[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux
Karen Shaeffer writes:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 01:37:32PM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > Karen again:
> > : > Bottom line: Larry's idea can be implemented today (and it already is
> > : > implemented in the Cobalt NasRaq, for example).
> > : >
> > : > Erik
> > : ---end quoted text---
> > :
> > : Larry's idea is not currently in the marketplace.
> > :
> > : <quote from Larry McVoy>
> > : One thing that I've dreamed about for a while is getting the disk drive
> > : vendors to put STP down in the drives. Then we throw out the SCSI/IDE
> > : cables and use RJ45 connectors to talk to both the network and the disks.
> > : Think hot plug. Cool, no?
> > : </quote>
> >
> > Well, duh. If it were in the market place, I wouldn't be dreaming about it,
> > now would I? I'd be a sorry assed "visionary" if my visions included things
> > which was already shipping.
> ---end quoted text---
> Indeed!
> Two years ago, in Q1-98, I submitted a proposal at Seagate to
> develop disk drives with a wireless network interface. I developed
> the idea to the point of suggesting a solution utilizing the
> unlicensed 2.4GHz ISM band. This solution would have implemented a
> spread spectrum wireless link. At these frequencies, we could have
> attained the necessary bandwidth to make a viable product. (No
> flames please, I am aware of the Bluetooth consortium, but that
> standard transmits at data rates that make it useless for mass
> storage.)

Good for you.

> Imagine a wireless disk drive attached to an office ceiling. People
> come and go and are connected to LAN-centric memory without any
> cables...

Sounds handy.

> Anyway Larry, we did this __TWO__ years ago. Integrating a network
> interface into disk drives is not visionary... I realize this is a
> bit presumptuous of me, but may I suggest you really should
> dis-engage your ego from your work...

Several times I've been at the point of responding to your posts, but
decided I couldn't be bothered with the effort. But now I really am
getting tired of your behaviour. I don't know what your problem is.

Larry didn't put forth his idea and proclaim he was being visionary.
He just put his idea out there and said it would be cool. You then
started mounting repeated assults where you've claimed that "it can't
be done", that it's a silly idea, that he (and others) don't know what
they're talking about, and picking nits.

Now you turn around and state that you've done this two years ago. So
what's it going to be? Is it a good idea or not? And no, I don't want
feeble explanations of how some subtle detail of Larry's idea is
different and flawed. That won't wash. You've lashed out at Larry and
others, making it clear from the content and tone of your posts that
his whole idea was absurd.
You've also come out with this obnoxious rubbish about other people's
egos, incompetence, lack of experience in the industry and so on.
Without actually shouting, swearing or being overtly rude, you
nevertheless have been offensive in your tone and dished out subtle

Given that you have recently posted a pious message about conduct on
this list, I find it quite hypocritical for you to conduct what
amounts to a flamewar in disguise. I think you need to take a look in
a mirror and consider your own behaviour. It looks to me that you're
the one with the bruised ego, perhaps because someone had the temerity
of independently proposing your idea, or perhaps because someone
suggested something nhot exactly the same.

If you wanted to be constructive rather than aggressive, your *first*
response to Larry's original message would have been to mention what
you did two years ago. If that would have been followed by your views
on the pros and cons of your scheme compared to Larry's, that would
have been doubly interesting.

But no, your first post was to riducule the idea. What a waste of

> OTOH, your posts are quite entertaining, combining theatre and
> engineering... Now that is visionary... :) Please don't be
> offended. We need to be able to laugh at ourselves to make a better
> world...

Charming. Be offensive, and then ask that people not be offended. How
about not being offensive in the first place?

And as for laughing... I'm sure there is some laughing going on right
now, but I don't think it's Larry laughing at himself... I think
people are laughing with him, not at him.


[betting some people's chins will be banging the ground, never
expecting me to say this;-]


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans