On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 05:19:32PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 3:13 PM, <wirelesswarrior@safe-mail.net> wrote:

...

I still maintain that bootstapping is best done using EBL to create LSI and less complex VLSI (USB chips, CPLD and FPGA). Sure EBL is slow but it can eliminate the cost and complexity of masking. EBL immensely simplifies the foundry and offers the possibility for OS distributed design and manufacture, affordable for "maker" groups, without involving a commercial entity. The number of trusted parties shrinks significantly.

Who can spot the two untrusted parties in this chickenegg EBL rig? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EB_litograph.jpg And what are they driving? D-oh.

EBL would be fine if it's control was rebuilt as trusted gear.

Just links... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-beam_lithography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit#VLSI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Systems_Language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_guidiance_computer_ferrit_core_mem... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Agc_nor2.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4oGI_dNaPc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3wPBcmSb2U

The solution to this chicken and egg rathole is a legislative trojan. First, we identify a consortium (cartel?) of open-source hardware folks who desire to make a lot of money making hardware that anyone can verify correct operation of said hardware. Then, we draft model legislation to fund basic R&D of 'trusted' hardware by basic science research agencies in the US, Germany, Japan, and China. (Now if you really want to tweak the beast, add Iran or North Korea to the list, that would be amusing) Now is the important part: Raising sufficient lobbying money to get the previously developed model legislation passed in a sufficient subset of countries. In the US this is pretty straighforward, we go to Silicon Valley with a pitch deck and find some investors that already play the game of financing legislation. We can start with people who've invested in Google, Microsoft, Apple, and media companies (the ones that brought us the DMCA) Once the legislation is passed, the previously mentioned cartel can now leverage (probably by at least 100x) the original funds invested in lobbying, because they are the only ones that can succeed in getting the grant funding for said basic research. A completely different approach would be to find the owners of some smaller independent fabs who'd like to stay independent. If you want to add the lobbying bit go to the local government and ask for economic development funds for local industry.