For story purposes, can someone build their own smartphone, computers, and OS from scratch?

Gotta love the 'ignore' button when idiots talk to yuh.

 

So to answer the question on whether or not you can build something from scratch: yes, with the right tools you can build anything from the ground up given enough time and knowledge on the subject. Hope that helps.

 

I'm going to go build me a space station in the magic woodshop!

 

By hand?

Fist = hammer
Thumbnail = screwdriver

 

Of course. Well, I might use a spinning wheel to make the carbon fibers for the space elevator.

 

You must need to go back to elementary school if you can't spin your arm fast enough to act as a spinning wheel. There's really no excuse for that.

 

You're oversimplifying, or perhaps overestimating the human lifetime.

Going back to my pizza analogy, the man who invented it at most made the base and combined the rest. The flour would've been milled, the tomatoes and basil would've been grown, the salt extracted, the cheese made, the yeast cultured and the sugar refined by different people. Baking a pizza is a walk in the park compared to a computer, let alone a smart phone.

Not to mention the knowledge you need is probably going to take a lifetime to do one specialist field, because even the two main branches (hardware and software) contain hundreds of different disciplines within it, multiple of which are used to create just one of the three things being asked for here.

 

Oh, dear. Does that mean I can't use knitting needles to make the solar panels, either?

 

You could, but any engineer worth hir or her basalt knows you can just grind your finger to appropriate size on a rock.

 

Ow.

 

I'm wondering to myself, what if this is a futuristic story? Maybe components like motherboards, circuits, etc are easier to make in the future. I mean look at books. They use to be hand made and now they are either digital, POD, or mass produced. I don't know much about 3D printers but what if in this futuristic alternative universe they developed a way to materialize components out of thin air. How would that even be possible scientifically, though? The only question is how can you create something from nothing. I understand the concerns you all have but who knows what we will invent in the coming decades that could make computers easier to build.

It's not out of the realm of possibilities. Who knew fifty years ago that we'd have smartwatches, smartphones, and smart devices. There were primitive technologies that led to the smartphone and so on but who knows what technology we will discover in the coming decades. Will materialization be possible? I don't know or will there be some other way to mass produce computers with very few people, that is more cost efficient? Maybe these people creating this equipment had crowdfunding to help them. I mean that's a possibility.

In the old days (correct me if I'm wrong) weren't video games created by a team of computer programmers. Now a single guy/girl in his/her basement can create a complex game like Fez or Limbo. I wonder if as technology progresses and we find out easier methods via science and discovery we may find easier ways to manufacture computers and smart devices. I could be completely wrong but hypothesizing never hurts.

 

You can write an Operating System from scratch like how the first OS was created. You'd need a computer though.

As for the actual phone it depends how 'from scratch' you mean. You can build you own PC by having the individual parts sent to you and you assemble it your self. But the actual individual parts to the PC or smartphone are made by machines.

I highly doubt someone can be able build a smartphone-grade motherboard together by hands. I could be wrong, however.

 

"And I know that everything in this world can be built by one man given time, knowledge, and tools. And that's a fact." ...

Oh, awesome. NASA would love to see you build a Delta IV Heavy rocket on your own. Would work wonders for their budget.

 

You clearly need to watch more cartoons.

 

Going from that to a system that can manage a smartphone is asking a lot.

 

Um, no. All you need is a couple of really small tin cans and some string. You didn't know?

 

Oh, you're one of those people who believe in string theory. Uh huh.

 

These all evolved from the invention of the printing press.

Also, your point about games isn't always true.

ZX Spectrum was easy to code for, creating a surge of indie developers. What made some consoles more restrictive, like the PS3 for a while, was that the hardware was damn hard to code for because it was incredibly custom and experimental (side note: that was an issue devs called Sony out on and they resolved that for PS4).

I don't see 3D printing being an avenue for circuits. It works like a piping bag of plastic.

As for materialisation, nothing comes from nothing, even in Star Trek an episode of The Next Generation alluded that the food replicators used hydrogen gas and an archive of the molecular structure of foods. Of course it does not explain how it could fuse these atoms without blowing up the ship.

 

I'm making an observation and I don't mean to be a jerk but one thing I am noticing in this thread is that a member was accused of using an ad hominem (which if I understand the definition of argumentum ad hominem it's attacking the opposition rather than analyzing their argument) when I'm seeing mocking invalidating replies (e.g talking about phones made of cans and string, etc - not sure if these short mocking replies are directed at me or the person accused of committing an ad hominem) from those same people making the ad hominem accusation. Being mocking does not add to the conversation, really. I'm trying to keep it civil. We can agree to disagree but please, laughing off someone or telling them their points are invalid is not going to earn you bonus points in an argument (if I have done this I apologize).

The question I have asked doesn't seem to have a particularly absolute answer, though. Some are saying it can be done (but it's hard) while others are saying it can't be done, absolutely not, no way, no how. I'm honestly not sure who is telling the truth and who's not, to be honest.

As for the invention of the printing press, this does not trump the fact that books evolved from being handwritten to using a printing press, POD, digital, and so on. I wasn't really sure the message behind this part. It was short, but it didn't really give a counter-argument to my mention that books are now easier to produce with the evolution of technology. I implore you to explain your argument on this in further detail.

I'm not denying you on this but I will say that it doesn't really tell me why it's not always true. Okay, it was restrictive for the PS3. That was at one time and then the problem was fixed. I'm assuming now it's easier for single game programmers to create indie games, which was my point in the first place. As time goes on we learn ways to make our lives easier. Reading into the history of indie publishing I read that before POD and digital publishing that self-publishing wasn't really a thing like it is today. The only early self-published author of that time that I know of is Irma S. Rombauer and her book The Joy of Cooking, which at the time of publication must have been a lot of work for her to promote, being that there was no internet and word of mouth, newspaper ads, and TV spots (but that may be a stretch) was the only options at that time. Now with the internet, social media, Wattpad, blogs, KDP, Draft2Digitals, etc. it's gotten a lot easier for authors to get their work in the hands of readers. You still have to work hard, like always, but my point is as we progress in our understanding of science and technology we may find some things out we didn't know before. It's safe to say that no technology is created but discovered as it has always existed in our universe in some way, shape, or form.

To quote me, "It's not out of the realm of possibilities. Who knew fifty years ago that we'd have smartwatches, smartphones, and smart devices. There were primitive technologies that led to the smartphone and so on but who knows what technology we will discover in the coming decades." The message I was attempting to get across in my last reply (it may not have read that way) was yes, right now it's not possible but who knows what science will discover in the future. You're right, @S A Lee. As for materialization, something forming out of thin air, that's impossible (and I even admitted I know nothing about 3D Printers - I think it's all fascinating but don't really understand it - something I should do more research on) right now in 2017 but who's to say we won't find a way to do this years from now or maybe instead of materialization it could be another way of producing hardware, cost effectively and quickly. Maybe a fictional hypothesis will be tweaked and lead to a discovery. There are still things that we are always finding out that we didn't know about our universe, that the laws of science as we thought we knew don't always apply.

I'm not saying you are wrong or you are right. I could be completely and utterly wrong, but these are not invalid points to make on my part. I'm asking questions and questioning answers in an attempt to get to the truth and weed out any falsities I might encounter on the Internet.

 

@pensmightierthanthesword, I think that the premise of

1) going into the future and having something--an actual device--that generates objects

is infinitely more acceptable than

2) the idea of someone with today's technological knowledge and some blueprints accomplishing the task.

(2) is utterly implausible, AND it's based on real-world facts, so I simply can't get past the implausibility.

(1) is also wildly implausible, but since you throw in some magic-future-dust it's easier to ignore the implausibility. There may be a few people who turned off Star Trek:TNG forever when they heard. "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot." but apparently most people didn't.

If I read

"Start digging up soil and dumping it in the hopper of the WidgetFerblopper! When it has enough of the right metals it'll make us a smartphone, AND the pulverized dirt that it spits out will make us a fine vegetable garden!"

I'd just close my eyes to the question of whether all the needed elements would be in the native dirt, and I'd keep reading. While a (2) situation would just have me closing the book and moving on to read something else.

 

They would have to know how to do it first. Also, they'd have to have a WHOLE lot of know-how beyond just knowing what parts go where if they're making the parts themselves.

 

As I am sure you are replying to a ton of posts, and honestly wouldn't know (as I have begun to 'ignore' the ignorant people who laugh and write people off (something you talked about in the opening part of this quoted post)) I will just say what I have to say (which is factually true) and that is that you can create anything from scratch as long as you have the know how (and given that it actually exists unless you are some super genius) and the tools. By "from scratch" I mean from basic components such as metals, wiring, plastics, etc. And by tools it can be anything from a hand tool to something a lot bigger (I know of large devices used to bend metals, don't exactly know the name). People have claimed that certain things can "only be made in factories" but that is a lie as factories are ONLY designed to ease the process of building it as well as making mass quantities of the item.

Factory: a person, group, or institution that continually produces a great quantity of something specified.

Tool: a device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function. (Not it is "especially one held in the hand" not exclusively something held in the hand).

Note I don't put this down for you as from what I can tell you are a smart man but instead put this here for the ones mocking anyone who tries to say differently than they do (which is a childish thing to do).

Bottom line; if you have the know how and the tools then you can build anything with the right amount of time. I hope this helps you out, although I know that I have stated this before but it gets laughed off and ignored by the "smart" people who deem themselves better than everyone else.

 

You're really very wrong, and I'm still waiting for your hand-built Intel processor.

 

@pensmightierthanthesword ad homs don't necessarily have to be based in fact, and @ChickenFreak was accused of being ignorant by someone who cannot rebuke the argument she made in an attempt to close the argument. That's a logical fallacy of there ever was one. The derailment was to emphasise how ignorant the notion was to others.

In the case of the consoles, the main reason the PS3 was hard to code for was the custom hardware architecture. Prime example of this was Bayonetta, which was ported by the publisher rather than the company that made the game to disastrous results. That is not the case with the ZXS, which was both console and development kit, kind of like the Raspberry pi is a cheap computer made to encourage coding.

However, the fact remains that intelligent people tend to have a field of expertise. I kind of want to point to the expressions 'jack of all trades master of none' and 'he who tries to catch two hares at once catches neither'. Rather than spreading themselves thin they pour their brain power into one field, and often one branch within a field as well.

My parents could talk all day about building computer chips but they will not be able to build an OS, similarly my bf, a software engineer, would tell you he's not a hardware architect if you try to ask him about building a motherboard.

You're looking at a group working together with access to the technology to build the smaller parts at best.

Edited for a little clarification.

 

Now back to the OP: I have some experience in this.

When I was in high school in the sixties I designed and built from scratch several ham transmitters, receivers, and accessories including my piece de resistance (no pun intended, after all, resistance is futile), an AM voice and CW (Morse to the uninitiated) all band HF (shortwave) transmitter. Back in the tube days, it was relatively easy to do this. And it also wound up looking very well-made, a lot of care in the panel layout, decals for the knob labels, etc. I continued through most of my adult life doing this stuff and my best piece in the 1980s was a teletype modem built with integrated circuits on printed circuit boards I made myself, using overlays on light sensitive board, exposed to the sun. But let me say it is getting increasingly difficult to do this without a lot of automated processes. In addition the components pack a lot of built in processing power that are impossible to manufacture on your own. A little square chip the size of a big nail head is actually a small internally programmed processor, and a smart phone has not one but several of those things. If you have them, and you know their inputs and outputs, maybe... but then these come with extremely dense pin connections, several dozen connections per inch, that are impossible to solder by hand. You would need a large automated machine to do the soldering. Finally you would probably need a multilayer circuit board, if you actually expect to fit this in your hand. Also impossible to make by hand. In short, you would almost need a factory of your own to make them, and if you had that, why do you need to build your own cellphone? And then you would need to make the supporting terrestrial infrastructure. I presume you are thinking of some post-apocalyptic scenario when these would not exist.

As to the OS, the first OS was put together when I was at Monterey US Naval Postgraduate School by Gary Kildall of the CS department, in the early to mid 70s. Gary had a bunch of single board computers, back when 8K RAM was a huge memory, and they all had different input/output architectures, though they were all built around 8008 and 8080 second gen Intel CPU chips. He had his students design various drivers for these different input/output architectures. These drivers connected to a central processing engine, so that, even though the input/output structures of each were different, the drivers took care of that and all the internal processing, after the data got inside the machine, was done the same way. From that was born the first common OS, CP/M that dominated the late 70s/early 80s 8 bit machines. Gary left USNPGS to live in luxury in Carmel, and ultimately compete with Microsoft for the first 16 bit OS for the first gen IBM machines... he lost, but nevertheless, he blazed the way. So yes, it can be done, but you have to start small. CP/M was in fact designed from scratch.

I think what you are looking for is can you build voice and data communications from scratch, and perhaps reconstitute some computing power? The answer to the first is yes, easily, hams still do this today as I did fifty years ago. But it will not be cell phone, but radio communications, most likely HF, as that is the easiest way to achieve global ranges without much power, sophistication or infrastructure. Data communications will be Morse or teletype, if you have some type of teletype (very hard to build for mechanical ones) As to computers, you need to examine why you would need them, what you would use them for. If you have to build one from scratch, you probably don't need it. We got along quite comfortably without them until the 1940s when we needed to crunch lots of numbers to break wartime ciphers. What we came up with were electromechanical devices for that, first gen digital. And WWII gunfire support used analog computers, which solved differential equations of motion using integrators and differentiators (low and high pass filters), which became quite accurate. The Iowa class BBs, for example, could put a 2000 pound warhead on target inside 50 feet at twenty miles, correcting for, among other things, Coriolis forces of the earth's motion. That is achievable with hand built systems.


Hope this is not a data dump on you all