Then you are failing to think this through. The only effect of this will be to give advertisers an excuse to ignore "do not track". How does undermining "do not track" help anyone?
If the advertisers are looking for a reason to ignore DNT, then fuck them.
The end result is going to be legislation unless they can police themselves, a situation that Hollywood faced not so many years back causing them to create their own movie rating system lest the government do it for them.
When scientists publish their results, they publish their methods and data along with it.
Says who? What papers enforce the publication of data?
I recall one climate scientist (no, this is not connected with climate gate) have to admit that his data didnt exist when others began to try to replicate his methodologies, but found that they could not do so because the available data was insufficient to fulfill the claims of the methodology.
Specifically the scientist was Wei-Chyung Wang and he had claimed to have filtered the historic temperature data of China to only include data that experienced no significant changes in location, observation times, or instrumentation. This claims goes under 'methodology.'
When trying to replicate his work, it was discovered that the information needed to make such determinations was not available from the China Academy of Sciences. When asked for his sources, Wang use delay tactics to stall the investigation rather than provide the information necessary to replicate his work.
Over a decade later it was admitted in official statements by both the China Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Energy that the data to do what Wang claimed did not exist when Wang wrote his papers, that most of it had been destroyed or lost half a century earlier during the Chinese revolution.
So no sir, they do not publish their data along with their papers and methodologies. Many journals say that they require the data to be available, but few (if any) take any steps at all to enforce such a requirement, or even investigate to see if any data is available, let alone data sufficient enough to carry out the claimed methodology.
So my advice to you, sir, is not to make shit up. Nothing you said has any value because you just make shit up whenever the fuck you feel like it.
Schon received his PhD and was hired by Bell Labs in 1997. He submitted his fraudulent papers over several years, and a committe was set up to investigate discrepancies in 2002, and submitted its report that year showing how Schon had lied. So in roughly five years, the peer-review system did its task to uncover deliberate, premeditated fraud in the field of basic semiconductor research.
I do not think that you know what peer review is, because it does not consist of 'a committee set up to investigate discrepancies'
This fraud published many papers, all of them breezing right through that glorious 'peer review' you are talking about. This committee was set up after the peer review process already failed.
Peer review cannot detect fraud. Your faith in peer review is misplaced, and protecting scientists from the discovery of fraud using misplaced justification is quite frankly laughable.
and then society has to pay higher hospital bills and health insurance to pay for your health care
First you made my health your business by forcing me into your shared risk club, and then you have the balls to use what you forced me into as an excuse to force me to do even more things?
You know what would lower my insurance costs the most? When people like you are required to successfully commit suicide. Its all about the money according to you, so this should be agreeable.
This is why things like Microsoft's DirectCompute is a good idea. The idea being that vendor support for a specific HAL is not an issue if you simply don't rely on vendors for your HAL. The vendors have to support something but DirectCompute isnt on the list. DirectCompute uses CUDA, OpenCL, and even SSE as needed.
Sure, DirectCompute is proprietary too, but that doesnt exclude an open alternative that supports both OpenCL and CUDA, and even simple GLSL and HLSL at the back end when OpenCL/CUDA support is broken by the vendor.
Writing a text book is extremely difficult because it has to satisfy the needs of different groups of students - brilliant students, above average, average and not-teachable students.
Wait... why are textbooks written to satisfy the needs of "not-teachable" students? This seems like a problem that cannot be satisfactorily addressed by the content of the textbook unless "satisfaction" is the score on a specific test that is either directly or indirectly a full-fledged companion to the textbook.
yes. It is extremely expensive to create new forms of anti-depressants, and treatments for erectile dysfunction... meanwhile tropical diseases don't have a business case. If that's all patents cand fund, it would be more straightforward to fund merit-based research into worthwhile causes directly with taxes (NIH)
..except that I dont want my tax dollars going to cure tropical disease that very few americans get.
The cost for creating the erectile dysfunction drugs is born by people that then take erectile dysfunction drugs (assuming that its not covered by insurance.) That seems very fair to me.
I am wondering what kind of bastard you would have to be to see a problem with people willingly paying for things that they benefit from, while simultaneously thinking its OK for people to be forced into unwillingly pay for things that they will never take advantage of.
In many cases patents are the alternative to trade secrets. Many companies still choose to rely on trade secrets when the technology was discovered somewhat accidentally
Indeed. This is the difference between patents on manufacturing technology and patents on consumer technology.
The patents on manufacturing technology were the original intent of patents. The idea being that a company could trade knowledge of their manufacturing techniques for a limited exclusive on their use, so that all industries could later take advantage of greater efficiencies.
With patents on consumer technology the trade-off justification does not apply, because the public already has access to the device and can thus reverse engineer it. This form of patent is simply a government enforced monopoly that otherwise would not exist.
The really crazy part is that after this first bastardization of patents to apply to consumer technology, that then they (recently started to) allow insignificant changes in materials to usher in a new patent, such as software patents being renewed for "..on a mobile device." While the first bastardization is almost debatable, this second bastardization is so way over the top that its very hard to debate its justification with a straight face.
The real sick part was the cameraman continued to follow the action
Why is that the real sick part?
His job was to film what happened. What happened was unexpected, and apparently so 'revolting' that people of less character such as yourself would have completely lost it.
I love all these discoveries. I'm forced to admit, however, that astronomy, per se, has never made anyone a dime.
Lots of people have been making money on astronomy ever since governments started funding it. True that the money made is from tax revenue (some of it teleported in from the future through the miracle of borrowing) instead of scientific discoveries.. but thats besides the point. Astronomy has become big business. Billions of dollars.
..or stop wasting money on the poor and elderly, on highways, on flood relief, on submarines, stealth aircraft and boats, alternative energy,...
You see how this works? Just because you dont like some spending, that does not mean that there isnt enough momentum to protect it. Its easy to pick and choose when the only one that needs to be happy at the end is you.
A millionaire won't be able to fund it very long, it would take someone with a lot more money than that.
This is the fact that seems to escape many slashdotters. They seem to think that there are enough billionaires to fund a seemingly limitless numbers of multi-million dollar projects as long as we can raise their taxes. You can see it in the other posts here.
The federal government is over-spending by over a trillion dollars per year. Thats over a million stacks each with a million dollars in it. Something has got to give, and its projects like these telescopes that at the end of the day are ultimately considered 'non-essential.' Think of the children and the elderly. Think of the working poor. Think of the uninsured. Think of the unemployed. Think of the veterans. Think of the terrorists.
When budgets get cut, its almost impossible to cut those 'think of the ____' budgets because very quickly the idea is re-framed by the special interests to be "they are trying to kill grandma" or whatever appeal to emotion is appropriate to that 'think of the ____' budget. Anyone who proposes budget cuts is immediately demonized if they touch one of the sacred ones, so anyone serious about budget cuts must cut 'non-essentials' instead, such as science and research. Yes, YOU may think some 'think of the ____' budgets is non-essential, but there are enough people that think otherwise to prevent its finding being cut.
This is the country we have created in the past 35 years by not considering how much we can really afford to spend on things. The simple and sad fact is that we can afford everything we want, but only if we have the patience to let the economy grow before increasing spending.
On the bright side, its the information age. The American empire will be the first great empire whose fall will be digitally documented.
Apple is probably already fishing for a new supplier, because any future contracts with Samsung will have lawsuit clauses all over it. "You sue us for any reason, and we can back out of this contract whenever it is most advantageous for us, but you cant ever back out."
1) whats the point in developing Open Source software for use in education if the framework/operating system on which it runs is not also open source.
Because one precludes the other. The schools already have a suite of closed source programs that run on windows. If you replace windows with linux or bsd, then you have to replace every other application that they currently depend on as well.
Whats the point of developing OSS for use in education if the OS requirement precludes any chance of its adoption?
2) taxpayers money - open source seems like a great way to save money and avoid costly licence / subscriptions
..and Obamacare seemed like a great way to reduce the cost of healthcare..
4) Is it appropriate for a charity to tie students or schools into a specific environment that could benefit a non-charity organisation in the future
Sounds to me like the coding system need to be revamped to remove the duplications if possible.
..or what the hospitals and doctors are doing, adding more codes to increase maximization opportunity. Medicare will pay as much as this, so thats code X.. Hartford will pay as much as this, so thats code Y.
I think that the electronic records are probably making it easier for physicians to bill more accurately, not necessarily more "lucratively"
Except this story is precisely about it being more lucrative, even if more "accurate." Doctors and hospitals are getting more now than they used to, for the same services they were always providing. Thats the very definition of "more lucrative."
What the electronic billing is allowing, as other have mentioned, is for the doctors and hospitals to automate getting the most they can for the services provided depending on who is doing the paying.
This is equivalent to an online store offering different prices to different people for the same product depending on a profile of the persons willingness and ability to pay. This isnt newly happening in the medical industry, but now its automated to maximize.
Of course if a politician were to propose medicare cuts, which would eventually translate into less money available for the doctors and hospitals to maximize upon, that would be "war on the elderly" because thats how a particular party has framed that sort of thing...
It seems with modern computer capability that absurdly long passwords would be trivial.
We are not living in an age where servers are growing in power due to CPU enhancements. We are living in an age where many servers now share a single CPU due to CPU enhancements.
Its not uncommon these days for a single rack to be powering dozens, or even hundreds of servers.
Xcode is free and I would also have to purchase a PC to run Visual Studio unless MS has released VS for Mac.
This fallacy has been repeated several times and so far everyone has not noticed...
The difference is that Windows runs on Macintosh computers, therefore Visual Studio runs on Macintosh computers. OSX does not run on PC's, unless someone has developed a VM recently that tricks OSX... which is doubtful, would still be a crappy VM unlike vise-versa, and such a VM would be quickly blocked by Apple perhaps even with the FBI knocking down the VM developers door because Apple pulls that shit.
Irrelevant to the GP's claims, which was that if you went to Google and did a search, that IE toolbar would associate terms with pages visited. Isnt true. Only true when you searched with the toolbar, just like Googles toolbar.
Slashdot Mirror
Then you are failing to think this through. The only effect of this will be to give advertisers an excuse to ignore "do not track". How does undermining "do not track" help anyone?
If the advertisers are looking for a reason to ignore DNT, then fuck them.
The end result is going to be legislation unless they can police themselves, a situation that Hollywood faced not so many years back causing them to create their own movie rating system lest the government do it for them.
When scientists publish their results, they publish their methods and data along with it.
Says who? What papers enforce the publication of data?
I recall one climate scientist (no, this is not connected with climate gate) have to admit that his data didnt exist when others began to try to replicate his methodologies, but found that they could not do so because the available data was insufficient to fulfill the claims of the methodology.
Specifically the scientist was Wei-Chyung Wang and he had claimed to have filtered the historic temperature data of China to only include data that experienced no significant changes in location, observation times, or instrumentation. This claims goes under 'methodology.'
When trying to replicate his work, it was discovered that the information needed to make such determinations was not available from the China Academy of Sciences. When asked for his sources, Wang use delay tactics to stall the investigation rather than provide the information necessary to replicate his work.
Over a decade later it was admitted in official statements by both the China Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Energy that the data to do what Wang claimed did not exist when Wang wrote his papers, that most of it had been destroyed or lost half a century earlier during the Chinese revolution.
So no sir, they do not publish their data along with their papers and methodologies. Many journals say that they require the data to be available, but few (if any) take any steps at all to enforce such a requirement, or even investigate to see if any data is available, let alone data sufficient enough to carry out the claimed methodology.
So my advice to you, sir, is not to make shit up. Nothing you said has any value because you just make shit up whenever the fuck you feel like it.
Group releases only Scientist 1's first email.
Scientist 1 and 2 release all of their emails to the public and then laugh at Group.
Being Open is a two way street. I thought slashdotters knew this.
Schon received his PhD and was hired by Bell Labs in 1997. He submitted his fraudulent papers over several years, and a committe was set up to investigate discrepancies in 2002, and submitted its report that year showing how Schon had lied. So in roughly five years, the peer-review system did its task to uncover deliberate, premeditated fraud in the field of basic semiconductor research.
I do not think that you know what peer review is, because it does not consist of 'a committee set up to investigate discrepancies'
This fraud published many papers, all of them breezing right through that glorious 'peer review' you are talking about. This committee was set up after the peer review process already failed.
Peer review cannot detect fraud. Your faith in peer review is misplaced, and protecting scientists from the discovery of fraud using misplaced justification is quite frankly laughable.
and then society has to pay higher hospital bills and health insurance to pay for your health care
First you made my health your business by forcing me into your shared risk club, and then you have the balls to use what you forced me into as an excuse to force me to do even more things?
You know what would lower my insurance costs the most? When people like you are required to successfully commit suicide. Its all about the money according to you, so this should be agreeable.
This is why things like Microsoft's DirectCompute is a good idea. The idea being that vendor support for a specific HAL is not an issue if you simply don't rely on vendors for your HAL. The vendors have to support something but DirectCompute isnt on the list. DirectCompute uses CUDA, OpenCL, and even SSE as needed.
Sure, DirectCompute is proprietary too, but that doesnt exclude an open alternative that supports both OpenCL and CUDA, and even simple GLSL and HLSL at the back end when OpenCL/CUDA support is broken by the vendor.
Writing a text book is extremely difficult because it has to satisfy the needs of different groups of students - brilliant students, above average, average and not-teachable students.
Wait... why are textbooks written to satisfy the needs of "not-teachable" students? This seems like a problem that cannot be satisfactorily addressed by the content of the textbook unless "satisfaction" is the score on a specific test that is either directly or indirectly a full-fledged companion to the textbook.
yes. It is extremely expensive to create new forms of anti-depressants, and treatments for erectile dysfunction... meanwhile tropical diseases don't have a business case. If that's all patents cand fund, it would be more straightforward to fund merit-based research into worthwhile causes directly with taxes (NIH)
The cost for creating the erectile dysfunction drugs is born by people that then take erectile dysfunction drugs (assuming that its not covered by insurance.) That seems very fair to me.
I am wondering what kind of bastard you would have to be to see a problem with people willingly paying for things that they benefit from, while simultaneously thinking its OK for people to be forced into unwillingly pay for things that they will never take advantage of.
In many cases patents are the alternative to trade secrets. Many companies still choose to rely on trade secrets when the technology was discovered somewhat accidentally
Indeed. This is the difference between patents on manufacturing technology and patents on consumer technology.
The patents on manufacturing technology were the original intent of patents. The idea being that a company could trade knowledge of their manufacturing techniques for a limited exclusive on their use, so that all industries could later take advantage of greater efficiencies.
With patents on consumer technology the trade-off justification does not apply, because the public already has access to the device and can thus reverse engineer it. This form of patent is simply a government enforced monopoly that otherwise would not exist.
The really crazy part is that after this first bastardization of patents to apply to consumer technology, that then they (recently started to) allow insignificant changes in materials to usher in a new patent, such as software patents being renewed for "..on a mobile device." While the first bastardization is almost debatable, this second bastardization is so way over the top that its very hard to debate its justification with a straight face.
The real sick part was the cameraman continued to follow the action
Why is that the real sick part?
His job was to film what happened. What happened was unexpected, and apparently so 'revolting' that people of less character such as yourself would have completely lost it.
I love all these discoveries. I'm forced to admit, however, that astronomy, per se, has never made anyone a dime.
Lots of people have been making money on astronomy ever since governments started funding it. True that the money made is from tax revenue (some of it teleported in from the future through the miracle of borrowing) instead of scientific discoveries.. but thats besides the point. Astronomy has become big business. Billions of dollars.
..or stop wasting money on the poor and elderly, on highways, on flood relief, on submarines, stealth aircraft and boats, alternative energy, ...
You see how this works? Just because you dont like some spending, that does not mean that there isnt enough momentum to protect it. Its easy to pick and choose when the only one that needs to be happy at the end is you.
A millionaire won't be able to fund it very long, it would take someone with a lot more money than that.
This is the fact that seems to escape many slashdotters. They seem to think that there are enough billionaires to fund a seemingly limitless numbers of multi-million dollar projects as long as we can raise their taxes. You can see it in the other posts here.
The federal government is over-spending by over a trillion dollars per year. Thats over a million stacks each with a million dollars in it. Something has got to give, and its projects like these telescopes that at the end of the day are ultimately considered 'non-essential.' Think of the children and the elderly. Think of the working poor. Think of the uninsured. Think of the unemployed. Think of the veterans. Think of the terrorists.
When budgets get cut, its almost impossible to cut those 'think of the ____' budgets because very quickly the idea is re-framed by the special interests to be "they are trying to kill grandma" or whatever appeal to emotion is appropriate to that 'think of the ____' budget. Anyone who proposes budget cuts is immediately demonized if they touch one of the sacred ones, so anyone serious about budget cuts must cut 'non-essentials' instead, such as science and research. Yes, YOU may think some 'think of the ____' budgets is non-essential, but there are enough people that think otherwise to prevent its finding being cut.
This is the country we have created in the past 35 years by not considering how much we can really afford to spend on things. The simple and sad fact is that we can afford everything we want, but only if we have the patience to let the economy grow before increasing spending.
On the bright side, its the information age. The American empire will be the first great empire whose fall will be digitally documented.
Certainly contractual...
Apple is probably already fishing for a new supplier, because any future contracts with Samsung will have lawsuit clauses all over it. "You sue us for any reason, and we can back out of this contract whenever it is most advantageous for us, but you cant ever back out."
What about open source school books?
Books are not programs.
...
...which to choose?
Did you mean some sort of open collaboration on the authoring of textbooks for all to enjoy?
Then you will get the Pro-Life fork, the Big Oil fork, the Socialist fork, the Pro-Israel fork, the Keynesian fork,
1) whats the point in developing Open Source software for use in education if the framework/operating system on which it runs is not also open source.
Because one precludes the other. The schools already have a suite of closed source programs that run on windows. If you replace windows with linux or bsd, then you have to replace every other application that they currently depend on as well.
Whats the point of developing OSS for use in education if the OS requirement precludes any chance of its adoption?
2) taxpayers money - open source seems like a great way to save money and avoid costly licence / subscriptions
4) Is it appropriate for a charity to tie students or schools into a specific environment that could benefit a non-charity organisation in the future
Yes,
You don't HAVE to update to iOS6.
auto-update is the default on iOS5
Saying that you don't have to do it is being just a wee bit dishonest about the situation.
You want petty and vindictive? Wait until Samsung has television ads comparing people navigating with iOS 6 vs navigating with Android 4.
Sounds to me like the coding system need to be revamped to remove the duplications if possible.
I think that the electronic records are probably making it easier for physicians to bill more accurately, not necessarily more "lucratively"
Except this story is precisely about it being more lucrative, even if more "accurate." Doctors and hospitals are getting more now than they used to, for the same services they were always providing. Thats the very definition of "more lucrative."
What the electronic billing is allowing, as other have mentioned, is for the doctors and hospitals to automate getting the most they can for the services provided depending on who is doing the paying.
This is equivalent to an online store offering different prices to different people for the same product depending on a profile of the persons willingness and ability to pay. This isnt newly happening in the medical industry, but now its automated to maximize.
Of course if a politician were to propose medicare cuts, which would eventually translate into less money available for the doctors and hospitals to maximize upon, that would be "war on the elderly" because thats how a particular party has framed that sort of thing...
Bear with me
You have a bear with you? WTH are you doing posting? RUN!! RUN NOW!!
It seems with modern computer capability that absurdly long passwords would be trivial.
We are not living in an age where servers are growing in power due to CPU enhancements. We are living in an age where many servers now share a single CPU due to CPU enhancements.
Its not uncommon these days for a single rack to be powering dozens, or even hundreds of servers.
Do you really think people are sitting around saying 'you know, I'd love to buy a tablet, but I won't until they run Windows'?
I am waiting at least to that point, probably longer, since tablets that run windows have been out for years now.
Were you trying to be smart?
Xcode is free and I would also have to purchase a PC to run Visual Studio unless MS has released VS for Mac.
This fallacy has been repeated several times and so far everyone has not noticed...
The difference is that Windows runs on Macintosh computers, therefore Visual Studio runs on Macintosh computers. OSX does not run on PC's, unless someone has developed a VM recently that tricks OSX... which is doubtful, would still be a crappy VM unlike vise-versa, and such a VM would be quickly blocked by Apple perhaps even with the FBI knocking down the VM developers door because Apple pulls that shit.
We know they spied on the resulting URLs
Irrelevant to the GP's claims, which was that if you went to Google and did a search, that IE toolbar would associate terms with pages visited. Isnt true. Only true when you searched with the toolbar, just like Googles toolbar.