Kachina,
I thought that I would let you scientists and vigilantes duke it out here, while we consultants and engineers wait for a real product to hit the streets so that we can have our say from an engineering and operations perspective. No such luck yet, I'm afraid.
But I can't remain entirely silent on this matter, not indefinitely. My name is on the front page of this thread as one of its originators along with AHhaha. And after all, you did make some rather caustic accusations against the originators of this thread, didn't you?
You should have done some additional sleuthing prior to making the claims that you did. Although, we probably should all be grateful to you, given the amount of work you must have done, finding out absolutely nothing incriminating about the company or its principals. Under counter-scrutiny, many of your initial claims could not stand up. And certainly, if you had found something really damaging, after all of that leg work, it would have been posted in your original message. I saw no such incriminating claims that withstood the test of even two days' time.
And all the while, none of the considerations which preoccupied your thoughts were ever discussed on the board. Where you spoke of investments, others here have speculated repeatedly that the company would probably be taken out first, rather than ever make it to an IPO. We were listening to a jazz concert, and you came dressed with shit kickers on ready to square dance. For this, I am indebted to you, for this humor, perverse as it is, that you've brought to the thread.
But the bone I have to pick with you has to do with your assertions, false allegations, and directly false accusations, libelous as they are, about the thread's originators. Not so much about SR, itself, or its technology... those will stand or fall on their own merits over time.
But SR will not come to defend the honor or the merits of Frank and AHhaha. You've made a boo boo here, friend. You've said bad things about good people. Shame on you! Now you can consider yourself censured!
----
If you had done more investigating right here in SI, not only would you have discovered that the creation of this thread was entirely benign, but you would have also seen that there was considerable previous SR discussion on other boards, prior to setting finger to key here.
[To All Thread Participants, Lurkers, and Students of the Absurd, alike,
I initially felt, and it was I who suggested to AHhaha, half in jest, but with good foundation, that creating this thread would be a good idea. I was pleased, yet somewhat surprised, when I found that he had actually followed through with it. (See the thread link below.)
An independent thread would, I felt, result in less of an annoyance to others on some of the other boards, while facilitating a more focused investigation of the company's new and somewhat startling claims at the time, either for or against their claims. Without debate, the thread would be useless, and there would be no reason for its being. Knowing AHhaha as well as I did from the ATHM thread, I could depend on nothing but debate going forward. And I was right. <g>
To this limited extent, in the pursuit of debate, Kachina's remarks here have been welcome. But he/she steps out of bounds almost immediately, and goes "way over the top," when [he/she/?] begins to make false, direct accusations of wrongdoing by the originators of this thread, two long-standing members of the SI community, both in good standing, including yours truly.]
Kachina... again,
As for the company and its claims, I'm not a scientist, nor am I clairvoyant, nor am I omniscient. So I don't know all there is to know about all things now and in the future, much less theoretical photonics, QED, or Planck and Maxwellian field formulas as they may evolve over time when the masters decide to change their minds again. I'm forced through lack of training in these disciplines to leave these matters to the masters, as I have done here.
What I do understand is the architectural significance of the SR model vis a vis the network element perspective, if it performs as advertised, or even partially so. In other words, I have a better than average grasp of its implications, if it holds up to expectations, in the emerging ultra-high bandwidth space, and how it would affect the economics of some very large next-generation networks. And some of the smaller ones, as well. Maybe right into the living room or den at some point.
In this context I have a legitimate reason for wanting to uncover the true extent of this company's technological merit. Admittedly, I would be delighted to see it fulfilled. But I am also quite prepared if it isn't, for whatever reason.
There are a number of questions which have been raised here by others, and some by myself, both here and in private mailings. Without the facility of this thread, however, those questions might not have been brought to the fore.
-----
In your point # 6 you note:
"6. The timing of the creation of this thread. By itself it would not be a
red flag. But together with the rest? It fits."
Is that so? A little more shoe leather spent on your part examining this discussion just prior to the creation of this thread would have revealed to you that its creation was merely a continuum from other SI stock boards. Its motive was entirely academic, centering on curiosity and some genuine enthusiasm about the possibility of yet another industry status quo being shattered. Many frequenters here can relate to that kind of academic enthusiasm. Do you?
The thread is even more benign, in fact, than many of the other banter-filled threads you'll find here in SI, or in the halls of Raging Bull, or, forsooth, on the beaches of Yahoo!, characterized by cat fights, hype, thread moron disputes, thread moron elections, thread moron ejections & evictions, off-topic disputes, and rah rah sis cum blah, ad nauseam.
This thread evolves on a par with the VoIP thread, the Last Mile thread, and many other discussion groups whose purposes are to discuss the generic, as well as the specific technical merits of communications disciplines, and the companies behind those disciplines. In the case of the SR thread, the generic topic has been advanced optical communications systems, and related matters. The specific companies behind the disciplines discussed here have been SR, MRVC, LUMM, NT, Cambrian, CIEN, and a half dozen others.
At the risk of sounding even more defensive than I need be, without justifiable cause (I owe it to my colleagues here, as well as to myself, to be fairly thorough on this), take a look at the following link, and the posts just prior to it on about a half-dozen other stock boards here in SI [you'll have to search the others out yourself, in the same time frame]:
Message 6332035
This subject appeared in random fashion on numerous other SI boards and was treated, effectively, as "off topic." Those earlier postings resulted from subject-matter interests and academic curiosity which were inspired by press releases and trade press articles that were published at or around the same time.
Getting back to your point # 6, are you suggesting that the thread should have been initiated prior to these published articles, when the company was still a virtual unknown? When no one had ever even heard of them but your brother, or your friend-of-a-friend, or whomever it is you go into the huddle with?
Or perhaps you think it should have been inaugurated three years from now, i.e., two years after someone finally takes them out? So... you tell me, when should this thread have been conceived? |
