In the Public Domain aren't there to be no expectations of privacy. I know this was used by the defense in some nude shots of girls on the street in mardi gras for something like Girls Gone Wild, when they were being sued by the girl (I might be wrong on the particulars but it was something of the sort.) So, considering it was outside in the public domain why should the cops be any different. When in public expect to be watched/listened to. I thought wiretapping came into effect when privacy was expected i.e. inside ones own house.
I don't know if I misread the article but did they ever said how big these goggles are? Battlefield medics need good line of sight, and probably end up toting around enough stuff as it is. I'm not sure if this is going to sell well, especially if they're aiming it at the medics. Still its a cool bit of technology and I hope they're able to adopt it to something better like NERF Glow in the Dark Football/Basketball/Soccer!
Whatever happened to the right to choose? Irregardless of whether or not one product is better than the other or not. Aren't people/corporations/governments allowed to make choices based on preferences that don't necessarily need to be cold hard facts. I'm a Pepsi man, I like Pepsi, not because I think its better than Coke in taste, but just because I prefer it. If Coke finds out scientifically that it "tastes" better, are they going to sue me? Based on what Diebold is doing it would appear so. So long as there wasn't any unfair business practices taking place, which the article says that there appears to be no proof of, I don't understand what would possess Diebold to file this suit.
Slashdot Mirror
In the Public Domain aren't there to be no expectations of privacy. I know this was used by the defense in some nude shots of girls on the street in mardi gras for something like Girls Gone Wild, when they were being sued by the girl (I might be wrong on the particulars but it was something of the sort.) So, considering it was outside in the public domain why should the cops be any different. When in public expect to be watched/listened to. I thought wiretapping came into effect when privacy was expected i.e. inside ones own house.
I don't know if I misread the article but did they ever said how big these goggles are? Battlefield medics need good line of sight, and probably end up toting around enough stuff as it is. I'm not sure if this is going to sell well, especially if they're aiming it at the medics. Still its a cool bit of technology and I hope they're able to adopt it to something better like NERF Glow in the Dark Football/Basketball/Soccer!
Whatever happened to the right to choose? Irregardless of whether or not one product is better than the other or not. Aren't people/corporations/governments allowed to make choices based on preferences that don't necessarily need to be cold hard facts. I'm a Pepsi man, I like Pepsi, not because I think its better than Coke in taste, but just because I prefer it. If Coke finds out scientifically that it "tastes" better, are they going to sue me? Based on what Diebold is doing it would appear so. So long as there wasn't any unfair business practices taking place, which the article says that there appears to be no proof of, I don't understand what would possess Diebold to file this suit.