To elaborate, there are RFID chips with embedded antennas but they obviously have very limited range. The other issue that should be recognized by people with concerns about "crowd dusting" is just how hard it is to build RFID systems that can handle reading lots of tags at once without collisions.
I/O should never happen at the same speed as the processor. It has to be this way in order for the processor to actually process anything fast enough to keep up with whatever it's connected to.
So the answer to your question is: The same way it always has, through things like buffers and UARTS.
I see a direct correlation there, but I beleive it's the result of a third cause. I think the states that lean more toward respecting individual liberty also tend to be the ones that haven't spent as much of their subject's money on modern digital systems for tracking the prols.
Because black markets, theft, and underground manufacturing don't exist in real life, and giving the government an absolute monopoly not only on the use of force but on the ability to use force is a real win for freedom.
The university does have an absolute right to dictate how their network is used. That doesn't mean that nothing they do is ignorant or boneheaded.
I'd say that if widespread use of a particular application could wreak such havoc on your network, there's something you need to rethink about how your network is structured and managed.
Eventually all network traffic is going to be encrypted, and administrators will have to figure out how to deal with that.
Why the hell would you need a warrant for tracking a criminal with GPS?
You need to back up and reexamine your premise there. In the US nobody is a criminal until they've been convicted by a court. If you think they might be engaging in criminal behavior, what's wrong with having to get a warrant?
This isn't making a mountain out of a molehill, it's squashing the molehill before it becomes a mountain.
Most of the design are already using aluminum sabots, but it really only keeps the projectile intact and doesn't do much at all to prevent rail erosion.
I was pondering replacing the metal rails with something that can't be eroded. Something like a pair of lasers that would produce conductive ionized gas "rails"...
The problem isn't friction, it's spark erosion. The projectile in a rail gun should barely be touching the rails at all so it doesn't get welded in place. You end up with the equivalent of a huge arc welder traversing the rails with several thousand degree plasma.
My health is far from perfect, and the medical bills for my wife's c-section last October weren't trivial. That's not the point. The point is that I (and you and everyone else) have no right whatsoever to demand that anyone take care of me but myself. Sure it's nice when people do help each other out, and in a lot of cases we probably wouldn't survive without help. What's WRONG, in my opinion, is to force other people at gunpoint to help whether they like it or not.
I can be a very compassionate person, but don't ever make the mistake of assuming that just because altruism is nice it should be mandatory. It's the same as the difference between voluntary service in the armed forces and conscription.
Private insurance. If that fails, I have family and friends that are as willing to help me as I am to help them. If that fails I would have to fall back on private charity.
Geeze, just because something bad could happen to me is NOT a justification for institutionalized theft and slavery.
First of all society != government and for that matter chaos != anarchy.
Second, I've already said that I'll gladly pay for every product and service I use, AND I would happily voluntarily contribute to whatever I think is necessary to help the less fortunate in our society.
I just think it's immoral to remove my choice in such matters. If you can't depend on people voluntarily funding your government then just what kind of mandate or consent is your government operating under? You apparently have so little faith in your fellow man that you support the initiation of force against the people that disagree with you.
To further clarify my feelings, I think that your desire to build a "social safety net" is tantamount to saying that you would like to trade my freedom for your security. I will always insist that my freedom is mine alone to use or sell and anyone who says otherwise sees me as a slave to their visions.
It's not that I'm obsessed with clinging to my meager income. I just find being robbed of my money and my choice in how to spend it distasteful. If I was not forced at gun point to hand over a chunk of my property to pay for things that I may or may not agree with, I would be far more inclined to make charitable contributions wherever I thought it might do the most good to help my fellow man.
I'm all in favor of everybody enjoying a decent standard of living, but I am 100% opposed to anyone else deciding for me how I'm going to help.
I think it should work that way. I don't care what you want the race to be. I don't want anyone speaking for me and I don't want to speak for anyone else. I'm not rich, wealthy, or powerful, but I'm an anarcho-capitalist.
I demand the freedom to do whatever I like with the fruits of my labor, within the limit of not infringing the same freedom in others. I embrace the fact that no one is responsible for me but myself. I am proud to pay my way for what I use.
I'm offended by people who would say that If I have a job I would like to pay someone to do, I don't have the right to choose from the entire field of people willing to do the job for price I want to pay.
If you want a safety net, join a commune or buy insurance.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, but who is going to surreptitiously weave an RFID antenna into the clothes of everyone in a crowd?
Its physical size would still be dictated by the frequency being used.
To elaborate, there are RFID chips with embedded antennas but they obviously have very limited range. The other issue that should be recognized by people with concerns about "crowd dusting" is just how hard it is to build RFID systems that can handle reading lots of tags at once without collisions.
Most RFID chips still have to be attached to a much larger coil antenna to make a tag that will actually work.
That's exactly why I posted this comment directly above yours. I not sure how you missed seeing it.
I/O should never happen at the same speed as the processor. It has to be this way in order for the processor to actually process anything fast enough to keep up with whatever it's connected to.
So the answer to your question is: The same way it always has, through things like buffers and UARTS.
Before someone jumps all over me, I should mention Eric Drexler's Engines of Creation.
Sounds vaguely similar to the nano-scale rod-logic of Neal Stephenson's stories.
I see a direct correlation there, but I beleive it's the result of a third cause. I think the states that lean more toward respecting individual liberty also tend to be the ones that haven't spent as much of their subject's money on modern digital systems for tracking the prols.
Do you have any fruits or vegetables in your vehicle?
Because black markets, theft, and underground manufacturing don't exist in real life, and giving the government an absolute monopoly not only on the use of force but on the ability to use force is a real win for freedom.
Could you send me a postcard from your world?
The university does have an absolute right to dictate how their network is used. That doesn't mean that nothing they do is ignorant or boneheaded.
I'd say that if widespread use of a particular application could wreak such havoc on your network, there's something you need to rethink about how your network is structured and managed.
Eventually all network traffic is going to be encrypted, and administrators will have to figure out how to deal with that.
You need to back up and reexamine your premise there. In the US nobody is a criminal until they've been convicted by a court. If you think they might be engaging in criminal behavior, what's wrong with having to get a warrant?
This isn't making a mountain out of a molehill, it's squashing the molehill before it becomes a mountain.
Most of the design are already using aluminum sabots, but it really only keeps the projectile intact and doesn't do much at all to prevent rail erosion.
I was pondering replacing the metal rails with something that can't be eroded. Something like a pair of lasers that would produce conductive ionized gas "rails"...
The problem isn't friction, it's spark erosion.
The projectile in a rail gun should barely be touching the rails at all so it doesn't get welded in place. You end up with the equivalent of a huge arc welder traversing the rails with several thousand degree plasma.
BTW, You read a lot of Ayn Rand, don't you? :).
Nope. L. Neil Smith and Robert Heinlein are my guys.
My health is far from perfect, and the medical bills for my wife's c-section last October weren't trivial. That's not the point. The point is that I (and you and everyone else) have no right whatsoever to demand that anyone take care of me but myself. Sure it's nice when people do help each other out, and in a lot of cases we probably wouldn't survive without help. What's WRONG, in my opinion, is to force other people at gunpoint to help whether they like it or not.
I can be a very compassionate person, but don't ever make the mistake of assuming that just because altruism is nice it should be mandatory. It's the same as the difference between voluntary service in the armed forces and conscription.
Private insurance. If that fails, I have family and friends that are as willing to help me as I am to help them. If that fails I would have to fall back on private charity.
Geeze, just because something bad could happen to me is NOT a justification for institutionalized theft and slavery.
So you know better than most people what they should be doing with their resources and that makes it okay to enforce your will on them at gunpoint?
That's exactly the kind of thinking that gets you the situations in Darfur, Afghanistan, South America, Mexico, Iraq, Iran, Haiti, & New Jersey.
First of all society != government and for that matter chaos != anarchy.
Second, I've already said that I'll gladly pay for every product and service I use, AND I would happily voluntarily contribute to whatever I think is necessary to help the less fortunate in our society.
I just think it's immoral to remove my choice in such matters. If you can't depend on people voluntarily funding your government then just what kind of mandate or consent is your government operating under? You apparently have so little faith in your fellow man that you support the initiation of force against the people that disagree with you.
To further clarify my feelings, I think that your desire to build a "social safety net" is tantamount to saying that you would like to trade my freedom for your security. I will always insist that my freedom is mine alone to use or sell and anyone who says otherwise sees me as a slave to their visions.
It's not that I'm obsessed with clinging to my meager income. I just find being robbed of my money and my choice in how to spend it distasteful. If I was not forced at gun point to hand over a chunk of my property to pay for things that I may or may not agree with, I would be far more inclined to make charitable contributions wherever I thought it might do the most good to help my fellow man.
I'm all in favor of everybody enjoying a decent standard of living, but I am 100% opposed to anyone else deciding for me how I'm going to help.
So you want to abolish private business and nationalize everything? You want to deny business owners the right to choose how they spend their money?
BTW the US is a constitutional republic, god help us if we were a democracy.
I think it should work that way. I don't care what you want the race to be. I don't want anyone speaking for me and I don't want to speak for anyone else. I'm not rich, wealthy, or powerful, but I'm an anarcho-capitalist.
I demand the freedom to do whatever I like with the fruits of my labor, within the limit of not infringing the same freedom in others. I embrace the fact that no one is responsible for me but myself. I am proud to pay my way for what I use.
I'm offended by people who would say that If I have a job I would like to pay someone to do, I don't have the right to choose from the entire field of people willing to do the job for price I want to pay.
If you want a safety net, join a commune or buy insurance.