The timeline often makes references to relevant papers, books, articles, and web sites from third parties in the text; wherever the term "jump off sources" is used for these, such references should be regarded as a portion of the total information pool considered by the author before making his speculative decisions-- the named sources do NOT necessarily always fully support the timeline author's own conclusions or ideas for a variety of reasons, ranging from much shorter term perspectives for their text (relative to the timeline's 1000 year outlook), to other factors, such as the intentional (or not) lack of consideration for other elements potentially significant to a chosen topic. Example One: A newspaper story which states something like 'workers ecstatic as unemployment reaches 30 year lows', but DOESN'T include the facts that workplace stress may be increasing overall because more folks are basically on call 24 hours a day, are often working unpaid overtime, possibly suffering reductions in health insurance and retirement plan options, enduring ever longer commutes, and greater surveillance and scrutiny of every action or word on the job. Ergo, such a story would seem to be missing something, right? Example Two: a newspaper reporter who writes about how the idle processor time of PCs could be put to better use for menial background chores for users-- but doesn't realize the much greater impact distributed processing could have via Network Computers/set top boxes as a competitive advantage in the marketplace of 2001 and beyond.
You can find out by clicking here...(and also send FEEDBACK)