How long it takes to boot depends on what software it runs. If you choose to code in straight C or C++, it will "boot" in the blink of an eye. If you boot suitably pared-down embedded linux, I suppose it might take a second or so. There is no BIOS, which is the usual time-waster.
Odds are, Edison will sink without trace. I'd rather it didn't take one of my favorite suppliers with it.
That is a peculiarly dour way of looking at it. For my own part, I am impressed as hell that Sparkfun landed this coup. I happen to think Edison will be one of the standout innovations of the decade.
I think Intel really missed the boat with this thing. Originally it was just "look guise we put a x86 computer in an SD card" but now they actually want to try to sell it to people. They got too wrapped up in keeping it small when they should've made it BB/RPi sized, with equivalent features. The tiny connectors are totally hobbyist unfriendly, you will be forced to buy 3rd party boards to do anything at all with this platform.
It must suck to be utterly unimaginative. Instead of just making nothing more than a dreary me-too, copying an already excellent product that doesn't need to be copied (the Beaglebone, not the Raspberry Pi), Intel has surprised a lot of people by proving they can fundamentally innovate. Everybody else is looking pretty stupid right now, because ARM is the obvious choice for something this tiny, but not a single one did a goddam thing to make it happen. Intel proved ARM is not the only way for tiny and power-sipping.
The breakout board's still missing Ethernet though, which puts a bit of a hamper on our plans (we require an Ethernet link as we ban internal WiFi use as it's a secure facility). Perhaps an Arduino shield would work but it wouldn't be elegant.
I too was bummed that there was no ethernet (I freaking HATE WiFi), but I understand why.
There could, and I'm sure there will, be a stackable ethernet block, and damned if I can see why that is an inelegant solution. There already is a dot-matrix OLED block. Just the RJ-45 connector alone would far outweigh the whole rest of the module. It's actually pretty amusing to contemplate a tiny weightless stamp waving around on the end of a gigantic stiff RJ-45 anyway. It's high time for a new micro cable and connector option spec for ethernet.
It's also missing video output.
[Places head in hands, moaning] Not this shit again. This product is not a toy for snotty-nose video game zombies. It is a serious embedded building block. My biggest gripe with the Beaglebone is that it wastes all those transistors and current drain on the video coprocessor and HDMI connector.
Why would a remote sensor or drone component, for example, need a freaking VIDEO OUTPUT?
Ask the Europeans that constantly tell us Americans we are too enslaved to the notion that we all need our own car.
You just made that up. I don't know if you've ever driven around a European city, but car ownership is pretty widespread, at least judging by driving through Rome/London/Paris/etc.
It's funny what some Americans think about Europe. They've got this AM talk radio version of Europe knocking around in their heads. "Yeah, they're all dying in the streets because of socialized medicine and everybody's gay and you can't get a decent hamburger anywhere. And they're a bunch of carpoolers who don't realize that we fought and died so that people could drive their own 4500lb vehicle like God intended." "You betcha, Mack. Next up is Fred from Midland. So, what grinds your gears about Europeans, Fred?"
I guess that would be an answer if nobody ever took the time to show you how to defend yourself with your hands.
I think you have been listening to people, that have gleefully lied to you.
I think you are projecting.
A far cry from "proven to make up data and conceals data that doesn't fit his ideology".
No. Not being able to produce the data that your most important work is based on is not a far cry from making up data and concealing data that doesn't fit his ideology.
If a researcher can't produce his data, his work is not taken seriously. The scientific method includes making your data available so other people can review your work.
They sort of look and feel like apple stores.
I do not want to buy my expensive Tesla from a smelly "genius" walking around with a corporate-logo polo shirt snug around the belly that hangs over his belt, which sports an iPhone holster. I'd rather just order the damn thing on-line and have USPS deliver it to my front door.
You failed to demonstrate that more than one of these many annual nonfatal injuries involves a penis being shot off.
Most US gun owners don't have good enough aim to shoot off their own penises. That's why they need semi-automatic weapons. It raises the odds of being able to actually hit that tiny thing.
Pathology? There is nothing pathological about a person wanting to employ all self-defensive measures to secure life or liberty
Gun ownership in the US has very little to do with "life or liberty". Be honest with yourself. If it was really about protecting your "life or liberty", you wouldn't have clown shows like this.
There is nothing invalid about using defensive uses of guns by police and against animals, since if there were no gun available
Yes, there is. No gun control proposal in the US has suggested taking guns away from law enforcement, the military or people who live where there are wildlife attacks. It's completely invalid. The technical term is "red herring". Look it up. Lott's book was about civilian ownership of guns. Kleck's work was designed to support civilian ownership of guns and has been used to attack all gun control laws. What's worse, his sloppy work and broad assumptions were used by the Supreme Court in the Heller decision, which began this entire notion of the Second Amendment being about civilian ownership of guns. Remember, until the '80s, there were no legal scholars who believed in this absolutist notion of the Second Amendment. Even Robert Bork, the sainted patron of the modern conservative, believed the Second Amendment did not apply to a right of every civilian to own (not to mention carry) a gun.
This entire argument is an artifact of Edwin Meese, the NRA and the Reagan Administration. There was a time when the NRA's literature quoted the entire Second Amendment, including the militia clause. Now, the quote above their headquarters door leaves that entire clause out. People who act like this so-called "right" goes back to the founding fathers are dizzy.
Let's assume Lott's figure is in the ball park just for argument sake.
No. Why should we do that when we know it's an imaginary number.
Your assertion that the U.S. may be the most lawless country in the world is ludicrous.
That's not my assertion, it's Lott's. His results imply that many hundreds of thousands of murders should have been occurring when a private gun was not available for protection. Yet guns are rarely carried, less than a third of adult Americans personally own guns, and only 27,000 homicides occurred in 1992. He assumes that there were 2.5 million attempted crimes that were thwarted by gun ownership. If that's true, and without those guns those crimes would have occurred, it would make the United States the most lawless country in the world. Do the math yourself. Assume for a moment that gun ownership is banned. Add 2.5 million to the crime statistics. That would just about triple the crime rate in the US.
Secondly, my neighbor travels to South America regularly and used to live in Argentina.
Do you know what "anecdotal" means? I lived in Sao Paolo when my wife was doing a math fellowship at a university there. The crime statistics in Brasil are about 30% higher than the US. Not double, not triple.
So as far as i'm concerned I'd believe him before believing your generalization.
What generalization? I cited a list of researchers and their studies that have refuted Lott. Are you going to believe your neighbor over published studies, too?
I'm sure they would, too. But what's Comcast's complaint about Tor? How is a VPN any less anonymous once you're tunneled through their network to somewhere else and how is the traffic any less hidden?