Having built my own plane (https://sites.google.com/site/tomscozypage/) it is something ANYONE can do. Well, not anyone, especially anyone who would rather tell us all that they can't do stuff, but anyone who is willing to spend a couple years out in their garage, basement, or whatever workshop you have getting stuff done. It is not a risky venture, if you either follow the plans, or do reasonable engineering (if you know that discipline) when designing your own.

Any avocation can be expensive. Sure you can pick up fishing for like $15 for a rod and reel at Walmart, but in a couple years, after the boat and SUV purchase, you are talking about real money. Very capable airplanes can be bought (yes factory built even) for the cost of a good used car ($15K probably for a 2 seater). Learn to fly in your own airplane, with a good instructor, and you can learn for very little.

The medical requirements are minimal, and if you are willing to stay with a 2 seater aircraft and not really high performace (Light Sport Aircraft category) you only need a drivers license as your medical certificate. Even a 3rd class medical (if you want an airplane with higher performance or carrying more than 2 passengers, you need that) can be passed by anyone who is willing to get off their butt a couple times a week and move around. (if you want to fly for money, you need a 2nd class medical, and if you want to be a captain of an airliner you'll need a 1st class medical with the whole EKG and all).

The inexpensive airplanes aren't made anymore, Steve Witman designed some wonderful inexpensive fast! airplanes (tailwind as an example). Long-eze was maybe a peak of recent plans designs, by the man, Burt Rutan. Kitplanes magazine does annual issues of various kit offerings, as well a plans designs. Wicks and Aircraft Spruce are reliable suppliers.

The EAA is a little shifty supporting the home builders, but have been the most reliable for over 50 years. The EAA chapter organization is probably the best support group in the world. Use the resourcfes available, don't do it alone. There are plenty of resources available, from tech counselors to flight advisors. Yes you can fly an airplane you built yourself, or you can have someone else fly it for you.

Lets see, I am typing this in Linux, on my desktop at work.

I first saw the story on my android phone, running Linux.

There was a WiFi router that was running linux that sent it to my android phone.

Nope, not the year of the desktop.

Short term gain, and really killing the future.

Imagine a device in you pocket, it does a lot of communicating, but it does it smartly.

A short distance communication, within the room, it will do point to point analog. No cells involved.

A medium distance communication, in the neighborhood or building, it may use a pico/nano cell.

A long distance communication, it will use a cell as needed.

It can receive broadcast (AM/FM/TV) without any special extra hardware.

It can do only digital communications, as needed, for voice, data or anything else.

It can locate other uses via the cell network, to know what mode will be the most efficient communications means.

The device is smart, and uses software defined radios. It will use the proper spectrum and modes to accomplish the communication. Analog voice, use SSB; CDMA for cell or as needed; proper psk, for digital, etc.

But... to make this work, the spectrum needs to be available. If it is all sold off, the program won't work. The cell carriers can still make money with the locator service, (maybe not as much, but they are about to not make as much due to other pressures)

If we keep auctioning off all the spectrum, there will be no opportunity to get any of this. We will still have to use the inefficient modes we have today, filling the available spectrum with overhead.

First it was D*Star, those goofy french are making our proprietary stuff illegal. Now we hear HDMI is dead, this new DRM crap will replace it.

Puleze will someone with some common sense filter these articles, get 'em out of the front page, and let the technical people make technically necessary products so we can have progress.

I am tired of people taking working stuff, making it worse, and blaming everyone for not buying into their stupid ideas.

I've built many robots, (Hero-1, other homebuilt ones, etc). I've been involved with robot clubs since the early 80s. Very little has changed!

My first robot was run off a parallel card plugged into my Heathkit H-8. simple h-bridge some bumpers, and I was set. worked pretty good but the dang cord was a problem.

The next robot had an on board Z80 processor. It also had a CRT and a dozen batteries. It weighed a ton, used relays and transistors to control the motor.

The Hero had an on board 6809 (I guess one of the accessories had a second 6800 I think, so technically it was 2).

I used various 8 bitters for many other robots, always trying to solve the power problem, finding more and more efficient processors, so I could use less battery.

I switched to a tinyboard (8088) for one, it ran DR-DOS, and turbo pascal!

Even the handyboard processor was good, and has a great library (interactive C).

Basic stamps have come and gone for various projects.

Aurdrino's are pretty current.

Which one of the above processors will run anything from M$? I don't think any. Right, all 8 bit processors. I see very few robots with more than an 8 bitter even in the 21st century!

Someone needs to convince the robot builders to switch to 32 bit processors (ARM, maybe beagle board, or anything else) and then there *might* be a market for an OS that runs robots. Trouble is, it'll be Linux or Android running it, since the robot builders are a little more scrappy.

 

They already fly slower. A 737-NG was designed to fly at Mach 0.72 to 0.78 (some will argue 0.82, but they are usually grumpy old guys). Currently many of the airlines prefer to use cost index (IE CI20). see: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/45399/ Most passengers don't notice it, but in crowded airspace (IE New York TRACON) the controllers hate it.

First Microsoft has a lot of explaining to do as why anyone should license the FAT file system.

TomTom didn't write the code, they licensed it from, well not sure. They are following the gpl, and that is the end of the story. Microsoft needs to be talk to the licensor, not suing one of their own customers, besides.

Microsoft didn't learn squat from their puppet SCO.

This isn't the strategy of a company in it for the long haul.

Back in the day Mattel used to sell spy ware infested programs (Printshop). It was hard to
use and just funky as can be. It got better over the years, but the spyware would make me
not want it.

My daughter got my boys a Fisher Price digital arts and crafts studio (more Mattel software).
It barely installed (see amazon reviews, not too many people can get the POS installed). Wow
what a pile of crap. Hardly usable. The kids can draw their pictures but can't print them, it
takes tricks to save, print and recover them. Way less than intuitive. Makes it obvious they
don't think kids understand computers, turns the multitasking machine back to one task at a time
DOS like.

Okey so now they think they can build a game that will be as popular as some people who get the
net. Good luck with that. Watch it be built by committee, with featuritis explosis (every
feature a group marketing dorks can imagine added on). It will be unusable, to the point where
people will complain, and marketing will blame everyone else.

They should shut up, and pay the kids who know what they are doing, and keep marketing out.