Sorry but the facility does exactly the same thing it did before the upgrade; it just does it more accurately, faster and with better communications to off site computers.
It has nothing to do with smarts. The issue is that there is a relation between the current facility and the name people carry around in their heads. In almost all cases, and particularly in people with Asperger Syndrome, this is a one to one relationship; one facility, one name. Now the same facility will have two names; the one in literature written before the change and one in the literature after the change. These new relationships can be difficult to deal with.
I have Aspergers. A new building was built on the Uvic campus and for a year it was call the Class Room Building. It finally got an official name but it will always be the CRB to me. Aspergers is quite prevalent in high tech fields.
I don't know if you are being sarcastic or just don't know Mr Job's dark side.
He didn't earn millions or billions by offshoring his factories.
Most of Apple's products are made in China or did you forget about the suicides at the Apple factories
He didn't profit by patenting his work.
Apple holds many patents and vigorously defends them.
And he never sued anyone.
Do you remember the Orange? It was an Apple2 clone that was sued by Apple and put out of business. When Windows 3.1 came out Apple sued Microsoft for infringement when Apple was really just copying from Xerox. Recently there was a battery backup manufacturer who went as far as buying Apple power supplies, cutting of the magnetic plug and using them. Apple sued them and since they didn't have the money to defend themselves they stopped making them.
Steve Jobs was no saint. If he gets credit for the good things he did he also should get the blame when he does bad things. Even his philanthropy record is thin at best. He was a very good business man who make crap loads of money for himself and his shareholders.
Astronomer 1: did you see what "insert new name here" found? Astronomer 2: "new name"?? Astronomer 1: The Very Large Array.. Astronomer 2: Oh yeah, they changed the name. Go on.
Old names have a tendency to stick around in proportion to how long they were used. Since the Very Large Array has been around for a while the name will probably be around for a while more.
Another issue is that researchers could be confused when the same piece of scientific gear is referred to by more than one name. It would be easy to miss the fact that the Very Large Array and "insert new name here" are actually the same piece of equipment.
The material for the heating element is not the issue. It is the non-trivial engineering, the testing and the FAA certification. That takes time and money.
Flares. We are not talking about a couple of guys with flares guiding a helicopter in. We are talking about 1000ft of runway with flares every 50 feet. That's 40 flares. As for instruments it requires a major installation on the ground.
This is the best one. The station is on the south pole. There is no water around for a seaplane to land on. You might have noticed the elevation of 10,000ft. It is not one of the coastal installations.
I also think it is funny that your learner's aircraft license is worth mentioning but a completed license isn't. In fact, I was being sarcastic and trying to point out how your assertion that being "10 solo hours away from obtaining my private pilot license" added any credence to your argument was absurd.
BTW, Lubrizol is a company name. Which of their many additives are you talking about?
True but that was at the beginning of winter and not the end. Also the patient had gall bladder attacks and life threatening pancriatitis. The current patient had a stroke and is in stable condition. Completely different situations.
The backup plane may not have even helped. Lets see, I am going to send another identical aircraft into exactly the same conditions where another aircraft had difficulties. What is to say that the seconds aircraft wouldn't have problems just like the first?
Putting coils on the inside of the tanks requires a lot of engineering, money and time. It will also decrease the range of the aircraft. It is not something one throws together at the last minute which is what the OP was talking about. No one is going to spend millions on a plane that is used once every few years.
Putting flares at the side of a highway is very different than putting them in the snow in Antarctica. And yes they may be high winds and blowing snow to deal with,
Even if the plane didn't freeze up you are still landing in pitch black on a non-flat snow runway at 10,000 ft above sea level. Not an easy task in daylight; very dangerous in the dark.
Actually the low end of some lithium greases is -35 so would have issues in the -70.
BTW, I had my pilot's license probably before you were born.
The plane would have to fly a couple thousand miles to get to the base and back. Most light planes do not have that range. A twin Otter is probably the smallest plane that could possibly make the trip and it uses hydraulics. Even if it was possible, the fuel is stored in the wings and the engine is on the nose. They would have to heat the pipe from the wings to the nose as well. Also the grease in the hinges would freeze rendering the plane uncontrollable. Remember you are talking -70degrees. You also completely ignored the aerodynamic issue with coils on the wings and the lack of runway. There is a weight issue as well especially with small planes.
The issue occurs when a photojournalist comes into a situation with a per-conceived idea and then slants the photos to support that preconception. That is when they cross the line from reporting news to creating propaganda. Take a photo from the right angle and it looks like 20 soldiers are firing at a few kids when just out of frame there are a couple hundred youths with rocks and slingshots.The message the photojournalist wants to send is that the soldiers are overreacting and oppressing the kids. The reality being that they are far outnumbered and in a much more dangerous situation.
There is a huge difference between summarizing and slanting. I want the whole story so I can draw my own conclusions and not just the story the reporter/photographer wants me to see.
which would be covered or moved by the wind and snow before that last one was put down.
heating coils around the tanks to keep temps around -10
Which if put on the outside of the wings ruin the airfoil and cause the aircraft not to fly. Not to mention the need for a source of heat to supply the coils. Plus the fact that the hydraulic oil for the flight controls would also jell.
The solution is not "Simple, easy, cheap". There is a lot more engineering in making an aircraft flyable to those temperatures than a few heating coils.
The difference is that she is in stable condition and not dying. All the scenarios you mentioned would cause death if nothing was done. A better example would be a SAR team swimming a swollen river to "rescue" a person standing on the other side instead of waiting a couple of days till the water calmed down. No immediate danger to the victim and no danger to the rescuer if they wait.
The study focused on aspect of folders; searching. Here are a number of other reasons to use folders.
1. Categorizing: I have several different folders for activities that do not need immediate attention; SCA, chainmaille, clubs, etc. When I have time I will read those emails. 2. Priority: There are some emails that I want to respond to immediately. The best way to highlight these is to sort them into a folder. 3. Separate Projects; When I am working on several projects at a time it is great to be able to look at only the emails related to that project. It also highlights when I get replies about a specific project. It also helps with task switching. When I can look at emails that deal only with the project I am working on at that specific time I am less distracted by other emails. 4. Archive/deletion: I have several folders where I will read the emails and then occasionally clear the folder. It is much faster than deleting each individual email. I can also export all the emails from a project and save them in case I need them later.
So no, searching is not the only reason to use folders.
The school fingerprint system is almost certainly accessible to police officers actually working in the school.
So they may be able to see the data. That does not mean they can run a fingerprint against it or copy the database.
Also, the contractor for the fingerprint service could quite also service the local police as well.
Just like the same telephone technicians who work on your phones work on the police phones. Does that mean that you conversations are being listened to by the police? No.
It's actually possible that the data sets are even already stored together.
Highly doubtful. The police databases are very strictly controlled to ensure that correct information is stored. There is no way they would allow data collected by a high school administrator to be in their database. It would taint all subsequent searches. Even if a "sketch" could be created the accuracy of the data would be in question. What is good enough for a school to identify a student is probably not good enough to stand up in a court of law.
I think it is illegal for the police to access them, but from the point of view of the police and the school, it would probably be a gray area at best, and the only recourse anyone whose fingerprints are shared has is a civil suit. Arrests and subsequent searches based on a match from a school database _might_ be thrown out in court. There have been plenty of judges in similar cases who have basically decided that they'll allow unconstitutional searches as honest mistakes, as long as the police swear it won't happen again. Or they'll just find a pretext for another search.
You don't think that the ACLU wouldn't take up the issue and have all such data removed from national databases? It would be very hard to plead that copying a school's fingerprint database was an "accident". Remember that to run a search on a school database one has to use the only interface which is a finger scanner. That means that the police would have to spoof the scanner to check the unknown fingerprint. That can be no accident.
Your faith that justice will prevail this time, when setups like this have been abused pretty much every single time in the past, comes off as just a little naive to me.
Can you site any of these cases where "setups like this have been abused pretty much every single time in the past"? All it would take is for one judge to throw out a case due to identification illegally obtained from school records and it would never happen again. That case would be cited by every subsequent case and all evidence stemming from it, as fruit of the poison tree, would also be thrown out.
The bottom line is that if any data collected by a school finger scanner somehow found it's way into a national criminal database there would be a huge uproar that would cause the data to be removed immediately. I really hate it when a good thing is shot down because it could be misused. By that logic police officers should not have guns because they could be used to shoot innocent people. If something is used incorrectly then deal with the situation. Don't throw out good ideas due to possibilities.
Here are a few issues; 1. The hashes woulds have to be compatible. Different algorithms create different incompatible hashes. Conversions don't even work as data is lost during the hash and the original print can not be re-created. 2. The school hashes would have to be accessible by the police. They are not and it would be illegal for the police to access them. Any arrest and subsequent searches based on a match from a school database would be thrown out in court. So even looking at the school database would taint an investigation making it more possible that cases will be lost.
Finger scanners used by private industry are not the same as the the scanners used by police. The police scanner takes an exact picture of the fingerprint and sends it through a system which compares it with national databases. Commercial scanners do not store an exact fingerprint and therefore are not valid for identifying a person in a court of law. They take a scan of the finger and use an algorithm to reduce it to a hash. This hash is then compared with the database of other hashes to find a match. For the limited number of people who are in a school database one can be reasonably sure the the match is correct. Any duplicates are handles at registration time. It is not valid to try to match the millions in a national database. Also different companies and different versions of the same hardware that use different algorithms and can no even be compared with each other. So this is not an illegal search.
Here are my issues with some of the other comments about this system; I doesn't always work; Dirt, water, etc interferes with the scan. By this logic we shouldn't use computers because the power may go out. That is why one always has a backup like signing a register like they do now. To throw out a system that works 90% of the time is stupid.
Counting desks/taking attendance; Takes time to do it. Some students may be ill so would have to check with the office. Is slow to get results. Increases paperwork when truancy officers are involved.
Nanny state. Truancy is still a crime in the US and punishable by fines. This helps track truancy.
Here is the procedure most schools, especially elementary and middle schools, have to go through to ensure students are where they should be. 1. Take attendance 2. Compare with the list of parents who have called in to say their child will not be there 3. Call parents who's child is not there to confirm. It is a safety issue in case the student has been kidnapped or lost. Manually, steps 1 and 2 could take a couple of hours. A computer could do it in seconds if the data was entered correctly. That time difference could mean a child's life. Finger scanners are a simple way to do this. Sorry but getting a kid to correctly punch their number into a pad is a non-starter; kids will do it wrong too many times. The scanners are also a cost saver in that a person does not have to punch all that information into a computer and the person punching the information may make mistakes. Another thing this can be used for is to automatically inform a child's truancy officer when the child is not at school.
All finger scanners are is an alternative to signing in on a piece of paper.
One must be very careful when one uses words like "any" as in "Private citizen scientists are left without any knowledge of any scientific advances made by the military." It is very easy to find counter examples to disprove absolute statements like that. For example jet engines. They were developed very quickly by military contractors to create fighters and bombers. It may have been decades for private companies to make that kind of advancement. The same holds for computers. They were first use as code crackers and trajectory calculators. Both of these major technologies soon became widely used by the general public.
So it is impossible to verify whether or not the military provides us with any benefit at all, apart from a standing army. Anyone who says, "a strong military leads to innovation" isn't saying anything factual, it is merely an article of faith -- one of many articles of faith you must believe in order to call yourself a right-winger.
The same can be said for the military not providing benefit at all, apart from a standing army.. That too is merely an article of faith; one of many articles of faith you must believe in order to call yourself a left-winger. Can you see how using absolutes cause issues?
I have shown and you have hinted that some innovation comes from the military so the statement "everything becomes classified government secrets" is patently false. Perhaps you meant "many" or "most of" but an absolute term such as "everything" is not supported by the facts.
First off, in US law it has (finally) become pretty clear that not obeying TOS is not, in itself, a crime. Ever-higher courts have ruled on that issue and Congress has a pending bill spelling that out in plain English.
I never said violation of TOS was a crime but breach of contract is an actionable item in civil court even in the US. If you break the TOS in the US you can be sued for breach of contract in the US. Here is the relevant citation concerning Brows Wrap Agreements.
"[93] In Register.com, Inc. v. Verio, Inc., 126 F. Supp. 2d 238 (Dist. Court S.D.N.Y. 2000), aff’d 356 F.3d 393 (2d Cir. N.Y. 2004), Register.com’s website contained their Terms of Use which stated that if the user accessed the database then the user agreed to the terms. The defendant submitted that simply making a query of the database was insufficient to indicate their consent. Register.com involved commercial parties where the defendant Verio accessed the plaintiff’s computers daily and saw the Terms of Use each time they did so and admitted that they were aware of the terms. Verio conceded that its use of the data for solicitations by mail and telemarketing breached Register.com’s Terms of Use. Registrar.com notified Verio that they were in breach of Register.com’s Terms of Use. Verio argued that it was not bound because the notice was provided after the transaction occurred, not before. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that this argument would only succeed if Verio accessed Register.com’s computers infrequently. The court held that Verio had notice of the terms because of its numerous daily queries and the presence of the Terms of Use after each query."
Notice that is an American case. Zoocasa was frequently accessing Century21 data and had been advised of the TOS. The court ruled there was a binding contract and Zoocasa breached that contract. A similar decision based on the same precedent would probably happen in the US.
Isolationism is ignoring world events up until the point that US territory is invaded. They tried that before WW2 and all it got them was a Europe taken over by Germany and most of China taken over by the Japanese.
The basis of my post was your assertion that "they haven't actually needed to DEFEND this country since um.... they were fighting with muskets." Most wars after that have been fought on foreign soil. It seems that for the military to be defending the US you think they must be fighting on American soil.
In WW2 there were the Axis Powers; Germany Japan and Italy. If the US had not supplied resources, arms and armaments to the UK and Russia and then sent troops to Europe it is quite reasonable to project that Germany could have controlled all of Europe, the middle East, Africa and defeated Russia. One major reason they lost in Russia was that Germany was fighting a two front War. In the Pacific, Japan wanted to create the "Asian Co-prosperity Sphere" which encompassed all of Asia. Japan were doing a pretty good job at it until the US was brought into the war. If the Axis plans had succeed the world, other that the US and maybe Canada (much of South America was already sympathetic to Germany), would have been controlled by three countries who worked together.
A similar thing nearly happened during the Cold War with USSR wanting Europe, Africa and the Middle East and China wanting Asia. Is it so far fetched that two Communist countries would act in concert against the last major Capitalist country in the world?
The problem with isolationism is this. If the rest of the world is controlled by one country (USSR) or a coalition of countries (Axis Powers) then they can easily blockade the US. They just don't buy or sell from the US. The US will collapse from lack or resources (especially oil) and the dominant powers just come in and mop up.
Japan screwed up in WW2. As Admiral Yamamoto said after the attack on Pearl Harbour; "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry but the facility does exactly the same thing it did before the upgrade; it just does it more accurately, faster and with better communications to off site computers.
It has nothing to do with smarts. The issue is that there is a relation between the current facility and the name people carry around in their heads. In almost all cases, and particularly in people with Asperger Syndrome, this is a one to one relationship; one facility, one name. Now the same facility will have two names; the one in literature written before the change and one in the literature after the change. These new relationships can be difficult to deal with.
I have Aspergers. A new building was built on the Uvic campus and for a year it was call the Class Room Building. It finally got an official name but it will always be the CRB to me. Aspergers is quite prevalent in high tech fields.
Now I understand. It was a late night
I don't know if you are being sarcastic or just don't know Mr Job's dark side.
He didn't earn millions or billions by offshoring his factories.
Most of Apple's products are made in China or did you forget about the suicides at the Apple factories
He didn't profit by patenting his work.
Apple holds many patents and vigorously defends them.
And he never sued anyone.
Do you remember the Orange? It was an Apple2 clone that was sued by Apple and put out of business. When Windows 3.1 came out Apple sued Microsoft for infringement when Apple was really just copying from Xerox. Recently there was a battery backup manufacturer who went as far as buying Apple power supplies, cutting of the magnetic plug and using them. Apple sued them and since they didn't have the money to defend themselves they stopped making them.
Steve Jobs was no saint. If he gets credit for the good things he did he also should get the blame when he does bad things. Even his philanthropy record is thin at best. He was a very good business man who make crap loads of money for himself and his shareholders.
Astronomer 1: did you see what "insert new name here" found?
Astronomer 2: "new name"??
Astronomer 1: The Very Large Array..
Astronomer 2: Oh yeah, they changed the name. Go on.
Old names have a tendency to stick around in proportion to how long they were used. Since the Very Large Array has been around for a while the name will probably be around for a while more.
Another issue is that researchers could be confused when the same piece of scientific gear is referred to by more than one name. It would be easy to miss the fact that the Very Large Array and "insert new name here" are actually the same piece of equipment.
The material for the heating element is not the issue. It is the non-trivial engineering, the testing and the FAA certification. That takes time and money.
Flares. We are not talking about a couple of guys with flares guiding a helicopter in. We are talking about 1000ft of runway with flares every 50 feet. That's 40 flares. As for instruments it requires a major installation on the ground.
This is the best one. The station is on the south pole. There is no water around for a seaplane to land on. You might have noticed the elevation of 10,000ft. It is not one of the coastal installations.
I also think it is funny that your learner's aircraft license is worth mentioning but a completed license isn't. In fact, I was being sarcastic and trying to point out how your assertion that being "10 solo hours away from obtaining my private pilot license" added any credence to your argument was absurd.
BTW, Lubrizol is a company name. Which of their many additives are you talking about?
True but that was at the beginning of winter and not the end. Also the patient had gall bladder attacks and life threatening pancriatitis. The current patient had a stroke and is in stable condition. Completely different situations.
The backup plane may not have even helped. Lets see, I am going to send another identical aircraft into exactly the same conditions where another aircraft had difficulties. What is to say that the seconds aircraft wouldn't have problems just like the first?
Putting coils on the inside of the tanks requires a lot of engineering, money and time. It will also decrease the range of the aircraft. It is not something one throws together at the last minute which is what the OP was talking about. No one is going to spend millions on a plane that is used once every few years.
Putting flares at the side of a highway is very different than putting them in the snow in Antarctica. And yes they may be high winds and blowing snow to deal with,
Even if the plane didn't freeze up you are still landing in pitch black on a non-flat snow runway at 10,000 ft above sea level. Not an easy task in daylight; very dangerous in the dark.
Actually the low end of some lithium greases is -35 so would have issues in the -70.
BTW, I had my pilot's license probably before you were born.
The plane would have to fly a couple thousand miles to get to the base and back. Most light planes do not have that range. A twin Otter is probably the smallest plane that could possibly make the trip and it uses hydraulics. Even if it was possible, the fuel is stored in the wings and the engine is on the nose. They would have to heat the pipe from the wings to the nose as well. Also the grease in the hinges would freeze rendering the plane uncontrollable. Remember you are talking -70degrees. You also completely ignored the aerodynamic issue with coils on the wings and the lack of runway. There is a weight issue as well especially with small planes.
The issue occurs when a photojournalist comes into a situation with a per-conceived idea and then slants the photos to support that preconception. That is when they cross the line from reporting news to creating propaganda. Take a photo from the right angle and it looks like 20 soldiers are firing at a few kids when just out of frame there are a couple hundred youths with rocks and slingshots.The message the photojournalist wants to send is that the soldiers are overreacting and oppressing the kids. The reality being that they are far outnumbered and in a much more dangerous situation.
There is a huge difference between summarizing and slanting. I want the whole story so I can draw my own conclusions and not just the story the reporter/photographer wants me to see.
Green and Red Flares for a temporary runway
which would be covered or moved by the wind and snow before that last one was put down.
heating coils around the tanks to keep temps around -10
Which if put on the outside of the wings ruin the airfoil and cause the aircraft not to fly. Not to mention the need for a source of heat to supply the coils. Plus the fact that the hydraulic oil for the flight controls would also jell.
The solution is not "Simple, easy, cheap". There is a lot more engineering in making an aircraft flyable to those temperatures than a few heating coils.
The difference is that she is in stable condition and not dying. All the scenarios you mentioned would cause death if nothing was done. A better example would be a SAR team swimming a swollen river to "rescue" a person standing on the other side instead of waiting a couple of days till the water calmed down. No immediate danger to the victim and no danger to the rescuer if they wait.
The study focused on aspect of folders; searching. Here are a number of other reasons to use folders.
1. Categorizing: I have several different folders for activities that do not need immediate attention; SCA, chainmaille, clubs, etc. When I have time I will read those emails.
2. Priority: There are some emails that I want to respond to immediately. The best way to highlight these is to sort them into a folder.
3. Separate Projects; When I am working on several projects at a time it is great to be able to look at only the emails related to that project. It also highlights when I get replies about a specific project. It also helps with task switching. When I can look at emails that deal only with the project I am working on at that specific time I am less distracted by other emails.
4. Archive/deletion: I have several folders where I will read the emails and then occasionally clear the folder. It is much faster than deleting each individual email. I can also export all the emails from a project and save them in case I need them later.
So no, searching is not the only reason to use folders.
The school fingerprint system is almost certainly accessible to police officers actually working in the school.
So they may be able to see the data. That does not mean they can run a fingerprint against it or copy the database.
Also, the contractor for the fingerprint service could quite also service the local police as well.
Just like the same telephone technicians who work on your phones work on the police phones. Does that mean that you conversations are being listened to by the police? No.
It's actually possible that the data sets are even already stored together.
Highly doubtful. The police databases are very strictly controlled to ensure that correct information is stored. There is no way they would allow data collected by a high school administrator to be in their database. It would taint all subsequent searches. Even if a "sketch" could be created the accuracy of the data would be in question. What is good enough for a school to identify a student is probably not good enough to stand up in a court of law.
I think it is illegal for the police to access them, but from the point of view of the police and the school, it would probably be a gray area at best, and the only recourse anyone whose fingerprints are shared has is a civil suit. Arrests and subsequent searches based on a match from a school database _might_ be thrown out in court. There have been plenty of judges in similar cases who have basically decided that they'll allow unconstitutional searches as honest mistakes, as long as the police swear it won't happen again. Or they'll just find a pretext for another search.
You don't think that the ACLU wouldn't take up the issue and have all such data removed from national databases? It would be very hard to plead that copying a school's fingerprint database was an "accident". Remember that to run a search on a school database one has to use the only interface which is a finger scanner. That means that the police would have to spoof the scanner to check the unknown fingerprint. That can be no accident.
Your faith that justice will prevail this time, when setups like this have been abused pretty much every single time in the past, comes off as just a little naive to me.
Can you site any of these cases where "setups like this have been abused pretty much every single time in the past"? All it would take is for one judge to throw out a case due to identification illegally obtained from school records and it would never happen again. That case would be cited by every subsequent case and all evidence stemming from it, as fruit of the poison tree, would also be thrown out.
The bottom line is that if any data collected by a school finger scanner somehow found it's way into a national criminal database there would be a huge uproar that would cause the data to be removed immediately. I really hate it when a good thing is shot down because it could be misused. By that logic police officers should not have guns because they could be used to shoot innocent people. If something is used incorrectly then deal with the situation. Don't throw out good ideas due to possibilities.
The one I heard was the girth of the Space Shuttle solid rocket booster because it had to go through a rail tunnel.
Same in the US; truancy is an offence punishable by fines.
Then they go back to the old system of signing in and/or taking attendance.
Here are a few issues;
1. The hashes woulds have to be compatible. Different algorithms create different incompatible hashes. Conversions don't even work as data is lost during the hash and the original print can not be re-created.
2. The school hashes would have to be accessible by the police. They are not and it would be illegal for the police to access them. Any arrest and subsequent searches based on a match from a school database would be thrown out in court. So even looking at the school database would taint an investigation making it more possible that cases will be lost.
Finger scanners used by private industry are not the same as the the scanners used by police. The police scanner takes an exact picture of the fingerprint and sends it through a system which compares it with national databases. Commercial scanners do not store an exact fingerprint and therefore are not valid for identifying a person in a court of law. They take a scan of the finger and use an algorithm to reduce it to a hash. This hash is then compared with the database of other hashes to find a match. For the limited number of people who are in a school database one can be reasonably sure the the match is correct. Any duplicates are handles at registration time. It is not valid to try to match the millions in a national database. Also different companies and different versions of the same hardware that use different algorithms and can no even be compared with each other. So this is not an illegal search.
Here are my issues with some of the other comments about this system;
I doesn't always work; Dirt, water, etc interferes with the scan.
By this logic we shouldn't use computers because the power may go out. That is why one always has a backup like signing a register like they do now. To throw out a system that works 90% of the time is stupid.
Counting desks/taking attendance;
Takes time to do it. Some students may be ill so would have to check with the office. Is slow to get results. Increases paperwork when truancy officers are involved.
Nanny state.
Truancy is still a crime in the US and punishable by fines. This helps track truancy.
Here is the procedure most schools, especially elementary and middle schools, have to go through to ensure students are where they should be.
1. Take attendance
2. Compare with the list of parents who have called in to say their child will not be there
3. Call parents who's child is not there to confirm.
It is a safety issue in case the student has been kidnapped or lost. Manually, steps 1 and 2 could take a couple of hours. A computer could do it in seconds if the data was entered correctly. That time difference could mean a child's life. Finger scanners are a simple way to do this. Sorry but getting a kid to correctly punch their number into a pad is a non-starter; kids will do it wrong too many times. The scanners are also a cost saver in that a person does not have to punch all that information into a computer and the person punching the information may make mistakes. Another thing this can be used for is to automatically inform a child's truancy officer when the child is not at school.
All finger scanners are is an alternative to signing in on a piece of paper.
One must be very careful when one uses words like "any" as in "Private citizen scientists are left without any knowledge of any scientific advances made by the military." It is very easy to find counter examples to disprove absolute statements like that. For example jet engines. They were developed very quickly by military contractors to create fighters and bombers. It may have been decades for private companies to make that kind of advancement. The same holds for computers. They were first use as code crackers and trajectory calculators. Both of these major technologies soon became widely used by the general public.
So it is impossible to verify whether or not the military provides us with any benefit at all, apart from a standing army. Anyone who says, "a strong military leads to innovation" isn't saying anything factual, it is merely an article of faith -- one of many articles of faith you must believe in order to call yourself a right-winger.
The same can be said for the military not providing benefit at all, apart from a standing army.. That too is merely an article of faith; one of many articles of faith you must believe in order to call yourself a left-winger. Can you see how using absolutes cause issues?
I have shown and you have hinted that some innovation comes from the military so the statement "everything becomes classified government secrets" is patently false. Perhaps you meant "many" or "most of" but an absolute term such as "everything" is not supported by the facts.
First off, in US law it has (finally) become pretty clear that not obeying TOS is not, in itself, a crime. Ever-higher courts have ruled on that issue and Congress has a pending bill spelling that out in plain English.
I never said violation of TOS was a crime but breach of contract is an actionable item in civil court even in the US. If you break the TOS in the US you can be sued for breach of contract in the US. Here is the relevant citation concerning Brows Wrap Agreements.
"[93] In Register.com, Inc. v. Verio, Inc., 126 F. Supp. 2d 238 (Dist. Court S.D.N.Y. 2000), aff’d 356 F.3d 393 (2d Cir. N.Y. 2004), Register.com’s website contained their Terms of Use which stated that if the user accessed the database then the user agreed to the terms. The defendant submitted that simply making a query of the database was insufficient to indicate their consent. Register.com involved commercial parties where the defendant Verio accessed the plaintiff’s computers daily and saw the Terms of Use each time they did so and admitted that they were aware of the terms. Verio conceded that its use of the data for solicitations by mail and telemarketing breached Register.com’s Terms of Use. Registrar.com notified Verio that they were in breach of Register.com’s Terms of Use. Verio argued that it was not bound because the notice was provided after the transaction occurred, not before. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that this argument would only succeed if Verio accessed Register.com’s computers infrequently. The court held that Verio had notice of the terms because of its numerous daily queries and the presence of the Terms of Use after each query."
Notice that is an American case. Zoocasa was frequently accessing Century21 data and had been advised of the TOS. The court ruled there was a binding contract and Zoocasa breached that contract. A similar decision based on the same precedent would probably happen in the US.
Isolationism is ignoring world events up until the point that US territory is invaded. They tried that before WW2 and all it got them was a Europe taken over by Germany and most of China taken over by the Japanese.
The basis of my post was your assertion that "they haven't actually needed to DEFEND this country since um.... they were fighting with muskets." Most wars after that have been fought on foreign soil. It seems that for the military to be defending the US you think they must be fighting on American soil.
In WW2 there were the Axis Powers; Germany Japan and Italy. If the US had not supplied resources, arms and armaments to the UK and Russia and then sent troops to Europe it is quite reasonable to project that Germany could have controlled all of Europe, the middle East, Africa and defeated Russia. One major reason they lost in Russia was that Germany was fighting a two front War. In the Pacific, Japan wanted to create the "Asian Co-prosperity Sphere" which encompassed all of Asia. Japan were doing a pretty good job at it until the US was brought into the war. If the Axis plans had succeed the world, other that the US and maybe Canada (much of South America was already sympathetic to Germany), would have been controlled by three countries who worked together.
A similar thing nearly happened during the Cold War with USSR wanting Europe, Africa and the Middle East and China wanting Asia. Is it so far fetched that two Communist countries would act in concert against the last major Capitalist country in the world?
Maybe you should read more history.
The problem with isolationism is this. If the rest of the world is controlled by one country (USSR) or a coalition of countries (Axis Powers) then they can easily blockade the US. They just don't buy or sell from the US. The US will collapse from lack or resources (especially oil) and the dominant powers just come in and mop up.
Japan screwed up in WW2. As Admiral Yamamoto said after the attack on Pearl Harbour; "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."
So does the entire east coast, think German submarines.
Already being done. These devices have been used quite often on the TV show Flashpoint which follows a fictional Canadian SRU.