Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us. Man: He's right; this is a two-party system. Homer: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate. Kang: Go ahead! Throw your vote away!
To me this is the most exciting thing to happen to space exploration in a very long time. We're about to get an idea of what's inside the Martian soil. We just carried out a remote landing on a different planet without using airbags to bounce around aimlessly. and we're looking to get quite a little bit of data from it.
The most important thing to come out of this is to have a new generation of kids interested in space exploration - I mean aside from fragging aliens. I don't know about anyone else, but those first images from the lander of the Martian ground send shivers down my spine.
Sorry - you're wrong. (not on the bendy buses, their introduction was just stupid, but on the bus lanes). Bus lanes are great, if you're using the tube and the bus to get around. If you're silly enough to want to pay the city their access tax, they you should be stuck in traffic. I'll be in the bus, reading the paper.:)
buses are mobile, thus less likely to be vandalized, easier to maintain, probably less intrusive. And, it would probably cost less to install cameras on buses then to install CCTV at every corner.
maybe... assuming that you're not traveling in your garden clothes, and you've taken a shower (or two) before you left, you may or may not be pulled aside. You might have more problems if you were Arab - sorry, but I'm sure we all know that a white, middle age man will get through TSA easier then a 20-something Arab - you should get out without too many questions.
I also believe the article mentioned that the system is able to tell the difference between certain particles... In the end, it will still be a question of a human making a call... but the idea is to cut down on time and money.
if this cuts down the line at the airport - and hopefully, also cut down the cost of detection and security, then I'm all for it.
I think the current system of security at the airport is woefully inadequate. There seems to be too much reliance on human intelligence for detection - with all the problems that brings with it, it's time consuming, and resource hungry. In the end, to me at least, it seems more for show (i.e. relying on prevention) then on detection, making everyone a suspect.
Some airports placed those airsniffers, but even they take a long time, and, as I understand it, are very, very expensive.
Please to define how Google can possibly "be" Big Brother.
Unless you're paranoid. you don't need to be paranoid. You just have to value your privacy. Google is a service provider. Its service is information. They make money by providing the right information for a price.
Now imagine what happens when you add medical records to that picture... And maybe in a few years, we'll add genetic information. And a few years after that we make it all easily cross-linkled.
for a price, your private life can be accessed by people who want to sell you something, or who want to convince you of something, or whatever. For the right price, your privacy can be ripped to shreds.
The biggest problem is that the service is inconspicuous. That you're not realizing the level of the invasion of privacy as you're feeding information to the system very slowly, over time, without realizing the persistent nature of that information on the google servers. In ten years, google will have hard data on when you get depressed, what kind of drugs you take, what medical procedures you had, what illnesses you suffered.
You don;t think that's a problem? Just take your medical history for the past year, add it all up, and see how willing you are to share that with a complete stranger who's not obliged to protect that information for you.
yeah. It's metabolism as well as lifestyle. For me it was turning 30, the the principle is the same. You slow down, you gain weight.
The problem with "studies" like that is that there is no control taken to insure data reliability. Do people who work for, say, Google with their catered lunch/dinner cafeteria healthfood gain as much weight? Less? More? Is there a difference between large companies vs small start-ups?
the fact remains that our (and I mean western society in general, and Western hemisphere in particular) are getting fatter at an alarming rate. And I would attribute most of that to lifestyle and diet - TV/Games/Carbs makes for a very fat ass.
so, google will have your surfing profile, your financial information, tons of images of you, your house, your friends, your networks, and how will add to it your health information.
You know, Big Brother can be a government, but it can also be a corporation. Even one that claims not to do any evil.
If I'm not mistaken, the information was blacked out not under secrecy requirements but under business information exception to the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act)..
5 U.S.C. 552(b): (b)(4) EXEMPTION 4 Trade Secrets, Commercial or Financial Information. This exemption protects "trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person [that is] privileged or confidential." This exemption is intended to protect the interest of both the government and submitter of information.
the sad thing is that most of them actually believe that they do protect your freedom and your way of live by doing this. Good people in a bad culture leads to really, really bad decisions.
But there is a side of caution. Note that I was talking about parents, not about government. Stating that children may be at risk while online, and that sexual solicitation of minors is common in chat-rooms and other online forums does not have to lead to attacks on freedom of speech.
The first amendment has to do with political speech (and religious speech) not with just form of speech. Calling for violence against other people is not protected, and it should not be. Harassing people, on line or in person, is also not protected.
Again, the main problem here is what should government do vs what should parents do. Congress can have a role in imposing penalties for offenses, mandating tough standards of privacy, etc. Parents have the role to educate their kinds about what is and what is not safe online. And should monitor their children.
The idea that because you disagree with the way the question was phrased, and thus you question the validity of the data, the entire topic of discussion should be muted, and that the use of such broad definitions lead, always, to infringements on personal freedoms is a slippery slope fallacy.
I think the idea here - by most of those organizations - is to err on the side of caution. As for politicians, what could be an easier subject to tackle then to say "I want to keep your kids safe online."?
I understand the point about not using misleading statistics. Yet defining the sexual solicitation broadly might not be a bad thing. The number of children being online as part of daily life is growing and will continue to grow. Tools for locating people online, personal information, pictures, etc, are increasingly available. At the same time, we are at a point where parents are less technical savvy then their children (at least in many cases) and might not be aware of some of the dangers. Using broad definitions, that are inclusive in defining what solicitation means can be useful. It gives a broad picture of the dangers children could face.
That being said, most sexual assaults happen from people children know, be it a family member or a neighbor.
not to mention that having the plant need water when you're away seems like a like useless since there is not much you can do except know that you're plant needs water.
my way of dealing with things like that is to a) water my plants each weekend and b) water my plants before leaving for any extended period of time.
Slashdot Mirror
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
Man: He's right; this is a two-party system.
Homer: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead! Throw your vote away!
To me this is the most exciting thing to happen to space exploration in a very long time. We're about to get an idea of what's inside the Martian soil. We just carried out a remote landing on a different planet without using airbags to bounce around aimlessly. and we're looking to get quite a little bit of data from it.
The most important thing to come out of this is to have a new generation of kids interested in space exploration - I mean aside from fragging aliens. I don't know about anyone else, but those first images from the lander of the Martian ground send shivers down my spine.Nigerian scams just got more interesting. :)
Sorry - you're wrong. (not on the bendy buses, their introduction was just stupid, but on the bus lanes). Bus lanes are great, if you're using the tube and the bus to get around. If you're silly enough to want to pay the city their access tax, they you should be stuck in traffic. I'll be in the bus, reading the paper. :)
buses are mobile, thus less likely to be vandalized, easier to maintain, probably less intrusive. And, it would probably cost less to install cameras on buses then to install CCTV at every corner.
tanks are even better then that. Safety First
you can be their gopher :)
maybe... assuming that you're not traveling in your garden clothes, and you've taken a shower (or two) before you left, you may or may not be pulled aside. You might have more problems if you were Arab - sorry, but I'm sure we all know that a white, middle age man will get through TSA easier then a 20-something Arab - you should get out without too many questions.
I also believe the article mentioned that the system is able to tell the difference between certain particles... In the end, it will still be a question of a human making a call... but the idea is to cut down on time and money.if this cuts down the line at the airport - and hopefully, also cut down the cost of detection and security, then I'm all for it.
I think the current system of security at the airport is woefully inadequate. There seems to be too much reliance on human intelligence for detection - with all the problems that brings with it, it's time consuming, and resource hungry. In the end, to me at least, it seems more for show (i.e. relying on prevention) then on detection, making everyone a suspect.
Some airports placed those airsniffers, but even they take a long time, and, as I understand it, are very, very expensive.
time is relative. if you see it now, it's real time. Too bad is not naked eye close.
Now imagine what happens when you add medical records to that picture... And maybe in a few years, we'll add genetic information. And a few years after that we make it all easily cross-linkled.
for a price, your private life can be accessed by people who want to sell you something, or who want to convince you of something, or whatever. For the right price, your privacy can be ripped to shreds.
The biggest problem is that the service is inconspicuous. That you're not realizing the level of the invasion of privacy as you're feeding information to the system very slowly, over time, without realizing the persistent nature of that information on the google servers. In ten years, google will have hard data on when you get depressed, what kind of drugs you take, what medical procedures you had, what illnesses you suffered.
You don;t think that's a problem? Just take your medical history for the past year, add it all up, and see how willing you are to share that with a complete stranger who's not obliged to protect that information for you.
yeah. It's metabolism as well as lifestyle. For me it was turning 30, the the principle is the same. You slow down, you gain weight.
The problem with "studies" like that is that there is no control taken to insure data reliability. Do people who work for, say, Google with their catered lunch/dinner cafeteria healthfood gain as much weight? Less? More? Is there a difference between large companies vs small start-ups?
the fact remains that our (and I mean western society in general, and Western hemisphere in particular) are getting fatter at an alarming rate. And I would attribute most of that to lifestyle and diet - TV/Games/Carbs makes for a very fat ass.
not afraid... just worried. and wary.
so, google will have your surfing profile, your financial information, tons of images of you, your house, your friends, your networks, and how will add to it your health information. You know, Big Brother can be a government, but it can also be a corporation. Even one that claims not to do any evil.
sounds to me like malware. Which is why I never installed iTunes. or Quicktime.
If I'm not mistaken, the information was blacked out not under secrecy requirements but under business information exception to the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act).. 5 U.S.C. 552(b): (b)(4) EXEMPTION 4 Trade Secrets, Commercial or Financial Information. This exemption protects "trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person [that is] privileged or confidential." This exemption is intended to protect the interest of both the government and submitter of information.
the sad thing is that most of them actually believe that they do protect your freedom and your way of live by doing this. Good people in a bad culture leads to really, really bad decisions.
you'll make no money that way. I'm filling a patent for "un-innovating patents." I'll be rich!
^^ I thought all software in china is "open source" :)
But there is a side of caution. Note that I was talking about parents, not about government. Stating that children may be at risk while online, and that sexual solicitation of minors is common in chat-rooms and other online forums does not have to lead to attacks on freedom of speech.
The first amendment has to do with political speech (and religious speech) not with just form of speech. Calling for violence against other people is not protected, and it should not be. Harassing people, on line or in person, is also not protected.
Again, the main problem here is what should government do vs what should parents do. Congress can have a role in imposing penalties for offenses, mandating tough standards of privacy, etc. Parents have the role to educate their kinds about what is and what is not safe online. And should monitor their children.
The idea that because you disagree with the way the question was phrased, and thus you question the validity of the data, the entire topic of discussion should be muted, and that the use of such broad definitions lead, always, to infringements on personal freedoms is a slippery slope fallacy.
I think the idea here - by most of those organizations - is to err on the side of caution. As for politicians, what could be an easier subject to tackle then to say "I want to keep your kids safe online."?
I understand the point about not using misleading statistics. Yet defining the sexual solicitation broadly might not be a bad thing. The number of children being online as part of daily life is growing and will continue to grow. Tools for locating people online, personal information, pictures, etc, are increasingly available. At the same time, we are at a point where parents are less technical savvy then their children (at least in many cases) and might not be aware of some of the dangers. Using broad definitions, that are inclusive in defining what solicitation means can be useful. It gives a broad picture of the dangers children could face.
That being said, most sexual assaults happen from people children know, be it a family member or a neighbor.
The best way to change Congress is to not run FOR Congress, but run FROM Congress. If you don't believe me, finish your taxes.
OK. This is not informative, it's funny. Unless FoxNews has moderating points on Slashdot. In which case is very informative :p
not to mention that having the plant need water when you're away seems like a like useless since there is not much you can do except know that you're plant needs water. my way of dealing with things like that is to a) water my plants each weekend and b) water my plants before leaving for any extended period of time.