You don't have to be a liberal to see that the Democrats didn't get a leg up with these voting irregularities. the Republicans did, and the story of how and why has been written about since at least the magical 2000 election. The Diebold company has far too many deep contacts with the Republicans, and have fought like madmen to prevent auditing or recounts on paper; no sane company would block a backup system to a computer network. They claim election results are trade secrets. They claim their systems cannot fail, to the bulge-eyed astonishment of any IT person. They have acted guilty, for years, without apology and without reason given. When the house is on fire, check for the guilty sots hanging around back with the can of kerosene and matches.
Real problem with closed suits, as extensively discussed in Heinlein's great old book, "Have Spaceuit, Will Travel", is heat and perspiration buildup. Air needs to circulate, cool air, to evaporate sweat and lower body temperature. Just using cooling isn't enough. You'd roast like a turkey if the heat isn't wicked off somehow.
Yet somehow no one seems to mention ElRon's cures in major media... and such trepidation on editors' parts leads to Beckham and his wife being recruited, as latest rumor seems to have it. If people actually knew about what ElRon actually claimed to have done, his "religion" would be classified with Nigerian royality scams.
Keep spreading the word of Xenu (xenu.net).
BACK on topic, sorry, this guy is doing what we SF and comics geeks always wanted to do as kids: build our superhero suit. I spent years redoing designs, and even today I perk up on hearing about a new impact or slash resistant fabric.
From what I can see, he's swiped (joke) my idea of plating the face, and running video to a screen in front of the eyes from a camera. I see only one camera. Bad idea. Use two, and two small hirez screens in front of the eyes -- this gives some stereoscopic perception. 2D viewing not good when you are fighting for your life or trying to target something. Alternatively, some sort of prism arangement could work, and be proof against risk of electronic breakdown that a camera system entails. A man with a plated face can take a shot from an Uzi to the nose. Yeah, they can shoot your camera, but the camera would be where your face is, so you're ahead by points by being alive. And you can always jack in a spare camera into a USB port, and then won't they be sorry for blasting you in the punum.
If you can make the armor light enough, you can move at a normal rate of speed, without power enhancement.
Sad part is, in ten years we won't have these suits. The Homeland Security Enforcement Elite will. So much for the second amendment and the theoretical right to revolt by handgun. Guns ain't worth much if they snicker when you shoot them.
The cost to build will be slashed enormously, given the elimination of hourly immigrant labor, but somehow, somehow the price to the buyer will be the same as stick-built, or slightly lower. The savings will be passed on to the builder -- always.
All cell phones sold after 2005 must have GPS/E911 built in. And you really can't shut it off, no matter what the menu says. Now, if we can hack a real "off" switch into the Homeland Security/Police/Your Boss/Anyone who cares to pay to see where you are/ human tracking system, then this phone is such a godtoy. It'd be a bargain at twice the price.
Buy an iPod. You've misunderstood: you can still buy iPods, hence the AppleTV appliance's existence. I don't think Apple is giving up the iPod. Be glad, iPod fan!
I do believe Steve decided to be saucy. He expects to print enough money with this superphone that he can eat any judgement Cisco can throw at him. And Cisco's suits had decided to be dicks about it anyway, when they called some silly router iPhone just to get in Apple's face. I kinda admire Steve telling them to stick it up their cattle chutes.
"If a commercial airliner is considered the private property of the airline which owns the airplane, doesn't the airline have the right decide what they require from their customers as a pre-condition of entering into the business arrangement of purchasing a ticket to ride on one of their airplanes?"
No. They are public carriers, and monopolies at what they do. Of course, the gilded-ageists will say that property rights trump any public compact. They are wrong. Else we are now living in an new tyranny more terrible than anything kings could have dreamt up, a tyranny of rich assholes who choose who flies, who works, who gets health care, and who goes to hell, with no oversight by the government of the people.
And we built their "private" infrastructure with our tax monies, both directly and indirectly.
Bad form, but I have to correct my post, otherwise it makes no sense...
-- OK. So it's okay if we point them at all your doors and windows. No expectations of privacy there.
I used to believe that the expectation of privacy argument didn't apply in a public space, but now, it seems we have to manufacture an expectation. Just because it never existed before doesn't mean we can't create one -- that's the purpose of the 9th amendment. Rights exist that are not explicitly spelled out.
And I'm stealing another poster's great argument: a public place doesn't mean the government owns it, and we are helpless there against the will of the faceless cops and corporate functionaries. WE OWN THE PUBLIC PLACE. It is ours to control, not the government or the cops or the massive numbers of private armies and security firms that now outnumber cops, but are increasingly being granted police powers. Hell, we're paying for the space AND the cameras AND the secret guards!
The alternative is cameras on our doors and trackers following everyone's moves -- tho as usual if you are wealthy and powerful, you always get superprivacy on demand. Only the schmucks get monitored.
You don't think COPS will let cameras be trained on their front doors, do you? Cheney? Britney Spears? They'll get privilege -- a word meaning "private law", the law for the special people.
"Your title is an assertion. The constitution has been interpreted by the courts such that the right to be secure in our persons is a right to privacy to some, unspecified, degree. Further, the right to privacy is regarded as a basic human right by most of the civilized world. The constitutionality and the ethics of these cameras are very, very questionable."
The ninth amendment states that the constitution, as such, does not eliminate any rights not enumerated. In other words, because the "right to privacy" is not stated explicitly does not eliminate the right. I doubt very, very much that the worthies who wrote that document believed that the government had the right to monitor everyone's movements.
This highlights a fundamental dispute among the writers of the constitution. Some wanted the rights of man spelled out in a bill of rights, while others did not want a bill of explicitly stated rights, because, as it now turns out in this thread, some would come to believe that the constitution granted powers by the grace of the writers, which was absolutely false to their intent. The ninth amendment was a compromise, stating that rights not enumerated were not to be held nonexistent. To hammer it home, you have a right to privacy, even in public places, if it is believed to be so -- the constitution holds that such a right exists, even though it does not state it explicitly..
The courts uphold the constitution, and as such recognized -- depending on fundamental ideological majorities at the upper levels -- that a privacy right exists. The current SCOTUS majority do not hold with the ninth amendment, going with the "original intent" notion, biting their own asses because the original intent was that rights existed beyond the scope of the imaginations of the writers -- they future-proofed the document.
The courts must uphold human rights not explicitly spelled out in the other amendments, and be damned to them if they side with the authoritarians in this matter. We're gonna be fighting the misinterpretation of the constitution for decades to come.
In the meantime, wear a hoodie. Oops, that's illegal in England now... it'll be illegal here in the USA soon.
OK. So it's okay if we point them at all your doors and windows. No expectations of privacy there.
I used to believe in the expectations of privacy arguments, but now, it seems we have to manufacture an expectation. Just because it never existed before doesn't mean we can create one. The alternative is cameras on our doors and trackers following everyone's moves -- tho as usual if you are wealthy and powerful, you always get superprivacy on demand. Only the schmucks get monitored.
You don't think COPS will let cameras be trained on their front doors, do you? Cheney? Britney Spears? They'll get priviledge -- "private law".
"If the police wish to use video from a camera as evidence, they must provide the video to the defense."
the record is replete with prosecutors and the police not providing evidence to the defense. As well, the record shows that the police and prosecutors, even when caught, don't get convicted much, and certainly never see prison.
If they want to railroad you, they will, and there is nothing you can do about it, other than spending a couple of million on a good defense team.
You are assuming that the situation will remain static. It never does. They will move the goalposts. The cameras will keep creeping closer to your door, and someday, they will be in your house. Listen! They're already recording all your chats and email,as much as they can anyway. They track your GPS coordinates on your GPS-mandated cell phones at will. They listen to the mic on your cell phone, if they feel the need. They're listening to your house phone calls, against a federal court order. What do you think will discourage them from surreptitiously monitoring people's actions when they are not in public - seeing as how they ALREADY ARE?
Yep. Lotsa stories about how a pursesnatcher got caught. Whatever. A steady stream of them, I predict. If cameras are placed on every piece of masonry, you'll find a whole lot of criminals.
Where are the stories about how an executive was caught using cameras? Doubt there will be many, because cameras will be scarce in executive board rooms. About how many anti-Bush protesters lost their jobs because of the copcams? It'll always be little people caught, not the big thieves and killers.A lot of little crimes, marginal ones, will be found, pumping up the safety meme. Kill one man, big story, kill hundreds of thousands, and they cover your state dinner.
And finally, when will we hear the stories about how some innocent person was arrested and imprisoned using circumstantial evidence from Complete Surveillance, USA? I don't think the American Secret Police will be publicizing those stories. I don't think we'll ever hear about those.
Americans. So terrified of crime, so sold on their helplessness. The safest country in the world, and the most terrified through the agency of their own government and a news media turned into the Nancy Grace Anger Hour.
The cameras are not worth the cost. They will be used against those who protest the mounting abuses of the same cameras. It's what police states always do; turn against the very people they insisted they were protecting.
And how many people are ruined because they failed a drug test -- yet were innocent? How could anyone ever know? The test is always right, so no statistics on the accuracy can be kept.
It's why I won't submit to a drug test. It's like having your faith in god tested by a religiously fanatic employer in a religiously insane country -- the consequences of failing their nonfunctional test is too high.
When I was in high school, we were required to take swimming, no excuses. Freezing water, yay. We were required to wear bathing caps and swim naked - since women couldn't swim naked, they were not allowed to take swimming. So no co-eds.
The memory that stuck with me was being forced to line up after showering, single file, and one after another being "inspected" for "cleanliness" by coaches and aides while standing in a big rubber pool of antiseptic-laced water. Then we'd sit shivering on a bench in the freezing pool room at the leisure of our fully suited coaches.
What strikes me now, besides how unbelievably pedophilically gay it all was, was how we submitted to the humiliation, every day. It's amazing how much people can be trained to submit to power, if you train them young. There's nothing that cannot be justified, if you train people to accept one small piece madness at a time. Small madnesses link up to become giant frenzies, and then the witches burn.
From what I've heard, although not the same type of abuse is performed on elementary and high school kids today, they've imposed far more repressive, broader training for madness in the last twenty years. The amount of sheer fascistic bullshit that young people have been conditioned to swallow is why corporations are so unchecked, why we have torture camps, why we must have anal electrodes up our ani eventually just to hold a job and have a family. It always starts with the little madnesses... just submit and get along, it's not that big a deal...
So, the scientists in our nuclear program can only work if they have sacrificed their integrity and honor. And they are worth what, then? They're operating at the level of political prisoners.
I've more aware of history than most Americans. And I do know that the Soviets also required their scientists to shed their integrity in just the same fashion, for reasons as stupid as we give the scientists.
The Jeffersons of the world are always at war with the pragmatists. Thanks to the FSM for the Jeffersonians, or we'd be spending random periods during the day cathartically screaming at images of the enemy on some big screen in the lunchroom. Bending the knee always leads to bending over for the baseball bat up the rectum, forever and always. Type A Alpha males know no limits. The fight must always be for freedom, for there are a consistent majority of humans that prefer pragmatic obesiance to power rather than be put to inconvenience.
And the choice shouldn't be submit and be employed OR eat roots and die. We've made a society that doesn't require submission to mental rape as a prerequisite for eating. We'd like to keep it that way. And if you let one profession require submission to madness, then nothing stops the others following the lead. And nothing does. Eventually, soon, we'll be required to submit to practically anything as a condition of employment. I don't have to labor this point, for the examples are all around us now.
And businesses are licensed by the government through corporate charter to exist at all. And goverment is US. We run the show, not businesses. If businesses don't like it, or government paranoiacs don't, then they are free to quit and eat berries and roots themselves. We, however, are the bosses at the end of the day, and we don't have to submit to a pack of corporate franchisees and government kiss-asses. WE the people. Not WE the government and businesses, which, after all, was Mussolini's definition of fascism. We are in charge, not the faceless invisible powers-that-want-to-be.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have to be a liberal to see that the Democrats didn't get a leg up with these voting irregularities. the Republicans did, and the story of how and why has been written about since at least the magical 2000 election. The Diebold company has far too many deep contacts with the Republicans, and have fought like madmen to prevent auditing or recounts on paper; no sane company would block a backup system to a computer network. They claim election results are trade secrets. They claim their systems cannot fail, to the bulge-eyed astonishment of any IT person. They have acted guilty, for years, without apology and without reason given. When the house is on fire, check for the guilty sots hanging around back with the can of kerosene and matches.
This is why we oldsters hate Microsoft. 25 YEARS of this.
Real problem with closed suits, as extensively discussed in Heinlein's great old book, "Have Spaceuit, Will Travel", is heat and perspiration buildup. Air needs to circulate, cool air, to evaporate sweat and lower body temperature. Just using cooling isn't enough. You'd roast like a turkey if the heat isn't wicked off somehow.
Doing anything interesting technologically in your spare time is always a sure form of birth control. It's mate repellant.
Yet somehow no one seems to mention ElRon's cures in major media... and such trepidation on editors' parts leads to Beckham and his wife being recruited, as latest rumor seems to have it. If people actually knew about what ElRon actually claimed to have done, his "religion" would be classified with Nigerian royality scams.
Keep spreading the word of Xenu (xenu.net).
BACK on topic, sorry, this guy is doing what we SF and comics geeks always wanted to do as kids: build our superhero suit. I spent years redoing designs, and even today I perk up on hearing about a new impact or slash resistant fabric.
From what I can see, he's swiped (joke) my idea of plating the face, and running video to a screen in front of the eyes from a camera. I see only one camera. Bad idea. Use two, and two small hirez screens in front of the eyes -- this gives some stereoscopic perception. 2D viewing not good when you are fighting for your life or trying to target something. Alternatively, some sort of prism arangement could work, and be proof against risk of electronic breakdown that a camera system entails. A man with a plated face can take a shot from an Uzi to the nose. Yeah, they can shoot your camera, but the camera would be where your face is, so you're ahead by points by being alive. And you can always jack in a spare camera into a USB port, and then won't they be sorry for blasting you in the punum.
If you can make the armor light enough, you can move at a normal rate of speed, without power enhancement.
Sad part is, in ten years we won't have these suits. The Homeland Security Enforcement Elite will. So much for the second amendment and the theoretical right to revolt by handgun. Guns ain't worth much if they snicker when you shoot them.
Heinlein was here first. And a lot of others before him. It was called... "science fiction"... it was in magazines and books...
Sears has what you want. A home CNC machine for wood and plastics. Me want!
u ter_contro.html?CMP=OTC-0D6B48984890
http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2007/01/comp
The cost to build will be slashed enormously, given the elimination of hourly immigrant labor, but somehow, somehow the price to the buyer will be the same as stick-built, or slightly lower. The savings will be passed on to the builder -- always.
All cell phones sold after 2005 must have GPS/E911 built in. And you really can't shut it off, no matter what the menu says. Now, if we can hack a real "off" switch into the Homeland Security/Police/Your Boss/Anyone who cares to pay to see where you are/ human tracking system, then this phone is such a godtoy. It'd be a bargain at twice the price.
I wonder if you can use Skype on the thing?
Buy an iPod. You've misunderstood: you can still buy iPods, hence the AppleTV appliance's existence. I don't think Apple is giving up the iPod. Be glad, iPod fan!
I'd worry more about the GPS tracking device built-into all cell phones post-2005.
I do believe Steve decided to be saucy. He expects to print enough money with this superphone that he can eat any judgement Cisco can throw at him. And Cisco's suits had decided to be dicks about it anyway, when they called some silly router iPhone just to get in Apple's face. I kinda admire Steve telling them to stick it up their cattle chutes.
My oldest dream. A real ebook reader.
Even if we get a simple text file display app, the ebook is finally here.
"If a commercial airliner is considered the private property of the airline which owns the airplane, doesn't the airline have the right decide what they require from their customers as a pre-condition of entering into the business arrangement of purchasing a ticket to ride on one of their airplanes?"
No. They are public carriers, and monopolies at what they do. Of course, the gilded-ageists will say that property rights trump any public compact. They are wrong. Else we are now living in an new tyranny more terrible than anything kings could have dreamt up, a tyranny of rich assholes who choose who flies, who works, who gets health care, and who goes to hell, with no oversight by the government of the people.
And we built their "private" infrastructure with our tax monies, both directly and indirectly.
How exactly does showing identity papers protect anyone? Brain cells, anyone? Bad guys have fake id's.
Bad form, but I have to correct my post, otherwise it makes no sense...
--
OK. So it's okay if we point them at all your doors and windows. No expectations of privacy there.
I used to believe that the expectation of privacy argument didn't apply in a public space, but now, it seems we have to manufacture an expectation. Just because it never existed before doesn't mean we can't create one -- that's the purpose of the 9th amendment. Rights exist that are not explicitly spelled out.
And I'm stealing another poster's great argument: a public place doesn't mean the government owns it, and we are helpless there against the will of the faceless cops and corporate functionaries. WE OWN THE PUBLIC PLACE. It is ours to control, not the government or the cops or the massive numbers of private armies and security firms that now outnumber cops, but are increasingly being granted police powers. Hell, we're paying for the space AND the cameras AND the secret guards!
The alternative is cameras on our doors and trackers following everyone's moves -- tho as usual if you are wealthy and powerful, you always get superprivacy on demand. Only the schmucks get monitored.
You don't think COPS will let cameras be trained on their front doors, do you? Cheney? Britney Spears? They'll get privilege -- a word meaning "private law", the law for the special people.
"Your title is an assertion. The constitution has been interpreted by the courts such that the right to be secure in our persons is a right to privacy to some, unspecified, degree. Further, the right to privacy is regarded as a basic human right by most of the civilized world. The constitutionality and the ethics of these cameras are very, very questionable."
The ninth amendment states that the constitution, as such, does not eliminate any rights not enumerated. In other words, because the "right to privacy" is not stated explicitly does not eliminate the right. I doubt very, very much that the worthies who wrote that document believed that the government had the right to monitor everyone's movements.
This highlights a fundamental dispute among the writers of the constitution. Some wanted the rights of man spelled out in a bill of rights, while others did not want a bill of explicitly stated rights, because, as it now turns out in this thread, some would come to believe that the constitution granted powers by the grace of the writers, which was absolutely false to their intent. The ninth amendment was a compromise, stating that rights not enumerated were not to be held nonexistent. To hammer it home, you have a right to privacy, even in public places, if it is believed to be so -- the constitution holds that such a right exists, even though it does not state it explicitly..
The courts uphold the constitution, and as such recognized -- depending on fundamental ideological majorities at the upper levels -- that a privacy right exists. The current SCOTUS majority do not hold with the ninth amendment, going with the "original intent" notion, biting their own asses because the original intent was that rights existed beyond the scope of the imaginations of the writers -- they future-proofed the document.
The courts must uphold human rights not explicitly spelled out in the other amendments, and be damned to them if they side with the authoritarians in this matter. We're gonna be fighting the misinterpretation of the constitution for decades to come.
In the meantime, wear a hoodie. Oops, that's illegal in England now... it'll be illegal here in the USA soon.
So, if I set up a lawn chair outside your house and watch...?
OK. So it's okay if we point them at all your doors and windows. No expectations of privacy there.
I used to believe in the expectations of privacy arguments, but now, it seems we have to manufacture an expectation. Just because it never existed before doesn't mean we can create one. The alternative is cameras on our doors and trackers following everyone's moves -- tho as usual if you are wealthy and powerful, you always get superprivacy on demand. Only the schmucks get monitored.
You don't think COPS will let cameras be trained on their front doors, do you? Cheney? Britney Spears? They'll get priviledge -- "private law".
"If the police wish to use video from a camera as evidence, they must provide the video to the defense."
the record is replete with prosecutors and the police not providing evidence to the defense. As well, the record shows that the police and prosecutors, even when caught, don't get convicted much, and certainly never see prison.
If they want to railroad you, they will, and there is nothing you can do about it, other than spending a couple of million on a good defense team.
You are assuming that the situation will remain static. It never does. They will move the goalposts. The cameras will keep creeping closer to your door, and someday, they will be in your house. Listen! They're already recording all your chats and email,as much as they can anyway. They track your GPS coordinates on your GPS-mandated cell phones at will. They listen to the mic on your cell phone, if they feel the need. They're listening to your house phone calls, against a federal court order. What do you think will discourage them from surreptitiously monitoring people's actions when they are not in public - seeing as how they ALREADY ARE?
Yep. Lotsa stories about how a pursesnatcher got caught. Whatever. A steady stream of them, I predict. If cameras are placed on every piece of masonry, you'll find a whole lot of criminals.
Where are the stories about how an executive was caught using cameras? Doubt there will be many, because cameras will be scarce in executive board rooms. About how many anti-Bush protesters lost their jobs because of the copcams? It'll always be little people caught, not the big thieves and killers.A lot of little crimes, marginal ones, will be found, pumping up the safety meme. Kill one man, big story, kill hundreds of thousands, and they cover your state dinner.
And finally, when will we hear the stories about how some innocent person was arrested and imprisoned using circumstantial evidence from Complete Surveillance, USA? I don't think the American Secret Police will be publicizing those stories. I don't think we'll ever hear about those.
Americans. So terrified of crime, so sold on their helplessness. The safest country in the world, and the most terrified through the agency of their own government and a news media turned into the Nancy Grace Anger Hour.
The cameras are not worth the cost. They will be used against those who protest the mounting abuses of the same cameras. It's what police states always do; turn against the very people they insisted they were protecting.
And how many people are ruined because they failed a drug test -- yet were innocent? How could anyone ever know? The test is always right, so no statistics on the accuracy can be kept.
It's why I won't submit to a drug test. It's like having your faith in god tested by a religiously fanatic employer in a religiously insane country -- the consequences of failing their nonfunctional test is too high.
Bear with me here, I'll get to the point.
When I was in high school, we were required to take swimming, no excuses. Freezing water, yay. We were required to wear bathing caps and swim naked - since women couldn't swim naked, they were not allowed to take swimming. So no co-eds.
The memory that stuck with me was being forced to line up after showering, single file, and one after another being "inspected" for "cleanliness" by coaches and aides while standing in a big rubber pool of antiseptic-laced water. Then we'd sit shivering on a bench in the freezing pool room at the leisure of our fully suited coaches.
What strikes me now, besides how unbelievably pedophilically gay it all was, was how we submitted to the humiliation, every day. It's amazing how much people can be trained to submit to power, if you train them young. There's nothing that cannot be justified, if you train people to accept one small piece madness at a time. Small madnesses link up to become giant frenzies, and then the witches burn.
From what I've heard, although not the same type of abuse is performed on elementary and high school kids today, they've imposed far more repressive, broader training for madness in the last twenty years. The amount of sheer fascistic bullshit that young people have been conditioned to swallow is why corporations are so unchecked, why we have torture camps, why we must have anal electrodes up our ani eventually just to hold a job and have a family. It always starts with the little madnesses... just submit and get along, it's not that big a deal...
So, the scientists in our nuclear program can only work if they have sacrificed their integrity and honor. And they are worth what, then? They're operating at the level of political prisoners.
I've more aware of history than most Americans. And I do know that the Soviets also required their scientists to shed their integrity in just the same fashion, for reasons as stupid as we give the scientists.
The Jeffersons of the world are always at war with the pragmatists. Thanks to the FSM for the Jeffersonians, or we'd be spending random periods during the day cathartically screaming at images of the enemy on some big screen in the lunchroom. Bending the knee always leads to bending over for the baseball bat up the rectum, forever and always. Type A Alpha males know no limits. The fight must always be for freedom, for there are a consistent majority of humans that prefer pragmatic obesiance to power rather than be put to inconvenience.
And the choice shouldn't be submit and be employed OR eat roots and die. We've made a society that doesn't require submission to mental rape as a prerequisite for eating. We'd like to keep it that way. And if you let one profession require submission to madness, then nothing stops the others following the lead. And nothing does. Eventually, soon, we'll be required to submit to practically anything as a condition of employment. I don't have to labor this point, for the examples are all around us now.
And businesses are licensed by the government through corporate charter to exist at all. And goverment is US. We run the show, not businesses. If businesses don't like it, or government paranoiacs don't, then they are free to quit and eat berries and roots themselves. We, however, are the bosses at the end of the day, and we don't have to submit to a pack of corporate franchisees and government kiss-asses. WE the people. Not WE the government and businesses, which, after all, was Mussolini's definition of fascism. We are in charge, not the faceless invisible powers-that-want-to-be.