Tim Hampton's Blog : Home

Normally I’m not one for campaigns to end the “blank”-word, whatever that may be in the moment.  This one’s different to me though.  I have an uncle who is mentally-challenged and while I haven’t seen him since I was a little kid, I find that when people use the word “retard” in a derogatory sense (especially when talking about mentally-challenged people) makes me bristle.  Me and my wife were actually talking about this just the other day when we were watching the most recent episode of Burn Notice.

So after reading this article today about Sarah Palin, I decided to go to the website and pledge my support as well.  I’ve included a button below that will take you to the website.  It’s promoted by the Special Olympics association.

Just read an article written by a former co-worker of my wife’s, and fellow libertarian Tim Brownlee.  You can read it here: The Prime Directive.  He makes a very good point about the responsibility of the government in the affairs of Israel, as well as the church’s responsibility.

While I think the use of the “prime directive” term from Star Trek might make some people dismiss the overall premise of his argument, it actually sums it up quite well.  To go even further, I would say “do to others what you would want them to do to you” (a paraphrase of the Golden Rule).  Our country would really be a lot better off if our elected officials bore that well in mind when deliberating on the next big increase in government or opting to go to war against an object or ideal (e.g. War on Drugs, Global War on Terrorism, etc.).

We need elected officials at all levels of government who practice a brand of patriotism and responsibility that seems to be lost on this generation of bureaucrats:  Do what’s right, regardless of the personal political cost, to improve the lives of those you’re responsible for by ensuring that they have a fair shot to succeed or fail on their own merits.  In other words give people the chance to succeed as well as the chance to fail and let them make their own choices and mistakes so long as they don’t infringe on another person’s inalienable (i.e. existing with or without a government) rights.

There have been tons of stories and news segments about Tiger’s affairs and trysts.  It seems that whenever this sort of thing happens, whether in sports or in politics, the question always arises: “Does it matter that he cheated?”

Normally I would say no, given that he’s an athlete and not a governor or legislator, but he was one of the most respected men in his field and was a role model to millions of children and adults in this country.  Unlike some sports, golf is centered around honor and honesty.  You’re expected to be truthful even when no one’s watching.  Watch “The Legend of Bagger Vance” some time if you don’t believe me (great movie by the way).

The fact that Tiger cheated on his wife with so many women shows a clear trust issue.  Will he have his country club membership revoked?  Unlikely.  Will he have his sponsorships revoked?  Possibly.

In a game where amateur golfers skirt the rules all the time, the professionals are where they’re at because they’ve worked at being the best physically, mentally, and honor-wise.  Tiger Woods was no exception and it’ll be interesting to see how this situation will pan out in relation to his golf career.  The part that makes this difficult to watch is that he and Elin have two kids in the mix.

In a little while I’m going to head with a few people from work to the Extreme Makeover build site here in Hattiesburg.  MegaGate Broadband (my employer) is one of the sponsors and we’re providing the WiFi internet for the site and will be providing the family with a free year of telephone and internet service.

Hopefully I’ll get a chance to talk to Ty while at the site.  It was because of a radio interview that he did with Glenn Beck last year that I decided to finally get tested for ADD/ADHD.  If it hadn’t been for his amazing story of growing up undiagnosed with ADHD I probably never would’ve gotten tested and wouldn’t be where I’m at today.

Supposedly we’re not allowed to take pictures at the build site so I may not be able to post any pictures from my visit.  If for some reason I am able to take pictures though, I’ll post them here for all of you to see.

Update: I was thankfully able to take pictures at the site.  Here they are.

Just read an awesome article that Paul Thurrott at Windows Supersite just published over the Thanksgiving holiday weekend.  You can read the article here: Windows 7: Past, Present, and Future.

I agree with everything he has to say in the article.  Something I do know that Microsoft will have to account for in Windows 8 is the existence of Google Chrome OS, which I’ve written a little bit about myself: Google Chrome OS previewed to public.  The biggest functionality that consumers will demand of Windows 8 is the ability for it to boot fast.  They will also want to be able to run it off of a thumb drive or similar device instead of being bound to a hard drive.  And this needs to be implemented within the installer and not as a consumer level “fix”.

It’s possible to install from a thumb drive but users will want to be able to run their OS from a thumb drive as well.  This may very well require a move away from the Registry as Windows has used for years, just like they did with moving away from DOS to the NT platform.  In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if they emulated or virtualized the Registry in much the same way they emulated DOS in XP, or virtualized Windows XP in Windows 7(i.e. XP Mode in Windows 7).

EDIT: 11/21/09 - Added CNN.com article link

I just got done reading an article over at Macrumors.com entitled “Google Previews Chrome OS, Scheduled For Release in Late 2010”.  The point that stuck out to me the most is that, while Google’s mum about who they’re partnering with on developing hardware to run and support Chrome OS, the devices (e.g. netbooks) will most likely not have any internal storage like a hard drive but will instead utilize flash-based memory and cloud storage.

Woefully, I never wrote an article on my thoughts about a year and a half ago where I was sharing with a then-coworker of mine that I felt that in 10 years we would move completely away from HDD-based internal storage to either a flash drive based solution or a cloud solution.  As I explained to him then, computer users are doing more and more with portable flash drives and cloud storage.  It’s only inevitable that computers and their operating systems move toward this end and Chrome OS appears to be embracing this move from the outset.  An article from Wired Magazine on CNN.com agrees with my assessment: Google OS: the end of the hard drive?

This shouldn’t surprise anyone given that Google is easily the largest consumer cloud computing and storage services provider in the world.  The kicker is that Chrome OS already boasts boot speeds of a blazing 7 seconds!  If this holds to the final release, or improves, we’re looking at a full-featured operating system that you can turn on at the same time as your TV and both would be ready to use from a cold start at the same time.  That’s unheard of!

Personally I doubt Chrome OS 1.0 will still boot at that speed on release day, but even if it were to slow down a few seconds it would still kick the tail of any other consumer operating system currently available (except maybe some super-slim -nix variants).  I probably won’t have the money to plunk down on the hardware when the OS first comes out, but I’ll probably become a late adopter after the first few kinks, of any major OS, are worked out.

PDF of the FCC Net Neutrality Ruling

I decided to read through the 107-page FCC Net Neutrality ruling when it came out on October 22, 2009, mainly because of the gloom and doom that Glenn Beck was espousing about it.  I listen to Glenn frequently, but I’ve become increasingly more questioning of some of the things he says.

After reading through most of the Net Neutrality ruling I can say for a fact that the document does nothing to explicitly limit freedom of speech.  In fact, from the outset, it appears to increase opportunities for expressing one’s freedom of speech.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I currently work as a customer support specialist for Megagate Broadband, a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC).  I read through the FCC document also out of professional curiosity of what it might mean for the industry in which I work.  There were a couple of areas that stood out to me when viewed from this perspective.

Section 92, Rule 3 states: “Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not prevent any of its users from connecting to and using on its network the user’s choice of lawful devices that do not harm the network.”  My concern here is that companies like Megagate that supply customers with a broadband modem that’s actually being leased to them (as a part of their normal monthly service), would be required to allow customers to not only hook up their own modems but be required to supply them their login info for that modem.  This could at worst present a security concern, or at best present a troubleshooting headache in the inevitable event that a customer accidentally changed their login settings and could no longer connect to the network.  In either case, the price of the service would undoubtedly increase to account for the increased workload in dealing with the new problems.

The other area that concerns me the most is Section 104, Rule 5: “Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner.”  Mainly I’m interested in seeing if this rule would be approved (currently it’s just a suggested one), and how it would be applied if approved.  My concern with it is how they would define “reasonable network management” and “nondiscriminatory manner”.  The concern I have is that ISPs would be obligated to allow competing services (such as VoIP or IPTV) to push enough traffic across the network that it would be to the detriment of other non-competing traffic (e.g. streaming music, cloud services, web hosting).

I, along with others, question whether the FCC even has the authority to traverse into the realm of regulating the Internet.

Even with this ruling from the FCC, the debate about Net Neutrality is far from over and I’ll be paying attention to the direction in which it heads.  The ramifications from a poorly implemented solution would be huge and quite damaging to the progress that the Internet and the World Wide Web have caused in our country for the past nearly twenty years.