel and NEC take my incomplete expired patent filings, and put out products straight from them. Again without money there is also no legal recourse, and after some attack from a big company I find myself having to go back to programming at some day job because the company died.
As soon as Microsoft or Real Video or some other big company with deep pockets took notice, that was the end for me.
One press release from Microsoft about some vaporware was all it took to completely kill my chances for any investment in internet video and CDN's from 1996 to 1999. The never delivered to this day an product that works as well as my 12 year old video player. Then I watch Macromedia come in a take over by adding the same technology I had but not telling anyone till they were ready to roll this was in 2004ish? What is now the basis for Youtube.
In the mean time I spend 10 years tying to raise money to do the same thing since 1996 without much success. Ok, so maybe I am a bit frustrated.
Personally if it's an important idea, and you've researched it and it is unique, then don't work on it at School, or at least keep it secret and don't show your professors. For a class project choose something more mundane.
Then Patent the idea, yourself outside of the School. And be patient. I have noticed that my good ideas, if I don't tell anyone will still be good ideas 5 years from now, and no one will have done it yet.
So get your degree first. Network with the right people so when you graduate you can then run with your idea.
The reality is that if just invented some plastic gadget like some new type of cork screw, I might have made a lot more money and not had to worry about idea theft nearly as much.
High Tech is fun and my passion, I just can't motivate myself to work on cork screws.

I think Kurzweil's Predictions for AI are way off.

by John Sokol on Tuesday January 06, @02:44PM (#26347245) to Slashdot
Attached to: A Look Back At Kurzweil's Predictions For 2009

His perception that the brain is a computer is just wrong. It's a pattern matching engine, and it's main ability is fast memory look ups.

This 20 year number for creation of conscience machines is far off the mark. It was pushed by Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines".

That book fails to take into account the memory bottleneck.

Here is my reasoning.

Everyone knows Moore's law, doubling every 18 Months. This is 66% Per year. But did you know memory performance in increasing only 11% per year.

In addition the capacity is also increasing, causing it to take longer and longer to scan every byte stored in a computers RAM memory then before. So even if you can hold more it's not proportionally faster to search it.

Now with the Brain, It only runs at 100 Hz, and holds 10^12 Neurons allowing 10^14 logic decisions per second. CPU's are at 3 * 10^9 so in about 18 Years we will be there in logic operations.

But how about memory? We don't even know what the brain holds, but at minimum it 1 bit per neuron 10 GBytes, If it 1 bit per dendrite that's 10,000 Bits per neuron giving 100 T Bytes. I suspect the real number is far greater because data I believe is stored in the interconnect patterns. Lets assume the best case, PC's are limited to 4 gig bytes already, we will be at 10GB in no time all, 7 years. To Reach the 100 TB That's about 20 years out. With Moore laws 66% a year increase.

Now how about memory speed? The brain can access all 10GB to 100TB 100 times per second. Giving us a memory throughput from 1 TB / Sec to 10 PetaBytes per second.

We have 833 Mhz FSB. This increase only 11% this takes about 7 years to double. So to go from 8.33 x 10^8 Byte per sec to the low number of 10^10 would take 25 Years or so and the High 10^13 would take about 100 years to reach this point.
But I think our brains hold more then a 100PetaBytes, this will take over 200 years for computers to reach that point with memory performance. So at least Humans are safe for the time being.

Computers are just really fast idiots for now.

Getting GPL driver code released from an employer.

Submitted by John Sokol Wednesday January 14, @01:26PM to Slashdot

For an embedded ARM project at work, I wrote a USB Gadget UDC driver (USB Device controller) for the Philips ISP1582 USB 2.0 device controller chip. This chip is not currently supported in Linux but is used in many PDA's since it's inexpensive. There is a real need for this driver in the community. It took me several months of long nights and weekends of coding. Much of it is derived from the drivers/usb/gadget/pxa27x_udc.c driver and other bits and pieces of GPL code. How can I push my employer to do what they are legally and morally required to do? To release this code open source so it can find it's way in to the Kernel. As am employee I am legal and contractually bound, so I can't just take the code and share it. To make matters worse I am laid off come the end of this month so I am under some time pressure to push for the release of this code. Does anyone have some experience with this? Is there some good boiler plate letter with enough legalese that I can use to put pressure on management here?

Microsoft TAX

Submitted by John Sokol on Monday January 29 2007, @07:48PM to Slashdot
John Sokol writes "I went to Best Buy in Sunnyvale yesterday with Linux V4L2 developer Mauro Carvalho Chehab who just flew in from Brazil. We were there to purchase a laptop. Mauro asked the clerk if we could get this Gateway laptop without the Microsoft software (who's price was part of the sales price) and they insisted that we would have to pay a $30 fee to get the laptop without Microsoft XP installed on it! I remember we had Microsoft protest days some years back. What happened? Why are we still paying $100+ per laptop to Microsoft for software we don't want or need?! What's even worse Brazil charges a 50% inport duty so he has to pay import tax of around $50 for the copy of XP that he doesn't want also."

Flying Spaghetti Monster takes on Religion

Submitted by John Sokol on Wednesday November 21 2007, @06:12PM To Slashdot

John Sokol writes "In response to the Kansas School Board decision to teach Intelligent design along side of Evolution, Oregon State physics graduate named Bobby Henderson stepped into the debate by sending a letter to demanded equal time for the 10 million followers of a pseudo-deity called the Flying Spaghetti Monster. From the MSNBC article "There's no more scientific basis for intelligent design than there is for the idea an omniscient creature made of pasta created the universe. If intelligent design supporters could demand equal time in a science class, why not anyone else? The only reasonable solution is to put nothing into sciences classes but the best available science." Wikipedia has a good writeup on it also."

Copyleft movies, can it be done?

Another rejected Slashdot post.
Submitted by John Sokol on Thursday March 20 2008, @12:43PM
John Sokol writes "hypothetically speaking, let say some big name science fiction authors were willing to allow there older stories to be made into Copyleft films done in a similar production quality as I-Robot, Blade runner, StarWars or StarTrek. Would it be possible to raise enough to produce a big budget film that has a LGPL type license on it? Possibly as a Non-profit where authors are paid there typical fees and actors, are paid typical fees but no investors, just grants and donations? Proceeds would be wrapped back in to produce the next movie. Sort like PBS and NPR. How could money be raised? What are the ramifications? How to bootstrap such a project and get it played in theaters and legally distributed free on the net? It's an interesting concept, but could it really work? Imagine what this would do the the RIAA and the film industry."

Freedom Tower construction begins at Ground Zero

I tried to submit this to Slashdot.

Freedom Tower construction begins at Ground Zero

Submitted by John Sokol on Tuesday December 19 2006, @09:12PM

John Sokol writes "The Freedom Tower would be 1,776-foot tower and is to be completed in 2011.
The skyscraper's 2.6 million sq. ft. (234,000 sq. m.) of office space will actually top out at 1,500 feet (455 meters). Above that will be a 276-foot (84-meter), lattice-like structure containing windmills generating as much as 20 percent of the building's energy.
It's not clear if the Freedom Tower's extension would be considered a spire and not counted in it's height by CTBUH

The new building is to be 400ft taller than the original World Trade Center towers that was 1,350 feet (410 meters) and 110-stories.
At 1,450.5 feet, (442 m) tall, with antenna 1,758 feet (533 meters) the Sears Tower usurped New York's claim to the world's tallest building in 1974.
The Freedom Tower would be taller then the current world's tallest building, the 1667ft-high Taipei 101 in Taiwan, which recently surpassed the previous holder of the title, the 1,483 feet (450 meters) Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
This would make Freedom Tower the tallest structure in the world — at least until the completion of Burj Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, which is projected to be 2,313ft high and with spire 2,640 feet (800 m).
Canadians claim the 1,815-foot CN Tower in Toronto as the world's tallest freestanding structure.

The Petronas Towers and the Burj Dubai are very Muslim and built with Islamic symbols in every facet of their designs. In some respect, the battle for the worlds tallest building is a competition between the west and the Islamic world.

The most widely acknowledged authority on the tallest buildings is the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH).

Wikipedia, has a nice graphic of this"