Surely it would be better to make killing people illegal and not try to legislate what people can construct at home in 60 seconds after a 3D printing is completely.
If killing people is already illegal, then why do they think that if they make something illegal that can be done secretly and completely undetectable in the privacy of one's home is going to prevent any crime? Surely the criminal that is intent on using a gun illegally isn't going to shy away from downloading plans and printing them.
I've heard the terms used in ways that implied that a primary datacenter always had your data, but a DR datacenter just had hardware and the ability to load the data when needed, for downtime of days while loading data rather than weeks while setting up new hardware, while still being cheaper than a redundant primary.
Our DR facility has less hardware than the primary facility (just enough to keep critical services running), but everything is powered on 24x7 and data is replicated and up to date. Unless hardware is powered on and monitored, you have no assurance that it will actually power up when you need it.
My CEO would laugh in my face (and probably have security escort me out the door) if I said "Thanks for purchasing nearly an entire set of redundant equipment. So now if we have a disaster here, someone will need to swim through the flood waters and load up the trunk of their car with our backup tapes and drive half way across the country to turn on the servers at the secondary faciity and load up the data. We "think" it'll only take a few days to do that.... assuming everything powers up".
We do regular failover testing to make sure that the secondary facility really can handle our systems.
Are there really companies out there that have the foresight to plan for and spend money on a disaster recovery facility, but are ok with days of downtime while they try to bring it online?
Farney acknowledges that many of Sears’ mall-based retail locations aren’t viable for data center usage. “I don’t think the industry is yet ready for a mall-based data center,” he said. “That may take some time. The stand-alone location is optimal.”
And also said:
Although mall-based stores may not be right for data centers, they could be ideal for disaster recovery facilities, Farney said. That includes mall stores that have closed, as well as those that have downsized to a smaller retail footprint
What's the different between a primary datacenter and a DR datacenter?
Did you not read the article? It specifically said stand alone stores and distribution centers. A distribution center is not a urban mall area and stand alone stores are just that, a stand alone store located on property they own and not part of a mall area kind of like the sears appliance outlet near me that closed but still sits on private property and not located in or near a shopping center or direct urban area.
Im guessing no you did not read a thing, you saw the headline and at best skimmed the article for a second and then posted a comment without actually reading the source material and posted a uninformed response filled with assumptions and what sounded good to you.
Did you not read the article? It said:
Although mall-based stores may not be right for data centers, they could be ideal for disaster recovery facilities, Farney said. That includes mall stores that have closed, as well as those that have downsized to a smaller retail footprint
So unless they are talking about building office space as a DR strategy, then they are thinking about using in-mall stores for DR datacenters. Which are pretty much the same as primary datacenters.
Um, you do realize that radiation is everywhere. So it's nearly impossible to be not exposed to radiation. Hell, even television that we watch gives off a fair amount of rads, so either you can accept it, or freak out about it. Your choice, although, if you choose the first part, you're liable not to have as many ulcers in the nearby future!!
If you're referring to x-ray radiation given off by CRT TV's, I'd bet that most people here haven't watched TV on a CRT in a number of years. I haven't owned a CRT TV for 6 years - and it's been about 10 years since I've had a CRT monitor.
It's not a magnet, it's an electromagnet, which just makes it a large and sensitive piece of equipment rather than a big magnet.
When I saw the headline and summary, I thought they were going to have to take special precautions to stay away from metals and other materials that could be affected by the huge magnet.
Sadly my only option was an FSA, which means they keep the money anyway so I might as well just pay for the more expensive insurance.
How that is legal I cannot understand.
On top of all that, this means only the young and well off can afford coverage and woe be to the underprivileged or the elderly.
The FSA is a stupid joke of a health care policy - how can anyone accurately predict their out of pocket medical expenses for the following year? Fixed expenses like medicines can be predicted, but I just paid for expensive dental work mostly out of pocket with no way to deduct it because I didn't have the forsight to predict that a dental condition would exhaust my meager Dental Insurance annnual cap.
Rather than an FSA where I have to lock up money in a bank account, I'd like to see medical expenses be fully deductible without having to reach the 7.5% AGI limit. Why should Jane get to deduct her $1200 of predictable $100/month medications, but John can't deduct his $2000 of unexpected dental work? John probably needs the deduction more since his was an unplanned expense.
Grownups are allowed to make decisions for themselves.
If grownups could be counted on to make grown-up decisions, that would work out well, especially at an individual level, if you don't go to the doctor for routine visits, eventually you'll go when someone catastrophic happens, but that was your choice. However, when dealing with public health policy, everyone wins if everyone gets routine care to prevent small problems from being big and expensive problems. (and also to keep individual problems from spreading, so the guy that has tuberculosis is less likely to just go to work "with a cold" and spread it to his coworkers and the public).
Um, you and everyone commenting has missed a major detail. Don't you geekheads know about circuit breakers? Your room is probably wired to a 20 or 25 amp circuit. Check the breaker and replace it with a larger one, say a 30 and you will probably be able to run everything at once without a fire.
I think you're just trolling, but if anyone is reading this and thinks just swapping out the breaker or fuse is a good idea, remember that it's the size of the wire that determines the safe current limit of the circuit, not the size of the breaker. In the USA,NEC specifies: 14 gauge wire = 15 amp, 12 gauge wire = 20 amp, 10 gauge wire = 30 amp. (but these are maximum values that may need to be derated in some conditions, like multiple conductors in conduit, especially long circuit runs, etc)
Outgassing? My god, people still think this is an issue?
I run a HUGE facility loaded with PVC, HDPE, ABS, and other plastic channels.
Outgassing is bullshit until you get into the solvents and adhesives used to join the system together.
Most routers are screwed together, not glued together, and are almost always made from one of those above-mentioned plastic types.
If there's an outgassing issue, someone's failing at proper ventilation or using the entirely wrong adhesives/molecular-bonding solvents.
I think outgassing or other effect is much more likely than RF energy from the router preventing seeds from germinating. It's not neccessarily the plastics that are outgassing -- Maybe cheap electrolytic capacitors or other components are venting.
Let's say you're selling a book. People are making films of themselves reading your book, with all the words visible onscreen, and putting up ads and making money off of reading your book.
Instead of having their video yanked and suing their infringing ass into oblivion, you clear your throat and coopt the ad revenue, but let the video stay up.
Seems reasonable to me.
Which path do you think the Tolkein Estate would take?
The difference between publishing the words to a book and showing a game is that everyone buys a book to read the words, but few (?) people buy a game just to watch someone else play it. Otherwise, game makers wouldn't have to actually create games, they could just sell pre-canned videos of what game play would look like if they actually produced the game.
can run a query like "Google: Show me the kitchen sink from the home on 1920 Sycamore St". And anyone who has access to the plumber's account could run a query like "Google: Show me all paintings from all houses visited in the past 6 months, ordered by estimated value"
Hey, that'd be great. If someone comes along and takes my paintings after he runs that through Google, the cops should know exactly where to go look.
It's a good thing there's no way to use stolen credentials to do searches anonymously!
They should have used a control, and put cress near a lamp bulb that gives off the same amount of heat.
Simplest explanation is the additional heat which was nearby but not enough to alter room temperature affected them.
The control would have to be a router that's powered on but not transmitting to account for the possibility of outgassing or some other effect from the router (magnetic field from the power supply? Flashing Light from the router disrupting the plant's growing cycle?). Maybe replacing the antennas with terminators to eliminate (mostly) transmissions while leaving the transmitter active would be a better control.
Once we have contact lens or eye implant AR devices, what will you do, stab every visitor in the eye just to check? What about neurointerfaces?
That's why it's important to bring these issues up now - before they become integrated into humans. Maybe an indicator (maybe visual, or maybe an RF beacon) to indicate recording?
By the time until someone could run queries like you propose there probably might be at least former.
Free cloud storage and internet access better grow up by that time too, as 6 hours of medium-high quality at 720p take ~3.5Gb.
Cloud storage is already growing up, Amazon Glacier will store 3.5GB of video for 3.5 cents/month
To reiterate, a) nobody will care for your shitty home,
That's what people used to think about their online accounts "No one's going to care about my online shopping account". Yet new data breaches seem to be a daily occurance.
b) if a plumber's or close enough friend to have full access to his records are gonna rob you, they won't need to record shit. They'll just need to know you've got a nice 60" plasma and you live alone.
In the end, it's just the question of ethics. Bad guy'll rob you without Google Glass, good guy won't record and will take it off if you ask him to. What's exactly big qualitative change?
The plumber's friend robbing me has always been a risk. Having a data breach that releases a data about everything valuable in my home (as well as opening new social engineering attacks where the attacker knows in intimate detail the layout and contents of your home) is the new risk that ubiquitous video recording can lead to.
or, since it is your property and the serviceman is there for you, you can ask him to take them off. This is not difficult and it is nothing that can't already be done using a cellphone.
"I'm sorry sir, I can't take these off, these are my prescription eye glasses, but don't worry I'm not going to record anything... *wink* We can send another guy out next Wednesday that doesn't wear glasses, but you'll still need to pay me the $75 service visit fee..."
Well then, good thing Glasses don't upload automatically.
For fuck's sake, if you'd stopp knee-jerking and just used basic math, it would tell you this is pretty much impossible today. Youtube states they now process 72 hours of video uploaded per minute. Just 2000 of Explorer limited issue glasses uploading constantly would mean 50% increase in needed capacity. "Millions of people" would mean 3 years worth of video uploaded _every minute_, and even commercial failure of 10-15 thousands sold would mean 3 or 4 extra Youtube datacenters built.
Storage densities have historically increased and prices decreases over time... What's impossible today becomes much easier and cheaper 5 - 10 years from now. 18 hours/day of 5000kbit video streamed for a year is "only" 10TB - less than $500 worth of SATA disk space. Amazon Glacier can store that much data for $100/month.
I think few people are concerned with Google Glass *today* when only a few thousand people have them, but are more concerned with when prices come down and they are much more prevalent.
The thing is, the camera is not even an integral part of google glass. Its more or less an afterthought add-on so you could share your vision with some distant person. But for most functions of Glass, its not necessary. With GPS and a compass the Glass could still show you real time maps and real time street view, and serve as a general purpose personal HUD.
There is no reason it need for Glass to even have a camera to be useful. Your smartphone doesn't do this unless you overtly whip it out and take a picture. Yet your smartphone does just about everything Glass does.
I think Google intends the camera to be an integral part of the Google Glass experience, or they'd just drop the camera which gets rid of the most controversial part of the device (distraction while driving is still a concern, but most people seem more concerned with its ability to surreptitiously take photos/video).
I wouldn't want a plumber recording everything in my house either...but more importantly, why would he, for that matter? First off, what about it would actually be interesting to him in the first place? Second, given the limited battery life of Google Glass and challenges of storing tons of data, it seems that there's actually a powerful disincentive for him to record indiscriminately. I think this is the flipside of Twitter mentality...people got so that they thought the world cares about them going to the bathroom, and now they're worried that people care about them going to the bathroom. But the truth (and the good news) is...they don't.:)
The current generation of GG may be battery and power constrained, but future versions likely will not be. Once you have the ability to record everything and archive indefinitely, why wouldn't you just record everything just in case you want to refer to it later? Especially as image recognition and searching gets better, so it's easy to refer to something that's been recorded. The plumber might get a call from the homeowner a year after his last visit about their kitchen sink and the plumber can run a query like "Google: Show me the kitchen sink from the home on 1920 Sycamore St". And anyone who has access to the plumber's account could run a query like "Google: Show me all paintings from all houses visited in the past 6 months, ordered by estimated value"
Why does it have to be nefarious? I have a real desire to be able to record everything i encounter if i desire. It opens up some very interesting possibilities It is not nefarious to collect photons in public.
That depends how you define "public" since Google Glass may be worn in places that aren't traditionally "public" like restrooms, gym locker rooms, etc. I don't really care if you peek over from the next urinal and watch me pee, but that doesn't mean that I want you capture it with your glasses and post it to Youtube. Likewise if I hire a plumber to fix my leaky bathroom faucet, I'm fine with him snapping a few photos of the bathroom sink so he can get the right parts, but I don't want him using Google Glass to record everything in my house on his way to the bathroom which could be exploited (by him or someone who hacked his Glasses) to build a database of attractive theft targets along with a detailed map of everything of value in the house.
Cameras (even ubiquitous cell phone cameras) are a known risk and it's generally easy to see someone recording with their cell phone, but Google Glass becomes a "hidden in plain view" spy cam.
I've heard that before. These new fangled PC's in everyone's home will make datacenters a thing of the past! Cloud computing will make home computers a thing of the past! New 4GL languages will make developers a thing of the past! New spreadsheets will make business software developers a thing of the past! New point-and-click GUI's will make web developers a thing of the past!
So far, things just seem to be getting more and more complicated, requiring more and more people to run them.
Instead of simulating a human brain, wouldn't it be better to start with something simplier. There is a worm that they have mapped out all of it's ells, from the egg up to fully grown. It wouldn't be much on conversation, but wouldn't it be better to simulate something like that to start with?
And when the experiment is over, you wouldn't have to worry about the ethics of "killing" it.
How starting with a rat? With only 56 million neurons, it's 3 orders of magnitude easier.
No, every single one of there tests have been seriously flawed. IN fact, anything involving driving on the show borders on surprisingly stupid.
That's not even getting into the issue that the issue is reflexes and response time, so you should test reflexes and response time, not how much of X is in your system. Of course, that would be reasonable, and remove most people over 60 from driving.
Except, of course, for the fact that safe driving involves more than reflexes and response time - if you want to remove the least safe drivers from the road, that would be drivers under the age of 24 - they have a much higher accident rate than average (even higher than drivers over 75). But it's the 25 - 55 year olds that get into the most drunk driving accidents. The 55-75 year olds have the lowest accident rate.
Slashdot Mirror
Surely it would be better to make killing people illegal and not try to legislate what people can construct at home in 60 seconds after a 3D printing is completely.
If killing people is already illegal, then why do they think that if they make something illegal that can be done secretly and completely undetectable in the privacy of one's home is going to prevent any crime? Surely the criminal that is intent on using a gun illegally isn't going to shy away from downloading plans and printing them.
I've heard the terms used in ways that implied that a primary datacenter always had your data, but a DR datacenter just had hardware and the ability to load the data when needed, for downtime of days while loading data rather than weeks while setting up new hardware, while still being cheaper than a redundant primary.
Our DR facility has less hardware than the primary facility (just enough to keep critical services running), but everything is powered on 24x7 and data is replicated and up to date. Unless hardware is powered on and monitored, you have no assurance that it will actually power up when you need it.
My CEO would laugh in my face (and probably have security escort me out the door) if I said "Thanks for purchasing nearly an entire set of redundant equipment. So now if we have a disaster here, someone will need to swim through the flood waters and load up the trunk of their car with our backup tapes and drive half way across the country to turn on the servers at the secondary faciity and load up the data. We "think" it'll only take a few days to do that.... assuming everything powers up".
We do regular failover testing to make sure that the secondary facility really can handle our systems.
Are there really companies out there that have the foresight to plan for and spend money on a disaster recovery facility, but are ok with days of downtime while they try to bring it online?
...they said exactly that in the article!
Farney acknowledges that many of Sears’ mall-based retail locations aren’t viable for data center usage. “I don’t think the industry is yet ready for a mall-based data center,” he said. “That may take some time. The stand-alone location is optimal.”
And also said:
Although mall-based stores may not be right for data centers, they could be ideal for disaster recovery facilities, Farney said. That includes mall stores that have closed, as well as those that have downsized to a smaller retail footprint
What's the different between a primary datacenter and a DR datacenter?
Did you not read the article? It specifically said stand alone stores and distribution centers. A distribution center is not a urban mall area and stand alone stores are just that, a stand alone store located on property they own and not part of a mall area kind of like the sears appliance outlet near me that closed but still sits on private property and not located in or near a shopping center or direct urban area.
Im guessing no you did not read a thing, you saw the headline and at best skimmed the article for a second and then posted a comment without actually reading the source material and posted a uninformed response filled with assumptions and what sounded good to you.
Did you not read the article? It said:
Although mall-based stores may not be right for data centers, they could be ideal for disaster recovery facilities, Farney said. That includes mall stores that have closed, as well as those that have downsized to a smaller retail footprint
So unless they are talking about building office space as a DR strategy, then they are thinking about using in-mall stores for DR datacenters. Which are pretty much the same as primary datacenters.
Um, you do realize that radiation is everywhere. So it's nearly impossible to be not exposed to radiation. Hell, even television that we watch gives off a fair amount of rads, so either you can accept it, or freak out about it. Your choice, although, if you choose the first part, you're liable not to have as many ulcers in the nearby future!!
If you're referring to x-ray radiation given off by CRT TV's, I'd bet that most people here haven't watched TV on a CRT in a number of years. I haven't owned a CRT TV for 6 years - and it's been about 10 years since I've had a CRT monitor.
I bet you suck dicks.
I do, sometimes. Though I'm sure why that's relevant?
It's not a magnet, it's an electromagnet, which just makes it a large and sensitive piece of equipment rather than a big magnet.
When I saw the headline and summary, I thought they were going to have to take special precautions to stay away from metals and other materials that could be affected by the huge magnet.
Sadly my only option was an FSA, which means they keep the money anyway so I might as well just pay for the more expensive insurance.
How that is legal I cannot understand.
On top of all that, this means only the young and well off can afford coverage and woe be to the underprivileged or the elderly.
The FSA is a stupid joke of a health care policy - how can anyone accurately predict their out of pocket medical expenses for the following year? Fixed expenses like medicines can be predicted, but I just paid for expensive dental work mostly out of pocket with no way to deduct it because I didn't have the forsight to predict that a dental condition would exhaust my meager Dental Insurance annnual cap.
Rather than an FSA where I have to lock up money in a bank account, I'd like to see medical expenses be fully deductible without having to reach the 7.5% AGI limit. Why should Jane get to deduct her $1200 of predictable $100/month medications, but John can't deduct his $2000 of unexpected dental work? John probably needs the deduction more since his was an unplanned expense.
Grownups are allowed to make decisions for themselves.
If grownups could be counted on to make grown-up decisions, that would work out well, especially at an individual level, if you don't go to the doctor for routine visits, eventually you'll go when someone catastrophic happens, but that was your choice. However, when dealing with public health policy, everyone wins if everyone gets routine care to prevent small problems from being big and expensive problems. (and also to keep individual problems from spreading, so the guy that has tuberculosis is less likely to just go to work "with a cold" and spread it to his coworkers and the public).
Um, you and everyone commenting has missed a major detail. Don't you geekheads know about circuit breakers? Your room is probably wired to a 20 or 25 amp circuit. Check the breaker and replace it with a larger one, say a 30 and you will probably be able to run everything at once without a fire.
I think you're just trolling, but if anyone is reading this and thinks just swapping out the breaker or fuse is a good idea, remember that it's the size of the wire that determines the safe current limit of the circuit, not the size of the breaker. In the USA,NEC specifies: 14 gauge wire = 15 amp, 12 gauge wire = 20 amp, 10 gauge wire = 30 amp. (but these are maximum values that may need to be derated in some conditions, like multiple conductors in conduit, especially long circuit runs, etc)
Outgassing? My god, people still think this is an issue?
I run a HUGE facility loaded with PVC, HDPE, ABS, and other plastic channels.
Outgassing is bullshit until you get into the solvents and adhesives used to join the system together.
Most routers are screwed together, not glued together, and are almost always made from one of those above-mentioned plastic types.
If there's an outgassing issue, someone's failing at proper ventilation or using the entirely wrong adhesives/molecular-bonding solvents.
I think outgassing or other effect is much more likely than RF energy from the router preventing seeds from germinating. It's not neccessarily the plastics that are outgassing -- Maybe cheap electrolytic capacitors or other components are venting.
Let's say you're selling a book. People are making films of themselves reading your book, with all the words visible onscreen, and putting up ads and making money off of reading your book.
Instead of having their video yanked and suing their infringing ass into oblivion, you clear your throat and coopt the ad revenue, but let the video stay up.
Seems reasonable to me.
Which path do you think the Tolkein Estate would take?
The difference between publishing the words to a book and showing a game is that everyone buys a book to read the words, but few (?) people buy a game just to watch someone else play it. Otherwise, game makers wouldn't have to actually create games, they could just sell pre-canned videos of what game play would look like if they actually produced the game.
can run a query like "Google: Show me the kitchen sink from the home on 1920 Sycamore St". And anyone who has access to the plumber's account could run a query like "Google: Show me all paintings from all houses visited in the past 6 months, ordered by estimated value"
Hey, that'd be great. If someone comes along and takes my paintings after he runs that through Google, the cops should know exactly where to go look.
It's a good thing there's no way to use stolen credentials to do searches anonymously!
They should have used a control, and put cress near a lamp bulb that gives off the same amount of heat.
Simplest explanation is the additional heat which was nearby but not enough to alter room temperature affected them.
The control would have to be a router that's powered on but not transmitting to account for the possibility of outgassing or some other effect from the router (magnetic field from the power supply? Flashing Light from the router disrupting the plant's growing cycle?). Maybe replacing the antennas with terminators to eliminate (mostly) transmissions while leaving the transmitter active would be a better control.
Once we have contact lens or eye implant AR devices, what will you do, stab every visitor in the eye just to check? What about neurointerfaces?
That's why it's important to bring these issues up now - before they become integrated into humans. Maybe an indicator (maybe visual, or maybe an RF beacon) to indicate recording?
By the time until someone could run queries like you propose there probably might be at least former.
Free cloud storage and internet access better grow up by that time too, as 6 hours of medium-high quality at 720p take ~3.5Gb.
Cloud storage is already growing up, Amazon Glacier will store 3.5GB of video for 3.5 cents/month
To reiterate, a) nobody will care for your shitty home,
That's what people used to think about their online accounts "No one's going to care about my online shopping account". Yet new data breaches seem to be a daily occurance.
b) if a plumber's or close enough friend to have full access to his records are gonna rob you, they won't need to record shit. They'll just need to know you've got a nice 60" plasma and you live alone.
In the end, it's just the question of ethics. Bad guy'll rob you without Google Glass, good guy won't record and will take it off if you ask him to. What's exactly big qualitative change?
The plumber's friend robbing me has always been a risk. Having a data breach that releases a data about everything valuable in my home (as well as opening new social engineering attacks where the attacker knows in intimate detail the layout and contents of your home) is the new risk that ubiquitous video recording can lead to.
or, since it is your property and the serviceman is there for you, you can ask him to take them off. This is not difficult and it is nothing that can't already be done using a cellphone.
"I'm sorry sir, I can't take these off, these are my prescription eye glasses, but don't worry I'm not going to record anything... *wink* We can send another guy out next Wednesday that doesn't wear glasses, but you'll still need to pay me the $75 service visit fee..."
Well then, good thing Glasses don't upload automatically.
For fuck's sake, if you'd stopp knee-jerking and just used basic math, it would tell you this is pretty much impossible today. Youtube states they now process 72 hours of video uploaded per minute. Just 2000 of Explorer limited issue glasses uploading constantly would mean 50% increase in needed capacity. "Millions of people" would mean 3 years worth of video uploaded _every minute_, and even commercial failure of 10-15 thousands sold would mean 3 or 4 extra Youtube datacenters built.
Storage densities have historically increased and prices decreases over time... What's impossible today becomes much easier and cheaper 5 - 10 years from now. 18 hours/day of 5000kbit video streamed for a year is "only" 10TB - less than $500 worth of SATA disk space. Amazon Glacier can store that much data for $100/month.
I think few people are concerned with Google Glass *today* when only a few thousand people have them, but are more concerned with when prices come down and they are much more prevalent.
The thing is, the camera is not even an integral part of google glass. Its more or less an afterthought add-on so you could share your vision with some distant person. But for most functions of Glass, its not necessary. With GPS and a compass the Glass could still show you real time maps and real time street view, and serve as a general purpose personal HUD.
There is no reason it need for Glass to even have a camera to be useful.
Your smartphone doesn't do this unless you overtly whip it out and take a picture. Yet your smartphone does just about everything Glass does.
I think Google intends the camera to be an integral part of the Google Glass experience, or they'd just drop the camera which gets rid of the most controversial part of the device (distraction while driving is still a concern, but most people seem more concerned with its ability to surreptitiously take photos/video).
I wouldn't want a plumber recording everything in my house either...but more importantly, why would he, for that matter? First off, what about it would actually be interesting to him in the first place? Second, given the limited battery life of Google Glass and challenges of storing tons of data, it seems that there's actually a powerful disincentive for him to record indiscriminately. I think this is the flipside of Twitter mentality...people got so that they thought the world cares about them going to the bathroom, and now they're worried that people care about them going to the bathroom. But the truth (and the good news) is...they don't. :)
The current generation of GG may be battery and power constrained, but future versions likely will not be. Once you have the ability to record everything and archive indefinitely, why wouldn't you just record everything just in case you want to refer to it later? Especially as image recognition and searching gets better, so it's easy to refer to something that's been recorded. The plumber might get a call from the homeowner a year after his last visit about their kitchen sink and the plumber can run a query like "Google: Show me the kitchen sink from the home on 1920 Sycamore St". And anyone who has access to the plumber's account could run a query like "Google: Show me all paintings from all houses visited in the past 6 months, ordered by estimated value"
Why does it have to be nefarious? I have a real desire to be able to record everything i encounter if i desire. It opens up some very interesting possibilities It is not nefarious to collect photons in public.
That depends how you define "public" since Google Glass may be worn in places that aren't traditionally "public" like restrooms, gym locker rooms, etc. I don't really care if you peek over from the next urinal and watch me pee, but that doesn't mean that I want you capture it with your glasses and post it to Youtube. Likewise if I hire a plumber to fix my leaky bathroom faucet, I'm fine with him snapping a few photos of the bathroom sink so he can get the right parts, but I don't want him using Google Glass to record everything in my house on his way to the bathroom which could be exploited (by him or someone who hacked his Glasses) to build a database of attractive theft targets along with a detailed map of everything of value in the house.
Cameras (even ubiquitous cell phone cameras) are a known risk and it's generally easy to see someone recording with their cell phone, but Google Glass becomes a "hidden in plain view" spy cam.
I've heard that before. These new fangled PC's in everyone's home will make datacenters a thing of the past! Cloud computing will make home computers a thing of the past! New 4GL languages will make developers a thing of the past! New spreadsheets will make business software developers a thing of the past! New point-and-click GUI's will make web developers a thing of the past!
So far, things just seem to be getting more and more complicated, requiring more and more people to run them.
Is that some new Windows phone?
Instead of simulating a human brain, wouldn't it be better to start with something simplier. There is a worm that they have mapped out all of it's ells, from the egg up to fully grown. It wouldn't be much on conversation, but wouldn't it be better to simulate something like that to start with?
And when the experiment is over, you wouldn't have to worry about the ethics of "killing" it.
How starting with a rat? With only 56 million neurons, it's 3 orders of magnitude easier.
They need another datacenter to hold the computers that track the cost savings from the other datacenters.
No, every single one of there tests have been seriously flawed. IN fact, anything involving driving on the show borders on surprisingly stupid.
That's not even getting into the issue that the issue is reflexes and response time, so you should test reflexes and response time, not how much of X is in your system.
Of course, that would be reasonable, and remove most people over 60 from driving.
Except, of course, for the fact that safe driving involves more than reflexes and response time - if you want to remove the least safe drivers from the road, that would be drivers under the age of 24 - they have a much higher accident rate than average (even higher than drivers over 75). But it's the 25 - 55 year olds that get into the most drunk driving accidents. The 55-75 year olds have the lowest accident rate.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1114.pdf